|
|
Post by philh on Jul 27, 2022 14:01:17 GMT
This game has gone. The target is sailing towards 300+. Pujara and someone else would need to perform miracles.
|
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Jul 27, 2022 18:14:08 GMT
That's all well & good Phil but where's the funny bit? It's gonna be 400+. It ain't happening but we've been in it until now. 143 was piss poor frankly.
I tell you what isn't opinion Gordy, the fact that Andrew has sacrificed our 4 day team and focused almost solely on T20 cricket.
What I see is one step forward two steps back. Love that we play youth and use the academy but 17 year olds? Really? Who is that fair to? How do you justify that? I don't care how good a kid is he ain't a man and he has to learn the game in the 2s. 19/20 yes. 16/17 definitely not. First class cricket is an adult's game. Dip them in the one-dayers maybe, but not 4 dayers.
Then there's the incomings/outgoings. They're clearly reflected through Andrew's spec so not much to add there except it's an absolute resignation of the best form of the game and it will result in us losing our best players, including the 17 year olds if they turn out any good.
Andrew is the biggest disaster cos this is his plan and I guess as the CEO or whatever he's the boss? We need someone who takes the best form seriously. Andrew has had his stint, 6 years or more, that's enough. It has not worked, you must go. Even if KG, JK & IS keep their jobs, Andrew must not.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Jul 27, 2022 19:30:39 GMT
What I see is one step forward two steps back. Love that we play youth and use the academy but 17 year olds? Really? Who is that fair to? How do you justify that? I don't care how good a kid is he ain't a man and he has to learn the game in the 2s. 19/20 yes. 16/17 definitely not. First class cricket is an adult's game. Dip them in the one-dayers maybe, but not 4 dayers. Completely agree. |
|
|
|
Post by squarepoint on Jul 27, 2022 19:55:34 GMT
Well, Tendulkar made his test debut aged 16 and although he was obviously a very rare talent, in some countries, Pakistan in particular, they put more trust in teenage talent than we usually do in England. Having said that, obviously too many young players were thrown in the deep end together for us last season with results that could have demoralised them. Fortunately that doesn’t seem to have happened and most have improved this year. So although it hasn’t been managed well, I’m cautiously optimistic for the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on Jul 27, 2022 22:06:18 GMT
You cant dismiss the injury list because it doesnt fit in with your argument. If you think missing Haines, Garton, Alsop, Archer, Atkins, Caron, Crocombe and Finn has't hampered a small squad I'm not sure your argument holds up either. I dont necessarily adopt a more supportive stance I just dont believe the constant attack on management and the team helps. All the attacks are based on gossip and opinion rather than actual fact. During one of my more boring work days recently i took a look at the steady decline in the squad and whether people like to admit it or not the rot set in at the end of Robinsons reign and hammered home by Mark Davis. The CEO's and Chairmen and those times in my opinion have a lot to answer for in how perilous they left the clubs finances. Grubbys biggest mistake for me was employing a part time head coach in Jason Gillespie. But i do massively support this process as i believe in Sussex Cricket from grass roots to the top and there is nothing greater to watch than homegrown talent performing for the martlets. I would say you can't hide behind the injury list because it fits with your view point (not argument). Actually on your second point we agree. Despite all the success and good he did whilst Head Coach, Robinson left behind a mess. This was perpetuated by Davis, who in my humble opinion was the wrong choice as his successor. Not possibly for the first time an appointment that feels like it was done on sentiment rather than what was needed or was in the best interests of the club at the time. I am not going to deny being excited by the appointment of Gillespie with his past successes. However, he also failed to deliver and like Robinson left behind a mess. Whether this was down to his decisions, his part-time status or not being given a true picture when being 'sold' the role or a combination of the aforementioned I have no idea and don't wish to speculate. The bottom line is what he left behind was never going to make it easy for whoever took on the role after him. That is not to negate the viewpoint of many that feel some of the decisions in the subsequent period have compounded the problems. Back to the current squad. I don't know how else to explain something that really is quite simple. You cannot use the absence of Archer or Robinson or any other centrally contracted player as a reason why we are unable to field a stronger team. The fact they are centrally contracted means irrespective of whether they are fit, they are likely to be away on international duty, have a franchise deal or won't be released due to the whim of the ECB and their availability is at best going to be scarce. Any sensible Management structure would plan without them with any limited availability being a bonus. Do we hear Yorkshire complain about the unavailability of Root, Bairstow, Malan, Lancashire about Anderson, Salt, Butler, Livingstone, Durham about Stokes, Lees, Potts, Surrey about Roy, Topley etc, etc, etc... What next, will we hear a County state they would have comfortably won the Royal London Cup if all there players weren't away at The Hundred? As for the others, are you seriously telling me the inclusion of Crocombe, Atkins and Finn in the team we have out for this match make it stronger? Finn not only being left out through choice I would add, but not forgetting his return of 7 wickets at 66.28 a piece with a strike rate of over 120 prior to this game. He was out performed by both trialists in the last game and would no doubt have been so again at Trent Bridge. Hunt has also now got double the wickets Finn has in the current season. Carson has a long way to go before he is a match winner, yes he is better option than Coles and Lenham, but 19 games and 55 wickets at almost 33 apiece would suggest only a marginal improvement in the current team putting aside in this particular match we are playing on a seamer friendly wicket. Yes, Haines, Alsop and Hudson-Prentice's bowling would again make us better. Garton is becoming a concern all on his own, but even at his best his white ball performances are noticeably better than his red ball that have produced only 26 wickets in his last twelve games over this and the previous two seasons. I am not disputing there inclusion would make us better to a degree, what I refuse to accept is this 'injury' smokescreen that implies if we had all our players fit then we could compete properly and everything in the garden would be rosy. The gulf between our current squad and not just the likes of Notts would still be there. If you honestly don't accept that, then we will have to agree to disagree. Case in point, contrast and compare the battering we are getting in the current fixture to the return fixture at the start of the season when Haines, Alsop, Finn, Crocombe and Atkins were all available and played. Notts didn't have Pattinson or Paterson either and they still comfortably defeated us. At best we may be a couple of places higher in the table, I am not convinced, but who knows. The problem isn't just the gulf between ourselves and Notts, it now exists between us and dare I say it other 'lesser' Counties. How are Glamorgan prior to this round of matches 55 points better off than us having won four more matches? Northants are comfortably going to survive in Division One. I believe my observations are objective and well thought out. The fact is we are sitting second from bottom of Division Two of the Championship, won just one match in our last twenty two and that thanks to a misjudgement by the opposition, failed to take twenty wickets in a match in twenty one attempts and are coming off our poorest T20 campaign for several seasons. A key factor behind our current plight being our injury list does not in my view hold up to scrutiny and is too easy a card to play. Others may disagree. Our overall squad needs strengthening. Yes, we have seen welcome improvements in several areas, but overall, I repeat overall even with everyone fit and available (excluding centrally contracted) we would still be well short of where we need to get to if we genuinely aspire to becoming a competitive force in Division One of the County Championship. A starting point over the winter is addressing an under par bowling unit and putting at least an equal emphasis between our participation in both red and white ball competitions. |
|
|
|
Post by enoughisenough on Jul 27, 2022 23:03:12 GMT
I take my hat off to you, Devon. One of the best argued posts I’ve read on here in a long while. I agree with just about everything you’ve said. This and last season have been the “short term thinking” era at Sussex, too many last-minute panicky loan signings to compensate for our lack of bowling options, and the saga of the revolving door of overseas Blast players was embarrassing (even if player availability was often beyond the control of the management). We need someone at the helm with solid, proven cricket experience (more important right now than the marketing aspect of the job), and we need some tough love from the ex-players on the cricket committee. This can be turned around but new personnel are required to do it.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Jul 28, 2022 10:31:14 GMT
So 399 to win. If we lose, our 3 bowling points will be wiped out because we finished -3 on over rate.
Just to illustrate how much we’ve missed our strike bowler, he’s now our leading wicket taker in only his 3rd game.
|
|
|
|
Post by philh on Jul 28, 2022 10:38:59 GMT
I think our batting is moving in the right direction. We are regularly achieving decent totals even allowing for the fact that it is hard not to score 400 on our home pitch. Last year, our batting looked weak, but Orr and Clark have progressed well, and Pujara has been outstanding. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that we have been a little unlucky going into this game without Haines and Alsop. Batsmen do not get injured as much as fast bowlers, and both are valuable members of our top six. Most counties would be weakened severely if they lost two of their top six. I have little sympathy for the management when it comes to bowling. Archer and Robinson were unlikely to be available for more than a couple of games this season, which meant we were left with Atkins, Crocombe, Hunt, Finn and Hudson-Prentice to take a lot of wickets. They may all be capable of taking a wicket or two or be OK as a third or fourth seamer. As for Garton, his first-class record is not particularly good. We are left with bowlers who can neither be fairly certain to take wickets nor keep runs down. Whereas I see the young batsmen improving with more to come, including from the middle/lower order batsmen of Ibrahim, Lenham, Coles, I do not see that in the bowlers. I am not writing off the younger ones, but they should be taking wickets in the 2nd XI rather than returning poor figures in the 1st XI. Atkins, Hunt and Crocombe may become top bowlers in a year or two, but not if they are over-exposed to decent 2nd Division batsmen on a flat pitch. I have no idea how near we will get to the target Nottinghamshire have set us. I suspect we will reach around 200. However, take out Ollie Robinson's return from this game and it would have been a massacre. I would like to propose Ishant Sharma for next season before anyone else claims it as their idea.  |
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on Jul 28, 2022 12:08:31 GMT
I think our batting is moving in the right direction. We are regularly achieving decent totals even allowing for the fact that it is hard not to score 400 on our home pitch. Last year, our batting looked weak, but Orr and Clark have progressed well, and Pujara has been outstanding. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that we have been a little unlucky going into this game without Haines and Alsop. Batsmen do not get injured as much as fast bowlers, and both are valuable members of our top six. Most counties would be weakened severely if they lost two of their top six. I have little sympathy for the management when it comes to bowling. Archer and Robinson were unlikely to be available for more than a couple of games this season, which meant we were left with Atkins, Crocombe, Hunt, Finn and Hudson-Prentice to take a lot of wickets. They may all be capable of taking a wicket or two or be OK as a third or fourth seamer. As for Garton, his first-class record is not particularly good. We are left with bowlers who can neither be fairly certain to take wickets nor keep runs down. Whereas I see the young batsmen improving with more to come, including from the middle/lower order batsmen of Ibrahim, Lenham, Coles, I do not see that in the bowlers. I am not writing off the younger ones, but they should be taking wickets in the 2nd XI rather than returning poor figures in the 1st XI. Atkins, Hunt and Crocombe may become top bowlers in a year or two, but not if they are over-exposed to decent 2nd Division batsmen on a flat pitch. I have no idea how near we will get to the target Nottinghamshire have set us. I suspect we will reach around 200. However, take out Ollie Robinson's return from this game and it would have been a massacre. I would like to propose Ishant Sharma for next season before anyone else claims it as their idea. Good post Phil. I like your thinking, Ishant Sharma. Surprised noone else has come up with that suggestion. You are right to be concerned. Inevitable someone else will try and claim credit. Especially that Liquid. Don't be fooled by that shy, retiring and highly respectable demeanour. If anyone is capable of a little plagatism, he would be my top suspect. |
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on Jul 28, 2022 12:14:38 GMT
So 399 to win. If we lose, our 3 bowling points will be wiped out because we finished -3 on over rate. Just to illustrate how much we’ve missed our strike bowler, he’s now our leading wicket taker in only his 3rd game. ...and Currie is coming up on the rails Joe. Eleven wickets in two games, three innings. The more I see of him, the more I like. Need a few more games to be completely convinced. It's a good blueprint. Given a good run out in the seconds before being tried out in the firsts. Need a lot more than him to solve our bowling issues, but can certainly be part of the rebuild. |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Jul 28, 2022 12:18:30 GMT
Damn it. Wanted runs galore from Ali Orr. Maybe Pujara can get us out of this... pickle. Poetry can be difficult.
Ishant? Heard him mentioned on here a couple of times but not for me. I want Chawla if Salisbury is gonna have us playing on roads all year. Presuming he ain't been sent down the road by then. Chawla could rock up and win us a game even if he ain't bowled for 2 years.
Man's a ledge in waiting like Mushy was.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Jul 28, 2022 14:00:18 GMT
Imagine what we could do if our bowling and batting could fire in the same game!
|
|
|
|
Post by philh on Jul 28, 2022 14:12:56 GMT
Imagine what we could do if our bowling and batting could fire in the same game! You mean we bat at Hove and they bat at Trent Bridge. It would give us a chance even if it is logistically difficult. |
|
|
|
Post by joe on Jul 28, 2022 14:30:54 GMT
142 all out and no points from the game.
Notts win by 256 runs in 3 days.
|
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Jul 28, 2022 15:59:03 GMT
Imagine what we could do if our bowling and batting could fire in the same game! You mean we bat at Hove and they bat at Trent Bridge. It would give us a chance even if it is logistically difficult. Yeah, there's a hell of a lot in that. Notts looked at who was coming and gave themselves the best chance of winning. They had a plan, we have a bunch of thoughtless idiots. We should have been doing that at home to Derby, Leics... Maybe not Notts & Middlesex. - It's not f****g pocket snooker. Disappointing. Two pants scores not worth a whistle. So zero points cos of the loss or a slow bowling rate? We totally ignore winning, seemingly placing so much emphasis on draw points then readily throw points away by bowling too slow? If that's the case, again, it shows monumentally bad management yet again. |
|
