|
|
Post by hhsussex on May 11, 2015 18:51:33 GMT
11 wicketless over for 52 suggests some improvement after his first three went for 25. Good for the Sussex faithful for applauding him. But I fear the no-balls and byes and the ill-directed long-hops and hlaf-volleys he has served up in this match may end up costing Sussex the points. Let's hope the batters prove me wrong and chase down the 250 or whatever it is Midd set us. Irt will be interesting to see how the wicket plays on day three. Grounders reckons it would get flatter, Angus Fraser reckons it will get tougher to bat on it. And where does 'home roller advantage' fit in to all this? Meanwhile, my real disaffection today is not directed at poor Matt Hobden but at myself. When I dropped hh at his home after close of play last night, I told him and Mrs hh that if I went to cricket today it wouldn't be to Hove but to the Oval to see Sangakarra and Pietersen. Then when I woke up this morning, I decided that sod's law meant they'd probably both be out by 11.30, so I stayed home and painted the bathroom. Grrrrrr!!!!! You were half right, borderman, and I hope that you've done a good job of the bathroom.  I think you'd have been quite impressed with the way Matt H stuck at it and I know that we both want to see him improve. As to the pitch, I had another look with a chum at tea-time - just before the rolling mist came down and hid the land - and his words to a 3rd party were "It has cracks, but they aren't opening; it hasn't got any obvious bald or rough patches; it's got some grass but no tufts". It is what we have wanted at Hove for some years, a wicket that will test the technique of batsmen and give encouragement to good bowlers who know how to use it. How else do we explain not only Hobden's poor figures,but Harris and Finn going well in excess of 4 and over whilst Roland-Jones and Magoffin bowl dry? Batsmen of all styles get in, but under the constant cloud cover of today they find it impossible to prosper on it unless they take risks or are over-confident. Just wait till we get our big 4th innings roller out tomorrow. We'll be calling back the stables to get a couple of Clydesdales teamed up to pull it up and down until you can blow a pea from end to end with a single breath. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2015 19:13:38 GMT
You were half right, borderman, and I hope that you've done a good job of the bathroom. I fear the score on my brush work was probably closer to Sangakara's 36 than Pietersen's 326 !!! |
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on May 11, 2015 20:09:35 GMT
Thanks HH, some good in-depth info - the track sounds perfect. So yeah, bowl them out for under 200, use home roller advantage like Durham did, the scallywags, and cruise home by 4/5 wickets - no problemo. Two concerns, does HRA only work on certain grounds cos until about 2 weeks ago I'd never heard of it? Could it make the track worse on certain grounds too?
The bowlers have kept us in this game, and effectively it seems to have been only two of them, so extra praise for young'un and not so young'un. The batsmen have a lot to learn about batting at home, and if they don't take a chance on that big arse roller tomorrow they have a lot to learn about HRA too. There's two or three in there in desperate need of runs.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on May 12, 2015 11:41:05 GMT
For those of us who were just beginning to question whether Steve Magoffin's years of hard work and massive experience were beginning to tell on that gaunt frame a good riposte in this match. Match figures of 7/110 may have been surpassed by Ollie Robinson's 8/108 but they still show a massive personal effort in the interests of the team. A thousand pities that Shahzad's injury - fortunately one that should be repairable in a week - and Hobden's lapse have damaged the strike qualities, but thank goodness we have people like Magoffin and Robinson to shoulder the burden thus created.
Yesterday I thought that 200 - 250 was as many as we would want to chase, and that is probably still realistic. But the pitch certainly plays easier with a little sun on it, and perhaps today and even tomorrow morning may be better for batsman than earlier in the match. Sussex will have to work hard and watch the ball to get anywhere near 286. I do think a substantial opening partnership would go a long way to setting a marker for later batsmen and I won't be unhappy with 80-0 at tea. I shall have my fingers crossed, and cursing that I'm at home today.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on May 12, 2015 13:41:58 GMT
Some similarities with Durham v Notts, in that they are also set to get the highest score of the game in order to win. Currently Durham are 146-2 chasing 161. Nightwatchman Mark Wood has his highest first-class score, 66 not out. If Sussex and Durham both win, Sussex will lead Division one again with 69 points to Durham's 68, and Yorkshire could go ahead of Middlesex (58) with 65 if they beat Hampshire. A shame we are hosting Durham on the draw bore ground, rather than a nice , juicy cricket wicket at Hove.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2015 13:59:34 GMT
We probably need someone to score a century to get close.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2015 14:57:43 GMT
Game over.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on May 12, 2015 15:13:11 GMT
Enter the man who wears his pants over his tights  . But he didn't look that happy with the pitch in the first innings and Yardy has shown that doggedness pays better returns than strokemaking on this wicket. If we do lose there are a number of batsmen looking vulnerable, which isn't a great thought at this stage of the season. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2015 16:25:23 GMT
I'm kind of relieved that the margin of defeat was greater than the 68 runs Sussex's bowlers gifted over the two innings in no-balls, wides and byes. Only 11 runs greater, it's true; but if we'd lost by 59 runs rather than 79, we would have only had ourselves to blame.As it is, I think we can concede that the best team won. Seems we failed to exploit that old 'home roller advantage' that allegedly cost us the match at Durham.
Not sure we're in the best of shape for the start of the T20 on Friday. The batsmen are hardly in ball-out-of--park form and the bowlers seem to be mostly injured. I'm going for a Kent win on Friday night, unless Ollie's got his cape on and his pants over his tights...
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on May 12, 2015 16:32:08 GMT
There is an excellent feature by Tom Fordyce on the BBC Website describing the KP and Strauss saga as 'England Go In Circles'. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/cricket/32705910One feels Sussex are experiencing a similar situation where deja vu is prominent. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on May 12, 2015 19:11:23 GMT
I'm kind of relieved that the margin of defeat was greater than the 68 runs Sussex's bowlers gifted over the two innings in no-balls, wides and byes. Only 11 runs greater, it's true; but if we'd lost by 59 runs rather than 79, we would have only had ourselves to blame.As it is, I think we can concede that the best team won. Seems we failed to exploit that old 'home roller advantage' that allegedly cost us the match at Durham. Not sure we're in the best of shape for the start of the T20 on Friday. The batsmen are hardly in ball-out-of--park form and the bowlers seem to be mostly injured. I'm going for a Kent win on Friday night, unless Ollie's got his cape on and his pants over his tights... There are lots of what if's about this game: What if Shahzad hadn't pulled that muscle and could have bowled more ,and therefore spared Hobden the humiliation and Sussex the expense of his no-balling in the first innings - would they have made much more than 200? And if he could have batted, wouldn't that have been worth 20 or 30 priceless runs in each innings? What if any of the assaults by Machan, Wright and Robinson in the second innings had come off? Another 50 or 60 runs from either of the first two could have led to a victory charge from the later middle order. For Middlesex, too, what if their batting had been a little more disciplined against a 2 1/2 man attack? Couldn't they have aspired to 300, even on a spirited track? What if Franklin had been in the form that saw him score a century and partner Voges to win against Somerset with 400 in the 4th innings, rather than his ignominious capitulations at Hove? And what if Harris had taken another 9-for? I don't think there was much between the teams - about 50 runs, whether from extras, shortage of bowlers, or extravagant pulls to balls that kept low. There is a chance to catch breath with T20 specialists to come in while Shahzad's shoulder heals, and a chance to see if Wells and Finch, who both got hundreds for the Seconds, can reproduce this form and push any of 4 in the top six who haven't shown much form so far. |
|
|
|
Post by howardh on May 12, 2015 19:40:09 GMT
Well, I did manage to get to Hove to see us move from 21-0 to 92-1 to 207 all out.
The skipper has said publicly (and in a most polite fashion) "It was a poor wicket." Frankly it was much worse than that and not a good advert at all for an even match between bat and ball. It was patently obvious to me from three different vantage points that Mike Yardy was the only batsman who had more than very little faith in it. I had a very good look at tea-time and kept my ear to the ground. It was very, very poor. The ball that removed Cachopa moved 15 inches to hit leg stump ... in the same over that one reached Simpson on the third bounce. He stopped it with both pads in an upright position. This was from Steve Finn bowling at approx. 85 mph!
Grounders does not often get it wrong, but this was a stinker.
Fair play to Middlesex they bowled well and caught all bar one chance.
We have defeated the two poorest teams and lost to two mid-table teams (and, yes, I know that is not their current positions!). There are tougher matches ahead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2015 20:15:49 GMT
The skipper has said publicly (and in a most polite fashion) "It was a poor wicket." Frankly it was much worse than that and not a good advert at all for an even match between bat and ball. It was patently obvious to me from three different vantage points that Mike Yardy was the only batsman who had more than very little faith in it. I had a very good look at tea-time and kept my ear to the ground. It was very, very poor. The ball that removed Cachopa moved 15 inches to hit leg stump ... in the same over that one reached Simpson on the third bounce. He stopped it with both pads in an upright position. This was from Steve Finn bowling at approx. 85 mph! Grounders does not often get it wrong, but this was a stinker. If what you say is true, howard, then the pitch preparation has gone wrong twice running because the second XI match last week was abandoned due not merely to a poor wicket but to a "dangerous" one. It was then glued, they started another match - and that had to be abandoned as well for the same reason. (Although the only place you will read about any of this is on the Lancs CCC website and on a blog by a shocked spectator who was in attendance and who also posted about the matter on this board). Wasn't there today but from what I saw on Sunday, I liked the wicket. These are all recently relaid tracks, don't forget, because the old strips were tired and turgid. It was sporting and it guaranteed a result - which I think is Sussex's policy and an admirable one. It gives the bowlers a chance. I hate wickets where the first innings is 450 and the reply is 400 and by then it's mid-afternoon on day three and there's no time to force a result. Think Arundel and ask yourself would you rather have the kind of game we had there last season v Yorks or the pitch we had at Hove v Middx this week. The only thing I would say is that Middx read the wicket better than Sussex. On day one grounders predicted the pitch would get easier for batting. Angus Fraser at the end of day one said it would get more difficult. It appears that the Middx assessment was more accurate than the Susssex reading as the Middx first innings on day one was the highest of the match (admittedly with the help of some very undisciplined bowling from Hobden, who lost the plot). In spite of Sussex having 'home roller advantage' (whatever that is), the result was more than just. The two highest innings of the match belonged to Middx and the two lowest to Sussex. And you cannot blame grounders for that... |
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on May 12, 2015 21:49:41 GMT
Sounds like Grounders is struggling to find the track Sussex want. Nobody wants to see a featherbed but nor do you wanna see indifferent bounce from day one, if that was the case. It needs to improve whatever way you look at it because these things are becoming as common as a ridiculously high no-ball count. Presumably, we used the heavy roller before our second innings? We must have. What works in Durham, again, doesn't necessarily work elsewhere, I guess.
Slightly alarming decline after two wins against the promoted sides. I think Wells, Finch and Mills should be the order of the day for the next Champ game. No point calling out Beer I spose but man, we're tough on him. He's a must for the T20, hopefully his confidence hasn't been completely destroyed.
|
|
. But he didn't look that happy with the pitch in the first innings and Yardy has shown that doggedness pays better returns than strokemaking on this wicket. If we do lose there are a number of batsmen looking vulnerable, which isn't a great thought at this stage of the season.
