|
|
Post by joe on Jun 8, 2022 19:33:58 GMT
I think Rawlins contract is up at the end of the year.
|
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Jun 8, 2022 19:36:45 GMT
I think Rawlins contract is up at the end of the year. Yes it is. Not before time! |
|
|
|
Post by skylark on Jun 8, 2022 19:37:24 GMT
I think Rawlins contract is up at the end of the year. well let’s just hope they have the sense not to renew it although this is Sussex we are talking about probably give him a 5 year contract with a pay increase |
|
|
|
Post by skylark on Jun 8, 2022 19:38:35 GMT
I wonder how Mr Kirtley will sum this Sussex performance up
|
|
|
|
Post by mrsdoyle on Jun 8, 2022 19:48:53 GMT
I wonder how Mr Kirtley will sum this Sussex performance up Disappointing, lessons will be learnt and we will take the positives into the next game. |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Jun 8, 2022 19:49:13 GMT
I think Rawlins contract is up at the end of the year. well let’s just hope they have the sense not to renew it although this is Sussex we are talking about probably give him a 5 year contract with a pay increase Ha! They won't tell you how long it is, not at SCCCSS Area 51 HQ. I went there once and got shot at - it was Greenfield, he missed by a mile. I'm gonna defend Rawlins but he's a second spinner and a number 7/8 bat. Great fielder too. JK just needs to wake up to that. So my main man has Covid. I thought it had blown away. They need 37 in ten balls - not quite Devon. |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Jun 8, 2022 19:51:32 GMT
McCoy strikes. They're reeling now.
|
|
|
|
Post by ashingtonmartlet on Jun 8, 2022 19:58:19 GMT
He must have some dirt on the coach because that is the only way he can continue to get selected and not have been released by the county already. I think you are right what other reason would he still be in the team or even still at Sussex surely his time must soon be up To be fair, we’ve lost so many players in the last 2 years, not sure we’d have fielded a side if he’d gone as well. |
|
|
|
Post by joe on Jun 8, 2022 20:08:35 GMT
50 from Mills 4 overs.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on Jun 8, 2022 20:11:18 GMT
They need 37 in ten balls - not quite Devon. Apologies Liquid, my mistake I was banking on Mills coming back on sooner. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jun 8, 2022 20:14:34 GMT
The very predictable Surrey stroll. Remember the day when Sussex were on level
par? Another poor performance from Mills. He seems to have given up already
on this season. A ghost of last summer.
Good luck to Surrey. They look favourites to win the T20 trophy. Jordan has taken
on the captaincy with aplomb.
|
|
|
|
Post by devonexile on Jun 8, 2022 20:42:43 GMT
Sixty runs short. Disappointing. We also need to start getting concerned about our net run rate, which could cost us down the road.
In fairness not only are Surrey a good team, they have greater resources and a larger more experienced squad. It was always going to be a big ask and we needed to be at our very best to stand a chance. I would also add we are not as bad a team as the last two matches indicate and there may well be a gap, but it isn't as wide as tonight's performance may suggest.
Liquid and I got into a healthy debate over Harrison Ward recently. Whilst, we may not have been on the same page over his continued inclusion in the team, I feel we were in agreement on the far bigger and more concerning issue over the team management.
Right from the start of the tournament there have been some odd decisions. The exclusion of Alsop, a proven T20 player. The initial inclusion of Ward, based on what? The revolving turnstile of overseas. Alsop only getting selected because Ward was unavailable and then putting in a man of the match performance. The delay in including Orr and Carter. The appearance of Hudson-Prentice from nowhere batting at 4 and 5 and scoring around a run a ball. The batting order in general.
I questioned in an earlier post, are these decisions a product of well thought out and carefully considered judgements or pure chance muddled thinking?
Top performing sides have top coaches. Just look at the Premier League. I have nothing against Kirtley or Salisbury, not only is it their livelihood, but they seem genuine decent guys who are trying their utmost and giving it their all.
But, top level sport is an unforgiving environment. The question is are our performances a consequence of the players on the field or more to do with the coaching staff not utilising the resources correctly?
The conclusion based on the evidence to date is I fear it may be far more to do with the latter.
Finally, let's be a little kinder to some of the players. Some of the comments on here go well beyond constructive criticism. For example, Delray. Yes, he hasn't performed with the bat, but before tonight he has arguably been one of our better bowlers. If he isn't producing with the bat, then maybe the management shouldn't be putting him in as part of the top order?
|
|
|
|
Post by wiseman on Jun 8, 2022 21:26:32 GMT
Sixty runs short. Disappointing. We also need to start getting concerned about our net run rate, which could cost us down the road. In fairness not only are Surrey a good team, they have greater resources and a larger more experienced squad. It was always going to be a big ask and we needed to be at our very best to stand a chance. I would also add we are not as bad a team as the last two matches indicate and there may well be a gap, but it isn't as wide as tonight's performance may suggest. Liquid and I got into a healthy debate over Harrison Ward recently. Whilst, we may not have been on the same page over his continued inclusion in the team, I feel we were in agreement on the far bigger and more concerning issue over the team management. Right from the start of the tournament there have been some odd decisions. The exclusion of Alsop, a proven T20 player. The initial inclusion of Ward, based on what? The revolving turnstile of overseas. Alsop only getting selected because Ward was unavailable and then putting in a man of the match performance. The delay in including Orr and Carter. The appearance of Hudson-Prentice from nowhere batting at 4 and 5 and scoring around a run a ball. The batting order in general. I questioned in an earlier post, are these decisions a product of well thought out and carefully considered judgements or pure chance muddled thinking? Top performing sides have top coaches. Just look at the Premier League. I have nothing against Kirtley or Salisbury, not only is it their livelihood, but they seem genuine decent guys who are trying their utmost and giving it their all. But, top level sport is an unforgiving environment. The question is are our performances a consequence of the players on the field or more to do with the coaching staff not utilising the resources correctly? The conclusion based on the evidence to date is I fear it may be far more to do with the latter. Finally, let's be a little kinder to some of the players. Some of the comments on here go well beyond constructive criticism. For example, Delray. Yes, he hasn't performed with the bat, but before tonight he has arguably been one of our better bowlers. If he isn't producing with the bat, then maybe the management shouldn't be putting him in as part of the top order? A lot of this I agree with.its the management of Sussex is wrong JK out of his depth as think salisbury is in the 4 day championship for Sussex to reward failure after this season will tell us all everything. |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Jun 9, 2022 10:48:19 GMT
We need to accept Rawlins is a one-day bowling all-rounder - 3 pronged. We need to bat him 7/8 and bank on him for 4, he's shown enough in this form with the ball. Roy and Jacks can get hold of anyone.
Looking at that Surrey line-up, they're s**t hot. They've built this side well, I really like their model, boundary hitting all-rounders throughout the spine. We should use their blueprint, we have the personnel - H-P, Rawlins, Garton, Ibrahim, Carter. In fact reverse this order from 5-9 and you got yourself a team to build around, as long as H-P is bowling.
|
|
