|
|
Post by coverpoint on May 15, 2022 12:21:40 GMT
Lenham apart our bowling attack has once again looked absolutely toothless. It's now raining.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on May 15, 2022 13:09:53 GMT
Covers coming off
9 overs lost
|
|
|
|
Post by philh on May 15, 2022 13:56:55 GMT
I'm starting to have a bad feeling about this. It will be incredibly disappointing if a draw v Middx and win v. Leicestershire become a loss and a draw.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on May 15, 2022 14:16:32 GMT
I'm starting to have a bad feeling about this. It will be incredibly disappointing if a draw v Middx and win v. Leicestershire become a loss and a draw. ...and if we don't win this one philh, we can't put it down to the rain on the last day. We have had more than enough time and overs to have put this one to bed already. Hopefully, no more rain and we can roll them over after Tea. Although like you, I am getting the same feeling you are!! |
|
|
|
Post by joe on May 15, 2022 15:01:57 GMT
Covers coming off, play to resume at 4.05. 30 overs remain for the day.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on May 15, 2022 16:29:04 GMT
And that’s it as they shake hands.
Very, very disappointing.
|
|
|
|
Post by sponge on May 15, 2022 16:36:05 GMT
And that’s it as they shake hands. Very, very disappointing. Agreed Joe. Up to the management to pick the team up. After all, it hasn't been too bad a performance. We all probably expected Robinson's class to make a difference. But for whatever reason it didn't happen. I still don't understand some of the bowling changes. The elusive win will come. |
|
|
|
Post by philh on May 15, 2022 16:41:23 GMT
You can say we should have won, but to balance that we have been unlucky with losing some overs and being so near yet so far. I think the management cost us 8 points against Middlesex, but bowling sides out on a pudding of a wicket is not easy. Leicestershire showed that you can stay there, scoring at 2.5 per over without too much danger. I would call it a good performance, particularly with the absences of Orr, Rizwan and Ollie in Leicestershire's first innings.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on May 15, 2022 19:23:52 GMT
You can say we should have won, but to balance that we have been unlucky with losing some overs and being so near yet so far. I think the management cost us 8 points against Middlesex, but bowling sides out on a pudding of a wicket is not easy. Leicestershire showed that you can stay there, scoring at 2.5 per over without too much danger. I would call it a good performance, particularly with the absences of Orr, Rizwan and Ollie in Leicestershire's first innings. I like your posts philh they are always well thought out, measured and balanced. On this one though, whilst I absolutely agree the recent performances have been much improved, dominating probably seven and a third of the day's play over the last two matches, the reality is we only secured a defeat and a draw and our winless run is now extended to eighteen matches. Again, you are correct we have seen some 'puddings' of wickets this season, away to Derby together with those we served up for our home fixtures against Durham and Middlesex. However, was this really another 'pudding'? We were playing bottom of the table Leicestershire, who we had bowled out in under 84 overs on Day One, yet couldn't dismiss in 136 overs across days three and four where at times there was invariable bounce and some encouragement for the bowlers. Having got through their top order, we were unable to dismiss their number 7 out of form wicket keeper with a career average of under 30 and their number 9 leg spinner with a career average of less than 20 with only one first class fifty to his name across seventy innings. Add in some curious bowling changes and tactics, Robinson bowling off spin, Crocombe arguably our best first innings bowler being asked to pointlessly bowl short down the leg side and not at the stumps and Lenham being removed from the attack when he looked his most threatening and was into a good rhythm. Not for the first time this season (and I will probably get shot down for even drawing such a conclusion) we looked completely devoid of any real plan or ideas other than just give everyone a go and hopefully someone will strike lucky. We are all focused on when we last won a match, but here is an equally worrying observation. Does anyone know when we last managed to take twenty wickets in a match? I will save you all the trouble of looking it up, it was seventeen matches ago (over 12 months), the one that immediately followed the last time we won a first class fixture. The match in question was against a Yorkshire side that included Joe Root. We lost by 48 runs having had a 71 run first innings lead. The point I am making is they weren't all 'pudding' wickets. We have a problem, not only have we forget how to win, we have lost the ability to bowl teams out twice over four days. Sadly, almost half way through the County Championship fixtures we find ourselves second from bottom of the table with only the team below us that we have just failed to defeat from the best winning position we have held for some considerable time. Did anyone even with the possibility of a rain affected day not expect us to take the last five Leicestershire wickets today? There were still 63 overs of play before the sides shook hands. May I suggest the Table doesn't lie and we have a problem, one that I am not entirely convinced will be solved upon the return of Finn, Hudson-Prentice and Carson from their respective injuries who incidentally have all at times featured and formed part of those bowling attacks that have been unable to find a way of getting twenty wickets in match. |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on May 15, 2022 19:25:07 GMT
A good draw performance-wise I reckon. If Robinson had got his usual results we'd have won easy, so well done to others.
I wish the captain would captain like he bats. There's a lot wrong tactically, a serious lack of aggression. Any game where Clark, Carter & Lenham do well is a good game by me though. And any leggie who can flip a game by removing three top order bats in about 20 balls is a real find. A spinner who can actually turn the ball, a bit. A bit is a bit more than any other spinner we've had for a while. You only need a bit.
More positives than negatives. I'm convinced we need to be tough on selection - lose the loans, they're not needed, and seriously re-think the OS slots. We need a strike bowler. This Aussie? Really? Another all-rounder? Garton, H-P, Ibrahim, Lenham, Rawlins... the list goes on. Well it doesn't, it stops there but that's enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on May 15, 2022 19:31:22 GMT
We need a strike bowler Devon. In fact, I'm also convinced we'd be better places with 2 OS bowlers. Our batting is really good even without Pujara and Rizwan.
A shout for Rawlins and Hunt too. Didn't see much this week but what I saw of them I liked. And many others.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on May 15, 2022 20:08:44 GMT
We need a strike bowler Devon. In fact, I'm also convinced we'd be better places with 2 OS bowlers. Our batting is really good even without Pujara and Rizwan. A shout for Rawlins and Hunt too. Didn't see much this week but what I saw of them I liked. And many others. Absolutely Liquid, you are correct and we agree (almost!!). Firstly, apologies in my haste to highlight our deficiency I omitted to compliment Clark, Carter, Crocombe and Lenham on outstanding performances. Particularly pleased for Lenham who up until now still appeared to be adapting to the red ball format. I believe we have both previously highlighted Carter as an outstanding prospect. I don't believe he is at the point Clark is yet, but he will get there given the opportunities, which won't happen if we keep bringing in overseas wicket keepers. A consequence of the poorly handled situation around Ben Brown, where I have shared my thoughts in previous posts so I will not repeat myself again. Carter could also do with a few extra sessions with Sarah Taylor as unlike his batting his keeping was a little sloppy at times during this match. We do need an overseas bowler, no doubt and if there is a way of changing direction on our overseas recruitment for the second half of the season then that in mine and presumably your opinions would be the way to go. Unfortunately, they won't as they are obsessed with the T20 and they see this as the solution to replacing Salt. The one area we differ is Pujara. We need to supplement the youth and I believe having him around not only acts as a safety net, but the added confidence, experience and knowledge he imparts to the young group is invaluable. It may well be playing a part in the performances they are producing this season, not forgetting his runs. Definitely stick with him. I am still concerned the Captaincy has been forced onto Haines too soon, although struggling to identify an alternative. |
|
|
|
Post by ashingtonmartlet on May 15, 2022 20:19:52 GMT
We need a strike bowler Devon. In fact, I'm also convinced we'd be better places with 2 OS bowlers. Our batting is really good even without Pujara and Rizwan. A shout for Rawlins and Hunt too. Didn't see much this week but what I saw of them I liked. And many others. Really good without the two overseas players??? Presumably you’d get rid of Alsop too…I think you’re getting a bit carried away if you think we can manage comfortably without those three, not least as we’d struggle to field a batting line-up. |
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on May 15, 2022 21:05:47 GMT
We need a strike bowler Devon. In fact, I'm also convinced we'd be better places with 2 OS bowlers. Our batting is really good even without Pujara and Rizwan. I agree about the need for a strike bowler. However, I disagree about being able to cope without Pujara. |
|
|
|
Post by philh on May 16, 2022 9:22:25 GMT
You can say we should have won, but to balance that we have been unlucky with losing some overs and being so near yet so far. I think the management cost us 8 points against Middlesex, but bowling sides out on a pudding of a wicket is not easy. Leicestershire showed that you can stay there, scoring at 2.5 per over without too much danger. I would call it a good performance, particularly with the absences of Orr, Rizwan and Ollie in Leicestershire's first innings. I like your posts philh they are always well thought out, measured and balanced. On this one though, whilst I absolutely agree the recent performances have been much improved, dominating probably seven and a third of the day's play over the last two matches, the reality is we only secured a defeat and a draw and our winless run is now extended to eighteen matches. .... May I suggest the Table doesn't lie and we have a problem, one that I am not entirely convinced will be solved upon the return of Finn, Hudson-Prentice and Carson from their respective injuries who incidentally have all at times featured and formed part of those bowling attacks that have been unable to find a way of getting twenty wickets in match. I suppose my point is that getting into good positions in games is part of the battle, devonexile. Whereas, I gave our chances of bowling out Middlesex in 5 hours at around 1 in 10 last week, I would say that I saw our chances of winning v Leicestershire as 8.5 in 10 before the last day's play. I think it's easy to overact when lower order batsmen hang around. When the ball is softer, it is not uncommon for numbers 7 to 9 to be more difficulty to shift than some of the higher order batsmen. I think if we replayed yesterday 10 times, we would have won 8.5 times out of 10. Of course, the reality is, we didn't and, after such an appalling run, it is doubly frustrating. However, on balance, I'm not disappointed with the performance at Leicester. Yes, they are a weak side, but we are starting to compete in games. The table doesn't lie, but a draw last week and a win this week would have us at the right end of the table. We just need to make that next step. I wholeheartedly agree that we need a strike bowler. If Ollie Robinson doesn't take five wickets or is not playing, taking 20 wickets looks highly unlikely. If Robinson had taken 5 wickets over the two innings at Leicester, we would have won. I would agree that we need Pujara but an overseas strike bowler would offer more than Rizwan, despite his undoubted talent. However, I think this is easy to say in hindsight. There were not too many clues that Tom Clark would become such a reliable bat this season and with Brown's departure, I can see why the decision was made to bring in Rizwan. There are some positives to take from this game. Archie Lenham rattling the Leicestershire top order, Carter looking the part and, once again, Clark's performance. Ibrahim was back in the 2nds last week, so I hope he can contribute to the 1st XI soon. As you say, the gap is a strike bowler. Although there has been plenty of discussion about the problems caused by the mass outgoings from Sussex, the one thing that has not been overly discussed is the loss of Archer, Robinson and Jordan to England, injury and T20 cricket. They are not easy to replace. I, therefore, agree a top-class strike bowler is the Achilles heel of this improving side. |
|
