Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2014 14:38:32 GMT
Joyce must be getting really fed up with skippering a one man team, as Notts race to 170-1 at five an over, undoing all his own hard work in batting us back into the match...
The vice-chairman said we had deliberately picked two bowlers for this match whom we knew would go at 4.5 runs an over or more as an attacking policy... but we currently have four seamers going at between 4.66 and 6 an over.
We desperately need a spinner who can bottle up the runs at the other end. We've now tried Luke Wells, who is currently getting smacked around at 7.5 an over. What about Tredwell? After today's final ODI, he returns to Kent's second XI having lost his place in red ball cricket to Riley and with no prospect of getting it back, barring injury to the young spinner. We could do worse than take him on loan for a month and see how it goes. We'd have to release him back to Kent for T20, a format in which he still commands a place in their team as second spinner - but we should have the budget to share his salary for a month with Kent, using the compensation payments we will be getting from England for Jordan ...
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 3, 2014 14:54:54 GMT
If perceived injustice at his first innings dismissal is Hales' motivation, then Hamilton-Brown should be good for at least a triple century when his turn comes.  |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 3, 2014 15:20:05 GMT
The highest partnership of the innings saves the follow on. Well done, Joyce for another great hundred, and well done Jonny Lew for another unexpected bonus from your signing for us. Last night it looked as if Joyce was trying to protect you from the strike, at least against Samit Patel, but you've shown yourself to be worthy of better than that. Yes, well done to Lewis. I believe that is only the fourth century partnership this season - and it's the lack of partnerships which has been Sussex's problem in the batting , I think. We tend not to bat as a unit ; too often it has been about one batsman holding it together and nobody staying with him long enough for a match-winning partnership. A similar problem to last year, and I have just had a look at the figures to check:
| 100 partnerships
| 50 partnerships
| Less than 50 partnerships
| Percentage partnerships over 50
| | 2013 | 16 | 33 | 178 | 22 | | 2014 | 4 | 12 | 64 | 20 |
Last year 7 batsmen scored 14 100s between them. That number of good scores ought to suggest strength, but it plays out as inconsistency, and this year is following the same path. |
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Jun 3, 2014 15:31:35 GMT
None of the batters, other than Joyce, show any consistency. I believe there is the talent there but as yet, none of the players seem able to put together a run of scores. It must be frustrating for Robbo who has put his faith in this group of players, but it is just not happening, and he may be forced to look outside the group come next winter. The problem is not new, even in the championship winning days our batting looked suspect. Except of course, back then we had Mushtaq, Kirtley and Lewry to dig us out of a hole.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2014 15:55:44 GMT
an attraction in winning the toss and bowling first on a good surface is that if you have a weakened attack and are not confident of taking 20 wkts against a mighty batting line-up such as Notts, then inserting the opposition may well be your only chance of winning, via a second innings declaration and then chasing a fourth day target. Providing you can avoid the follow-on, of course! Let's not give up. What about the scenario above, which I floated after we invited Notts to bat first and they scored 408-5 on the first day? We then avoided the follow-on; now does anyone fancy a Notts declaration and Sussex Ed Joyce to chase 400 to win tomorrow? On second thoughts, perhaps we should pray that the poor weather forecast is correct and settle for five pts for the draw! |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 3, 2014 16:34:56 GMT
Whatever else, we should surely learn the lesson that it doesn't do to go playing theories about the nature of the Hove pitch if we haven't got the bowlers to do the job effectively. Until we can field an attack that is both penetrative and balanced, we clearly can't afford to put in the opposition on a fine sunny day.
There's some evidence for Robinson's theory about the Hove wicket, though much less than his dogmatic assertion that "9 times out of 10" sides winning the toss elect to bowl and come away with a win.Over the last three seasons just over 60% of sides winning the toss have fielded first, and there has only been one game lost that way, but wins and draws were about equal. First innings pentration hasn't been the answer either, first and second innings scores average out almost identical. The third innings has been the decisive one in most cases, regardless of what happened with the toss. Unfortunately for Sussex it looks like being the decisive one in this game - unless there is rain and a draw, which has been the fate of 38% of games here since 2011.
|
|
|
|
Post by crickettrader on Jun 3, 2014 16:44:39 GMT
It says a lot about the unfairness of the championship point scoring system that if it rains all day tomorrow Sussex will come out of a game they have been thoroughly outplayed in with just one less point than Notts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2014 16:53:39 GMT
Whatever else, we should surely learn the lesson that it doesn't do to go playing theories about the nature of the Hove pitch if we haven't got the bowlers to do the job effectively. Until we can field an attack that is both penetrative and balanced, we clearly can't afford to put in the opposition on a fine sunny day. There's some evidence for Robinson's theory about the Hove wicket, though much less than his dogmatic assertion that "9 times out of 10" sides winning the toss elect to bowl and come away with a win.Over the last three seasons just over 60% of sides winning the toss have fielded first, and there has only been one game lost that way And that was last month, wasn't it, when we put Somerset in and lost by an innings? The next week, Durham put Sussex in, we ended day one at 441-5 and everyone mercilessly took the mick out of Collingwood for getting it so badly wrong. And then it happened again for the third match running when Notts piled up 408-5 on day one in this match. It's true that we put Middx in and bowled them out for 105 - but that was back in the first week of April on a very damp Sunday when conditions were quite different. I'd have thought the way the wickets have been playing here and now in recent weeks and how teams have consistently piled up big batting pts on day one at Hove this season should be more significant determinants than some historical "nine out of ten" claim of dubious statistical provenance. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 3, 2014 16:57:21 GMT
It says a lot about the unfairness of the championship point scoring system that if it rains all day tomorrow Sussex will come out of a game they have been thoroughly outplayed in with just one less point than Notts. I agree with you. I think it was a bad decision to raise points for a draw from 3 to 5, but over and above this the bowling points system wants overhauling. It doesn't really give incentive to a side to do other than wait for mistakes to claim their points from clumps of 3 wickets. Perhaps a system that rewards wicket-taking at specific break points during the innings (so many for wickets within 25 overs, 50 overs, 75 overs etc) would help restore the difference between bat and ball. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2014 17:01:24 GMT
It says a lot about the unfairness of the championship point scoring system that if it rains all day tomorrow Sussex will come out of a game they have been thoroughly outplayed in with just one less point than Notts. I'd say this is the most important of the many good points raised in the course of this match thread. Notts have out-batted, out-bowled, out-caught, out-fielded and out-thought Sussex, with only Joyce standing between Sussex and an innings-and-plenty defeat. The points system needs major surgery because at the moment it gives far too much reward for mediocrity. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 3, 2014 17:35:20 GMT
Feel really sorry for Chris Nash, having to go out to open the batting against Broad and Siddle straight after bowling 22 overs this afternoon. Another reason why we desperately need a proper spin option.
|
|
|
|
Post by sharkey07 on Jun 3, 2014 19:08:49 GMT
I have attended days one and three and have to say that Sussex's bowling attack is looking powderpuff. The lack of any real me acne is worrying for rest of the season. Well dome Hobden, inconsistent and as expected for a man on debut some good balls, some bad balls.
Can someone tell me why for the most part of the afternoon we didn't howl Luke Wright ? He was useful in first innings yet ignored by the skipper.
On reflection I feel our status in Div One could, I hasten to add could be a dilemma as the campaign continues...
|
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Jun 3, 2014 19:15:47 GMT
Whatever else, we should surely learn the lesson that it doesn't do to go playing theories about the nature of the Hove pitch if we haven't got the bowlers to do the job effectively. Until we can field an attack that is both penetrative and balanced, we clearly can't afford to put in the opposition on a fine sunny day. There's some evidence for Robinson's theory about the Hove wicket, though much less than his dogmatic assertion that "9 times out of 10" sides winning the toss elect to bowl and come away with a win.Over the last three seasons just over 60% of sides winning the toss have fielded first, and there has only been one game lost that way, but wins and draws were about equal. First innings pentration hasn't been the answer either, first and second innings scores average out almost identical. The third innings has been the decisive one in most cases, regardless of what happened with the toss. Unfortunately for Sussex it looks like being the decisive one in this game - unless there is rain and a draw, which has been the fate of 38% of games here since 2011. Most stats are made up anyway - 73% of people know that. I imagine only the rain will save us now, giving us an undeserved draw. Wonder where the game would be if we'd have won the toss - I mean made the right decision at it. Nash bowling all those overs with some success says a lot. Tredwell would be better than Nash, but so would Beer, we gotta give him a go. As for Lewis' efforts, he's a bowler. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jun 3, 2014 20:37:33 GMT
My farthing's worth is it's swings and roundabouts. We should get away with a draw if the weather is
as bad as the forecasters predict. Most counties get away with one each season. This is our one.
Lancashire were there for the taking until rain ruined that finish.
Leaving aside the strength of the Notts side when Broad and Siddell are added to an already highly
impressive XI are the Sussex weaknesses which often come to the surface when playing far
better opponents.
Without Captain Marvel this game might have been done and dusted today. We need a full-time
spinner and a top seamer to replace Jordan. Surely, a respected division 1 side can't rely on
part-time spinners for the rest of the season? Perhaps, they can? So why not throw in Beer
and make it sink or swim for him.
Of course, the reality is quite different.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonfilby on Jun 3, 2014 22:18:04 GMT
Whatever else, we should surely learn the lesson that it doesn't do to go playing theories about the nature of the Hove pitch if we haven't got the bowlers to do the job effectively. Until we can field an attack that is both penetrative and balanced, we clearly can't afford to put in the opposition on a fine sunny day. There's some evidence for Robinson's theory about the Hove wicket, though much less than his dogmatic assertion that "9 times out of 10" sides winning the toss elect to bowl and come away with a win.Over the last three seasons just over 60% of sides winning the toss have fielded first, and there has only been one game lost that way, but wins and draws were about equal. First innings pentration hasn't been the answer either, first and second innings scores average out almost identical. The third innings has been the decisive one in most cases, regardless of what happened with the toss. Unfortunately for Sussex it looks like being the decisive one in this game - unless there is rain and a draw, which has been the fate of 38% of games here since 2011. Most stats are made up anyway - 73% of people know that. I imagine only the rain will save us now, giving us an undeserved draw. Wonder where the game would be if we'd have won the toss - I mean made the right decision at it. Nash bowling all those overs with some success says a lot. Tredwell would be better than Nash, but so would Beer, we gotta give him a go. As for Lewis' efforts, he's a bowler. What on earth are you on about?! How could a draw possibly be undeserved when we have had the privilege of witnessing one of the best innings ever played by a Sussex batsman? |
|
