Luxury, we had to share the pips between 5 of us.

a whole slice, bloody luxury, we only got the pips.

In that case how about bringing him on when the ball is about 12-15 overs old and then again when it is less than 35 overs old. He will only get strength to bowl by bowling. As Fred Trueman said, in all the years he bowled, he barely had a single injury, bowled more than 1000 overs a season and only kept bowling because he knew he could because his body was up to it.

It doesn't make sense either way, Rankin with a hard ball was often a handful but he didn't do any better for Chopra bringing him on late so that cannot be the reason. The last thing we want is to lose a genuine fast young bowler who could be a match winner for the next 10 years because he was fed up with being given a soft ball that was 40 overs old. If he has pace, let him go and see what damage he can do when the ball is hard and shiny. His confidence should not be diminished before he has got a full season under his belt. We will never know what he can do with a new ball until he is given the chance.

Davies appears to do the same with Simmons as Chopra used to do with Rankin, keep him kicking his heels for 40 overs and then decide to give him a 'Few' overs. By that time, the ball is softer, if you have pace, surely a harder ball is better to bowl with. I would love to see Simmons given the new ball just to see what sort of pace, bounce and trouble he can cause. Why have a genuine fast bowler and keep him back. No batsmen like high pace so why hold it back.

Glad to get away from there now, always did find Hampshire very irritating but with the whooping and hollering, they are the loudest side along with Surrey, perhaps it's a Southern thing. A few debatable decisions and I thought it looked good until Hain was given out (He does appear to get some awful umpiring decisions) as Hampshire were always going to benefit from Abbott's opening spell and despite a rare outing of wickets from Fuller, they do look average without their big Springbok. We lost it in the last session of the first day and have been playing catch-up ever since and only 3 points to show from this.

We could be chasing 320 if we bowl well or even more more if we give their tail, length balls to hit like we did in the first innings and I hope the bowlers have learnt from the first innings, everyone has the right to score runs but tailenders don't deal well with yorkers even if they're delivered by spinners so no more total and utter rubbish please but a good fightback shown and Webster probably had his best spell for us. Don't want to chase more than 350.

I bought that book from him directly as I couldn't find it anywhere. It is a good read and reflects the difference between todays pampered stars and players then who were so badly paid (Obviously this didn't affect Foster who had a private income) and treated very poorly if they were professionals. I would recommend it to anyone and the positive way Foster played the game, was a reason why Warwickshire became champions in 1911 much to the annoyance of the big 6 Yorkshire, Lancashire, Surrey, Middlesex, Nottinghamshire and Kent (Who refused to play us but then moaned after they finished 2nd) who thought they should have the monopoly on titles.

Andy, no, a perfectly balanced reaction to what I have seen happening so often. Last season we were rarely outplayed despite winning just 1 game in the CC but we were in good positions in so many game and failed to capitalise on it. Today, it was apparent again and I cannot see how it can keep happening and we can again, appear to look so lost when face with tailenders scoring runs against us.

Total and utter bloody rubbish. One minute we are in charge and by the end of the day it is them who look forward to 11 am tomorrow. Our failure to wipe out the tail has let Hampshire in with an opportunity to gain the advantage. Do bowlers not bowl 'Yorkers' anymore? I would now sooner be in their position as we appear to have given them the upper hand. How often did we have little meetings that seemed to point to a little bit of "So what do we do now". What could have been a good day has seen us hand over the initiative with some mindless cricket. Don't give tailenders any room to hit as it it's what they like, give them a few round the ears, not 'nice line and length bowling'. A poor day really.

Had we have taken the last wicket this morning first ball, would there have been enough time to take another 10? I doubt it but better than a defeat as we have had far too many against Surrey in the last few seasons.

Yes, we want a bit of life in the pitch, Hampshire like Surrey and Somerset, haven't had things their way so far this season so lets really try and get stuck in to them. I reckon they are missing James Vince's influence.

You get the feeling if Surrey had to bat even 100 more overs, they would be able to. The forecast is for rain from 1-2pm so one way or another, it looks a draw.

Simmons with some chin music and who knows what could happen if Surrey are put back in just before the close. If so, give Simmons the new ball and say, "Get 'em, let them know what's coming tomorrow".

5 down, Jason Roy, they must have been desperate to bring in a player who hasn't had that much CC cricket in the last 4 years. Also, as someone pointed out when he was picked for the Test side in 2019, he hasn't ever batted for more than 3 hours in ANY innings during his career so when he plays a shot like that to get out, it's no great surprise.

One of the dullest pitched I have seen for a while, a bit like the 1970's/1980's ones where Bernard Flack used to get praise for good pitches. Why is a pitch good if it produces dull draws and some of ones from years ago wouldn't have been helped by 4-day cricket either. As Trevor Bailey used to say, "A pitch that produces a low-scoring game with a result and keeps people interested get a points deduction and yet when 500 plays 500, that it is surely a poorer pitch...". I was going to probably give Monday a miss depending on if Sunday is another 'Bat-fest' but tomorrow, the thought of watching any opposition bat all day, does make me not want to go. Malik was superb, scored quickly without having to score many boundaries but he sped up considerably until he suddenly realised there was time for another Warwickshire 100. As for Troughton's remark, seriously, that Surrey bowling attack would have struggled anywhere, they look insipid without Roach, Worrall and Atkinson.

A good day and we need to put up a good fight against these, having been on the end of some atrocious umpiring whilst playing them at The Oval during the last 2 seasons. Strange decision to bowl first, in fact completely weird, maybe they thought 2 undercooked batsmen (Latham, Hain) plus a young guy playing his 2nd game, were reasons that they thought they could work through the batting. If you consider that yet again we got out to a 2nd string bowler like Lawrence and Yates and Hain also gave it away, we might only be 1 or 2 down. Their bowling looks pedestrian without Roach and Worrall so it was good that we took advantage. Come on Bears, 550 minimum. Latham looks good, a proper innings, playing himself in, not panicking if he didn't score and getting better every hour he batted. Could we actually have chosen a worthy overseas player.

A good, strong finish, was hoping that that last ball was going for 4 so that Malik could get to his 50 but what a super little knock that was and after 1 win last season that we had to wait ages for, we now have 2 from 4 games. Well done the lads, a lot to be happy about and a really fulfilling 'Team Effort'.

A good position to be in, a few overs at the end of the day is always tricky and I do not agree with Boycott who always said "You have everything to lose and nothing to gain..", well, 15 runs is a nice little chunk out of the target and the way we stuck to our task when they were just 3 down and looking to post a 220-250 lead, was admirable and holding them to less than 3 an over whilst nipping a wicket out every now and then was a real team effort considering their batting line-up. Getting the last 5 for 62 was important as we didn't then have to wonder overnight, just what we would chase, it's now up to us to get over the line.

JB gone, come on lad that's the spirit, keep chipping away. Would love to see Root out maybe all the Yorkshire team before I come in from the garden, a newly retired man's work is never done.