When you say 'In the Flesh', are referring to the 1977 Pink Floyd tour or the fact that you are coming to the game to strip off down to your Mankini. If it is the second one, please don't sit at the city end, they can be brutal.

Thanks to Andy for reminding me of the 1 wicket win v Gloucestershire in 1999, shouldn't have forgotten seeing as I was actually there on that last day, Giles, slog-sweeping a 6 for the winning runs.

I can remember a few 2 wicket wins but the last 1 wicket win I can remember, Lancashire 1986 with Anton Ferreira and Adrian Pierson getting us through.

We didn't take 20 wickets but we still won. Well done YouTube cricket for allowing us this privilege.

*** hell, yessssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss!

Agree with LeicesterExile, Doggett and Hogg have bowled some dross and look like a couple of club bowlers but glad Doggett didn't jump all over the place as though he bowled a snorter after the wicket.

Just when you begin to think of the possibility of a win, a wicket falls. I hate it if we lose close games, would much rather get well beaten rather than 30-50 runs which I regard as close, it makes all the hard work seem pointless.

I think we should now just look to survive the day, that would be a good result from here.

We should take comfort that Smith and Booth batted for a long time when we were in trouble. The Durham attack if you take out Potts, is not that good really, I hope we take our time and wear their bowlers down a bit.

Bedingham might hold the key now, a superb batsman and capable of taking the game away from us and we do not want any tailwagging after this.

Booth is making my praise of him yesterday, make me look good. It had to happen one day, I remember when we signed Jeetan Patel, "Why, his first-class record is awful, Can't really see him being a success". Duh!

Gave it away as the commentator said. Another wicket we again give to a very ordinary bit of bowling.

And before you know it the 8th wicket puts on over 50.

From 174-2, we will take 249-7, well done bowlers, now lets get rid of this tail which has been a problem for a few seasons.

Fernando has played Test cricket but his record is not that good, he is no Chaminda Vaas.

Pity we lost the toss but 2 down for 104 is better than 120-0. Good that Booth got a wicket, he got undue criticism on here last week, he was tidier than other bowlers v Sussex and beat the bat many times more than most of the other bowlers.

I would be surprised if we see much of Woakes at all as he is probably going to be picked for the upcoming Tests I would assume but at lot depends on if the selectors have him pencilled in for Australia. If they haven't then there is no point in him playing unless England want the strongest side to beat India but they might want to have a look at players for Australia and that means pace and with Wood, Archer and perhaps Stone not looking to have much cricket, it might be a case of looking at Tongue or any other young pace bowlers. If the selectors don't want Woakes then they should tell him, he can end his international career and concentrate on Warwickshire and I am sure we would love to see him back. Too many times form 2012 onwards, he was picked in England squads and then not played which saw him miss massive amounts of cricket like the 2012 CC season.

Don't want 3-day back, the whole idea of 4-day cricket was to give middle order players the time to play an innings. When we had 3-day CC the middle-order would have to come in at the end of an innings and move the tempo along before a declaration and wouldn't allow them to play themselves in, it produced too many draws and most side would look to first, bat about 130 overs if they could to guard against being beaten and that was worse than anything we see now. Not all games are like this.

70 odd runs 15 minutes before lunch is a strangle type of tactic if you go into the last day with a 200 lead. It would appear some sort of token declaration or getting bowled out is what the aim is here. Glad I didn't go as I thought this might happen.

Still doubt Sussex will set us a decent target, if they do set us something, it will probably be in a situation where they could win but not us. Not sure about our tactics once Smith was out. It's as if the tail were playing defensively until the 100 overs were done and then they started playing shots. Disappointed that they didn't at least make an effort to secure the 450 and another point with enough time to do it. That was Smith's job but he failed to keep it on the deck and gave his wicket away. I think the best we could hope for is 350 in 55 overs but I doubt we would go for it.