That's a good return from Davies and that strike rate would get you to 180 if the whole team batted at the same rate. A few of us discussed Ross Whiteley yesterday and why he keeps getting T20 contracts and his strike rate of 136.36 would only get an average score of just over 163. We have good strike rates for quite a few batsmen but our bowling does worry me at times as we do leak a few runs and players like Mouseley have conceded a few compared to last season. We must tighten up when we play Somerset as they have some really fast scorers in their side.

Wasn't he in Auf Wiedersehen Pet, "I'll have to ask Brenda"

2010 was annoying on the basis that as Neil Carter always said, "If you finish top of your group, you should go to T20 finals day", just like Yorkshire and Worcestershire have done in this year's Metro Bank but we yet again finished top of our group, won 11, lost 4 and Hampshire scraped through buy 0.2 of a run after losing half their games and by the time they won the final, their record was won 11, lost 8 and we had won 11, lost 5, hardly seems fair that you should saunter through but have your hard work ruined by one game. Yes, the 2012 final also haunts me. Bell who had been superb, hit a full-toss straight to a fielder on the boundary. Carter should never have gone out to bat before Patel on the basis that Jeetan had plenty of innings recently unlike Carter who was rusty and hadn't batted that much recently, Blackwell (For a big hitter) farted about too much and I sat there thinking, "Carter, Just get something on it and run or crack it through the infield". He did neither. Despite winning the title that season, the season was ruined as it was the very last game of the season which was unusual.

I always hated being called Birmingham Bears but Bears is better and I think eventually we will be called Warwickshire Bears which isn't too bad. As for the pavilion, it isn't really that popular, massively cold at times (It has been called the 'Icebox' for a while), which is why so many people (Mostly members), sit at the opposite end. It is functional but I would have preferred something a bit more aesthetically pleasing to the eye. When we won the title in 2021, there were not many in there and 80% of people were over the other side.

There was a period from the mid 1980's until the mid 1990's when it was almost impossible for Warwickshire to lose to Hampshire in the CC but I doubt that every time we played them, we thought it would be a nailed-on win, at some point it had to stop. From 1981 up until the Natwest semi-final in 1989, we had not beaten Worcestershire in ANY competition. I doubt before that semi-final being played at a packed Edgbaston (Wouldn't have been full if it was so obvious that Worcestershire would win) that it was looked on as an obvious win for our neighbours. At some point, a run of good results has to stop, it won't continue indefinitely so all the 'They Always Do' isn't really a good reason for saying we would lose to them had we have played them yesterday.

I don't agree that Hampshire would have beaten us, nothing is so obvious that you can just call out a result in a game that never happened. I agree about the strange selection for The Hundread, there are some very ordinary cricketers in there and Whiteley is another one who baffles me, mainly, how he keeps getting picked in teams of all sorts and hardly ever seems to have a decent game. I think we have a situation in the UK whereby if a cricketer has one good game where they appear to have made a difference to the result, they suddenly gain a reputation for being some sort of specialist. I remember Kabir Ali once managing to defend 7 off the last over in a O.D.I in South Africa and suddenly he was a 'Last over specialist' and apart from the 2012 final at Lord's, I don't remember him doing much else. I think Josh Hull was picked for England because he defended the last over v Hampshire in a 50-over final a few years ago and I think Payne got picked because he was a part of Gloucestershire's T20 side last year. I does appear that certain teams are grasping at straws in this dreadful 100-ball farce and just look at players who no one has heard of and put them amongst Test players maybe hoping something will rub-off, it hasn't so far.

Short term signings very rarely work anyway so I don't think we should worry too much.

Well, we need a strong side and as we will have our players back from The Hundread so we should be alright to put out a full strength side.

The whole scenario should have been to play the BEST side possible to win the game and worry about a quarter-final if it happens. It is like a similar dilemma when there are 2 overs left in a one-day game, 15 runs to win and you have a good bowler and a part-timer left who can bowl. You choose the part-timer to bowl the penultimate over on the basis that the best bowler will be able to defend most things but the part-timer goes for 12 and the best bowler is irrelevant then. I cannot believe we couldn't give Sylvester's place to someone else. Would Che Simmons have been a better bet and is George Garton in the Hundread but to bank on Sylvester was a real gamble which went badly wrong. Should we be surprised, the same as most games when we lose in a chase, batsmen who are set and are scoring above the rate, deciding to stick it up in the air rather than just knock it about as they have been doing, at one point we needed 4.4 an over with about 7 wickets in hand but as usual we see an innocuous bowler come on and decide to give him wickets.

That would have been excellent, another home tie but having said that, playing at home does not appear to give us any advantage at all. Sometimes it is possible to get 5 wins and go through depending on how other results go but we should have won today and we also blew it against Middlesex so perhaps we didn't deserve to go through. Though it does have to be said that in most cases, their game with Lancs would normally have been over at 6 down but as Lancs couldn't get any further, they were not exactly 'on It' so to speak and Middlesex had no choice but to keep playing shots. Sussex to a degree didn't look interested until the 5 wicket went down, another 40 runs and they would have just gone through the motions. Bloody awful day.

Some of us on here have been accused of going over the top and exaggerating a defeat but there are no other words for that except 'Abject Shit'. 204-3 with loads of overs left, a side who can't even qualify against a spinner who barely spun one and who's first class bowling is 7 wickets in 7 games. Did our players look at Old Trafford and think it was all over because a few supporters near me did, appearing to be concentrating on other games when I turned around and said "It's the Lancs/Middlesex game that matters...". Lancs didn't take a wickets for ages and because they couldn't qualify, were not that bothered maybe. Again, we give a lesser bowler a great return by giving out catching practice. Perhaps that needs to go on the wall in the dressing room, 1. Don't give the opposition catching practice 2. Don't play big shots if you have the game under control 3. Never think a game is over until it is. The other game at Old Trafford might have been one of those freak games which happens rarely but there was no excuse for that and all the hard work that has gone into run chases against better sides and here were are failing to get home on our own ground. Never mind 'T20 Bottlers' as we are called by other county supporters, this was as bad as any of those T20 games that we have ** up.

Ed, what can you say, we are running out of great things to say. Booth, becoming a really good all-round player, loads of confidence.

301 to win, could be tough, trust us to concede that many against a side that might struggle to qualify. I seem to remember them doing the same at Edgbaston 2 seasons ago when they finished bottom of the group and it was the only game we lost.

You could call it 'Lazy Journalism' but having said that it is complimentary so we like it.

We aren't playing Sussex away, it's on Tuesday at Edgbaston.

We are seeing the future of our batting for the next few years. I am quite optimistic.

Flippin' 'eck Ed. Why do we get greedy when we are going at 10 an over.

Just watching the first few overs and the outfield looks awful.

When I look at some of the duffers on the batting and bowling side, you have to wonder how such a consistent performer at T20, 50-over and CC, can't even get into any first XI.

It just goes to show that The Hundread has no idea what it is doing. There are players in it who struggle to get into their own county sides and you have Sam Hain, one of the most consistent performers in county cricket in all formats, who cannot get a game. I have heard a few players names being shouted out and I cannot immediately think which county they play for. There are some mediocre players in there who perhaps made the cut because they had a good 4-over spell in a T20 that was televised.