|
|
Post by longstop on Aug 11, 2021 6:58:21 GMT
It's our last game in this year's Royal London One Day Cup which brings Middlesex to Hove. While Sussex have no chance of reaching the knockout phase of the competition, Middlesex could just about make third place with a win, which is the minimum requirement to progress in the competition. Middlesex will need to improve their run rate sufficiently to overtake Lancashire, Hampshire and Gloucestershire and hope that Lancashire lose and Hampshire and Gloucestershire do not take both points. It's all quite complicated. As the Middlesex v Gloucestershire was called off due to Covid in the Gloucestershire camp, the table is being decided on points per game. If you want to spend an hour working out the permutations, you will probably need an A level in Maths, although turning up for an A level seems to warrant an A grade these days. Suffice to say, whatever happens, Sussex will not be launched into the hastily completed knockout phase which starts on Sunday and finishes on Thursday next week at Trent Bridge.
Middlesex have had a strange a RLODC campaign. They started with a crushing defeat against Essex, following that with a 2-run defeat to Durham as decreed by Messrs Duckworth and Lewis. A washout of the Hampshire game was followed by two narrow wins over Worcestershire and Lancashire before losing to Kent to give Kent their only win of the campaign. Middlesex have achieved average scores and conceded average totals with runs and wickets shared around. Steve Eskinazi scored 130 in their win over Worcestershire as they reached 302, their highest total.
It's hard to sum up Sussex's RLODC performance. Two narrow defeats mean that we only have one win and four defeats from the five completed games. Individually, there have been some good performances, but as the results reflect, we have tended to fall just short of the standard needed to win games. Can Sussex end on a high note? It's possible.
Current table with one round of games to play
Durham P7 11 Pts PPG=1.57 (qualified)
Essex P7 10 Pts PPG=1.43 (qualified)
Lancashire P7 8 Pts PPG=1.14 (can qualify)
Hampshire P7 7 Pts PPG=1.00 (can qualify)
Worcestershire P8 7 Pts PPG=0.88 (can't qualify)
Gloucestershire P6 6 Pts PPG=1.00 (can qualify)
Middlesex P6 5 Pts PPG=0.83 (can qualify)
Sussex P7 4 Pts PPG=0.57 (can't qualify)
Kent P7 4 Pts PPG=0.57 (can't qualify)
Final round of group games
Durham v Hampshire (Chester-le-Street)
Kent v Gloucestershire (Beckenham)
Lancashire v Essex (Old Trafford)
Sussex v Middlesex (Hove)
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Aug 11, 2021 10:27:05 GMT
In a way we are a product of our own success. If our white ball players hadn’t been quite so good they wouldn’t have been picked up in the 100 and we’d have a bigger squad to choose from. Having said that, Luke Wright hasn’t played a game yet and Rawlins only played the first game. Those two could have boosted the team.
As it is we have been forced to play the younger players, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing but means we’ve lacked the experience of how to win games.
|
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Aug 11, 2021 17:39:17 GMT
I envisage one change with Hunt coming in for Sarro.
|
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Aug 11, 2021 20:02:06 GMT
In a way we are a product of our own success. If our white ball players hadn’t been quite so good they wouldn’t have been picked up in the 100 and we’d have a bigger squad to choose from. Having said that, Luke Wright hasn’t played a game yet and Rawlins only played the first game. Those two could have boosted the team. As it is we have been forced to play the younger players, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing but means we’ve lacked the experience of how to win games. Who doesn't? We had four seniors, they had five I think. We had two OS too. I think our only issue here is our seam attack. Liked to have seen Hunt, Atkins and Carson too for that matter. |
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Aug 11, 2021 21:06:51 GMT
In a way we are a product of our own success. If our white ball players hadn’t been quite so good they wouldn’t have been picked up in the 100 and we’d have a bigger squad to choose from. Having said that, Luke Wright hasn’t played a game yet and Rawlins only played the first game. Those two could have boosted the team. As it is we have been forced to play the younger players, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing but means we’ve lacked the experience of how to win games. Who doesn't? We had four seniors, they had five I think. We had two OS too. I think our only issue here is our seam attack. Liked to have seen Hunt, Atkins and Carson too for that matter. Atkins is injured. I agree the seam attack has been our main problem. |
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on Aug 11, 2021 21:21:19 GMT
Spot on Liquid, our seam attack has not been up to the required level all Tournament, however...
in the last match it was compounded by some below par fielding (throws from the boundary, over throws) and a complete inability in understanding and knowing how to go about constructing a meaningful run chase.
We were always scoring freely and ahead of their score at the equivalent stage, just needed to pick up one's and two's in the first thirty overs or so, hit the inevitable loose deliveries for four, keep between 5 to 5.5 an over, play their one quality bowler Harmer sensibly and most importantly keep wickets in hand in readiness for the charge in the last ten overs needing somewhere between eighty and ninety.
All part of the learning curve for 'Project Youth'.
Instead we witnessed panic and a whole host of reckless and unnecessary shot selections. End result, complete meltdown. We never looked in the game.
Unfortunately, Atkins has been injured throughout, otherwise we would no doubt have seen him, Hunt was injured at the start, but has been available for I believe the last three matches. Your guess is as good as mine as to why he hasn't been selected.
Hunt for Sarro is a no brainer, if Carson plays one of the other three spinners will need to drop out. Coles is probably safe as a genuine all-rounder and has bowled economically, although he did chew up a lot of dot deliveries on Tuesday and Beer and Lenham have been genuine wicket taking threats. Would be harsh on whoever makes way.
Don't be surprised if Harrison Ward gets another go. Hopefully, a more even contest with lessons learned from Tuesday's mawling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2021 12:28:12 GMT
Good sensible batting so far, 200-1 with 10 overs left is a very good platform but I feel they really need to push on now though for 300+ the likes of Eskinazi could make short work of anything less.
Well done Haines on the century! Apparently a record list A 2nd wicket partnership for Sussex.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2021 12:44:58 GMT
Also well done Ben Brown on a maiden list A century.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on Aug 12, 2021 13:28:48 GMT
What a contrast to Tuesday.
That is how to construct an innings, albeit not a run chase. Slow, steady start (in overcast difficult conditions), solid base with gradual acceleration and calculated risks with a sound platform for our overseas to wreak havoc in the last five overs.
Great effort from Brown and Haines. I was concerned Haines would be given the Captaincy for the remaining Championship matches and the extra responsibility would impact on his batting. Looks like nothing to worry about on that front based on today's performance.
Over to our bowlers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 12, 2021 13:54:59 GMT
Brutal stuff from Head & Wiesse at the end, it's a real shame than now Head has found some one day form he'll probably be back in Australia for the T20 semi finals.
|
|
|
|
Post by sponge on Aug 12, 2021 14:05:11 GMT
Get spin on asap.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on Aug 12, 2021 17:29:51 GMT
Another great advert for the Royal London One Day Cup. You can keep The Hundred.
Well played Sussex, not just today, but across the whole Tournament. Personally, I feel we have performed beyond expectations. Two wins, two losses, two wash outs and two matches we lost from winning positions.
A lot to be positive about and it will be interesting to see where we are with this group of players and how the Club progresses in the coming seasons.
My one gripe for the day and I apologise for dampening the mood, but whilst it is brilliant to see these youngsters given their chance and to develop, it is equally important to know when to pull them out of the line of fire.
Absolutely no criticism of Joe Sarro, a genuine prospect who I hope continues to develop and has a successful career with Sussex. However, it was obvious to every poster on here and should have been equally obvious to the Sussex Management Hunt should have replaced him in today's side. The kid has had a challenging Tournament and had a difficult time on Tuesday.
What is bowling just two overs, getting smashed around the park and spending the rest of the match fielding on the boundary going to do for his confidence? I hope someone will pick him up and reassure him of his ability.
Ok, Hunt might also have took a bit of tap, but the odds were far more in his favour than Joe's. Not only do you have to consider the impact on Sarro, but the knock on effect on the rest of the bowling unit today. The result was we become over reliant on our spin unit, over reliant on Ibrahim (who in fairness other than the penultimate over did really well), put unnecessary pressure on our fledgling Captain, had to gamble on a seventh bowler (Head that fortunately paid off) and end up bowling Lenham and Ibrahim later than should have been necessary. All of which could have been avoided.
If we had yet again clutched defeat from the jaws of victory that would not have been on the players, Captain or our under performing seamers, but on whoever was responsible for team selection.
Selection is difficult and will always divide opinion and whilst I suspect some may disagree, for me it is worrying that those running the side couldn't see something that was pretty obvious today.
Rant over and apologies. Well played Sussex, the player's can be rightly proud of how they represented the Club in the Competition.
|
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Aug 12, 2021 18:21:46 GMT
Another great advert for the Royal London One Day Cup. Who needs the hundred when you have the three hundred! 663 runs in a day! What other format of cricket can say that? You can keep you crappy hundred in the dustbin where it belongs!
Two wins against Worcestershire and Middlesex and two losses from winning positions against Lancashire and Gloucestershire which had we won we would have finished third.
Positives: Hundreds from Brown, Haines today and Orr at Worcester, performance of the three spinners (Beer, Coles and Lenham). Credit to Haines for the decision to bowl Head today was inspired. Good catch from Harrison Ward.
Negatives: performances of our seamers especially Crocombe and Sarro. Two overs too many from Sarro which went for 25, one over too many of Lenham which went for 17 and one over too many of Ibrahim which went for 23, a poor dropped catch from James Coles and poor last over which went for 14 and some sloppy out fielding. Last five overs went for 62 but probably only one wrong choice of bowler (I would have bowled Beer rather than Ibrahim for the 49th over).
|
|
|
|
Post by philh on Aug 13, 2021 5:40:34 GMT
Yet another exciting game for Sussex in this competition. It was to see us squeak home.
It’s a shame that the ECB see this competition as being of little or no value even though England are World Champions. I thoroughly enjoy 50 over games. There’s a part of me that is hoping that cricket splits between short and longer forms even if 50 over and 4-day games are played by at a far lower standard due to money by players who can go off and play T20/T16.66/T10 as well as T5, T2 or whatever.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Aug 13, 2021 7:57:17 GMT
Yet another exciting game for Sussex in this competition. It was to see us squeak home. It’s a shame that the ECB see this competition as being of little or no value even though England are World Champions. I thoroughly enjoy 50 over games. There’s a part of me that is hoping that cricket splits between short and longer forms even if 50 over and 4-day games are played by at a far lower standard due to money by players who can go off and play T20/T16.66/T10 as well as T5, T2 or whatever. Interesting thought. My view is that the ECB is gradually maneuvering the structure to a position where there are only 8-10 1st class counties. This will concentrate the best players at the top of the pyramid, raise the overall standard, and enhance our test match capabilities. It will also allow the 1st class counties to be converted into cities for the purpose of white ball tournaments. Having fewer teams in the top tier would make the various competitions shorter and enable the fixture list to be managed more easily. I'm not saying this is what I want. It's just my hunch as to the way things are moving. I can't see cricket's problems being readily solved under the current structure. |
|
