50 overs cup away to Glamorgan, Weds 8th June

... and Sussex seek their first win in the competition since Aug 2014!

I'd ring a couple of changes. Salt for Machan and Robinson for Briggs or Shahzad.I'd like to include Finch,too, but cannot see how.

The lack of a bowler who can bat at number six (like Zaidi!), means that the five bowlers have to make a long tail from 7-11 - which you can may be get away with over 20 overs but is clearly a batsman light over 50. I can see why last year the club liked the idea of Cachopa keeping wicket in white ball cricket. In the absence of a bowler in the top six, it was the only way of trying to balance the side and include a sixth batsman. Sadly, he seems to have lost his run-scoring ability and so is not the answer.

The only other available solution would be to repalce Briggs with Wells, as has happened in red ball cricket. But I don't think I'd trust him to bowl ten overs. On a good day you might get away with by bowling him in flashblade's 'boring middle overs' when most of the runs seem to come from pushing singles (unless you are playing at Trent Bridge, of course...) But too much potential to go horribly wrong...

Can you give any evidence that Cachopa has achieved anything like "form" for the seconds? Yesterday he made 46 on a batsman's wicket (Sibley made 113 not out for Surrey and Burke 52 not out) and most of his innings have been less than that. It is bitterly disappointing that he has fallen away so completely, in every form of cricket, since he arrived here in a blaze of 50s in the late summer of 2014 but there is no sign that his drought has come to an end.

Is there still time for our batting coach to work intensively with Machan, and Cachopa, to help them regain their previous brilliance? I believe he is not due to go back to Australia until July so surely there is a case for a couple of weeks of concentrated hard work.

We played five batsmen against Essex. Three gave their wickets away, two when well-set. I can't see adequate replacements unless it's Finch for Machan.

Steve Hollis has just tweeted that Machan is ruled out of tomorrow's game with a wrist injury, he's replaced in the squad by Magoffin.
Presumably that means Finch will play and perhaps Magoffin for Shahzad?

Sussex have put a link to the preview of the game on Twitter but the link doesn't work! 

Magoffin? What a waste. When's he ever played in this and why bring him in to do so when he's 86? Give Whittingham the chance if you wanna change an attack that don't need changing. Mags isn't normally considered, is too old and a dear on roller skates in the field, it's ridiculous. Giving youth a chance my arse. These fools please me with one decision then utterly astound me with another. Infuriating.

Another stupid move is only giving Wiese T20 games in this new deal, completely closing out the possibility of addressing the biggest issue in the playing side, the balance. Wiese six and Brown seven would give us the alternative that we're searching for, on here anyway, to try out at least. I predict the issue hasn't even registered with the men calling the shots.

The Mags/Whittingham one though, that really grates. "If we have an Academy we use it, otherwise what's the point." And he's 22 and already performed well in first class cricket. Very backwards and disturbingly unprogressive.

Idiots have ruined my night, not gonna be able to sleep now, wish I never came on here tonight, thanks a lot Joe.

I thought Machan was injured?

I agree with Bms sentiment. Sussex must win a 50 over game to dispel their past bogey and place the Wright/Davis revolution back on track.
Including Mags strengthens the bowling.

According to the Argus, yes. My point was that  what purports to be a "match preview" on the Sussex website makes no mention of Machan or the reason for his absence, so that anybody who hasn't read the Argus might conclude that he has been dropped.

And rather than just listing Magoffin's name in the squad, it might also have been an idea to say something informative, such as "Magoffin is in line for a rare one day appearance during a long period of white ball cricket in which Sussex  has only one four day CC game in the next month".

As hhs suggested, it rather implies that Sussex aren't very interested in the Royal London Cup. Perhaps that's one of the reasons we're not any good at it...