|
|
Post by hhsussex on Aug 15, 2016 6:49:21 GMT
try to set a target over 300 as soon as possible. Tha requires Susex to score 667 plus ! More realistically if there is to be a result, a lead of 100, bowl them out for 250 and a chase for Sussex of 150 on the final afternoon against the clock? First things first - 27 overs this morning to score 74 runs and secure maximum batting points!Agreed, the lack of bonus points would have told against Sussex as promotion candidates even if there had been more wins this year. This game can be won from here, probably as borderman suggests, but allowing Glos to recover from 34-4 to make 367 was simply not good enough. All season we have lacked a meaningful attack and having assembled one, with Magoffin in his old form,and Archer looking silky smooth, in the aftermath of the Klinger/Davis controversy we got flustered and distracted and lost focus. Side bet of the day: which extras total will be higher? Glos currently have donated 41 to the 50 from Sussex. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 6:59:30 GMT
in the aftermath of the Klinger/Davis controversy we got flustered and distracted and lost focus. Interesting that you should say this. You were there and I wasn't but it is exactly what I feared had happened when I heard Mark Davis and Adrian H banging on and on about it in that dispiriting interview at the close of day one. It's why I raised it: having the head coach adding to the sense of grievance that the players were already seemingly feeling was poor. Just ask Alex Hales whether feeling hard done-by and moaning about in the first innings of the Oval Test did him any good. Sensibly, though, instead of stoking the fires of disaffection as Mark Davis did, Farbrace and the England management gave Hales a public rebuke. If you look at the position of the eight CC matches which enter day three this morning, it looks like there will be plenty of results - and you would have to say of the eight games , Hove looks the venue most likely to produce a draw... |
|
|
|
Post by philh on Aug 15, 2016 6:59:43 GMT
I was wondering if we had been out-extraed in any game this season. It would seem that extras will be raising his bat for the second time in this game today.
|
|
|
|
Post by grandavefan on Aug 15, 2016 8:46:53 GMT
I've noticed a few things, I have said this before as well. The less Wells bowls the more runs he gets. I like this. He may be boring but gives stability which we lack. The answer is stop him bowling, Briggs and Beer, give it time, it will work.
The wicket, seems from a distance the usual non wicket that the groundsman produces.
Lots of talk about getting rid of players and coaches. No one mentions the fact that if the surface you play on doesn't support what your strength as players is, then the logic is to get rid of the groundsman? Easier than paying off a team and getting a new one when you have no money?
Sussex need better wickets, these produced this year have been advantage to the opposition.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 8:53:24 GMT
Sussex need better wickets, these produced this year have been advantage to the opposition. That Sussex are unbeaten suggests the wickets have not advantaged anyone. But they have disadvantaged winning cricket. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Aug 15, 2016 9:10:27 GMT
I share the thread sentiment. We are in for two exciting days of cricket where there should be a winner. The weather is set fair, so no hindrance
there, and so long as Sussex can carry on, accomplishing their full max batting points and then scoring 120 ahead on first innings, we have
every chance of knocking Glos over.
We require Wiese to carry on and reach his 50 plus one other like Jordan to get a further quick half century. As for Wells he can plod along to his
heart's content.
My one concern are the Sussex bowlers in the second innings. We need at least one to come to the fore. Otherwise, the Klingers' could embed in and
we are then looking at yet another draw.
It's all about winning from now on if Sussex have any chance of getting in to contention for that one spot. Wright and Davis have nothing to lose.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 11:17:38 GMT
Our opponents are seriously hampered with the absence of a key bowler. Their remaining bowlers are being over-bowled as a result. Also we need to take nine wickets again next time round.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 11:54:18 GMT
This Gloucester side is not going to enjoy their lunch.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 11:56:38 GMT
I hope van Buuren is ok. Couldn't see the funny side of that at all, I'm afraid.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Aug 15, 2016 15:29:40 GMT
Sussex could win this match by close of play. Presently, 30-3; at least one if not two Glos batsmen won't be playing. Great to see Sussex bossing a game. We just need to get Klinger!
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Aug 15, 2016 19:53:45 GMT
Poor old Sussex.
Every chance to win their first home Championship match of the season within 3 days in front of a suntanned crowd; so needing to enjoy the innings victory after an underwhelming season; and with the last two Glos bats, the Taylor Bros, at the crease with 5 overs remaining plus then a further half an hour (additional 8 overs), the club still couldn't complete the task.
Never mind.
For the lucky few supporters who live close to the ground, an 11am start will either offer the final wicket in the first few overs or the Taylor Bros will continue batting, surpassing the 160 Sussex first innings lead...
Question: Why didn't Magoffin bowl during those added last 8 overs? The best bowler on the pitch. Why did Luke Wells instead whom Matt Taylor hit to all corners of the ground.
|
|
|
|
Post by fraudster on Aug 15, 2016 19:58:27 GMT
I say play Garton for Mags. Good job nobody listens to you. He's currently got three wickets for four runs and has reduced Glos to 19-3!  Yes a well timed comment wasn't it. Father Time waits for no man though. Not you, not me, not Imran's Wife - who may be a woman, and not Steve Magoffin. The old dog's rolled back the years in this match but he's about spent and will be completely by next season. There's no room in the modern game for old people, especially if you have quality young people ready to play.
Anyway, our first win of the season is finally gonna turn up and it had to after the horrendous luck Glos have endured. We should be beating Glos at full strength so we should be wiping the floor with them in this situation.
The very encouraging thing is that everyone has contributed in one way or another, which is very rare for Sussex. The team looks in better shape thanks to Wiese, who has contributed in all three innings. That sort of player adds more than meets the eye. Some on here rubbished the signing somewhat but if we'd had him from the start we'd be higher than we are now. He was at IPL mind but that sort of player.
A special well done to Brown and Wells who continue to attract criticism on here, but continue to do well. And a special well done to Mags too, where would we be without him? About the same place probably.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 21:10:38 GMT
Question: Why didn't Magoffin bowl during those added last 8 overs? Why did Luke Wells... 1. Because Jordan had proved to be the best bowler in the innings and so took precedence over Mags and deserved to 'lead' the attack in the final eight 2. Jordan was replaced by Archer not Magoffin because the former was making things happen in an extraordinarily eventful way : in his earlier spell almost every ball seemed to be destined either to be hit to the boundary, go for four byes over Brown's head or threaten to take a wicket. 3. Briggs bowled at the other end because he had taken two crucial wkts and we wanted a spinner at one end to get the over rate up. In the fourth over of the added eight Briggs then served up such a load of ****e (including two consecutive, horrible dragged-down half-trackers) that Wright had no option but to replace him with Wells for the last two from the sea end. Yes arguably Mags should have bowled. But them's the reasons he didn't and I wouldn't criticise Wright's captaincy at all (even if he might have had an extra close catcher or two towards the end...) Funny old game. Weakest Sussex batting line-up I can remember in years, and they score 500 plus and set up what could/should be an innings win! |
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Aug 16, 2016 7:00:02 GMT
Question: Why didn't Magoffin bowl during those added last 8 overs? Why did Luke Wells... 1. Because Jordan had proved to be the best bowler in the innings and so took precedence over Mags and deserved to 'lead' the attack in the final eight 2. Jordan was replaced by Archer not Magoffin because the former was making things happen in an extraordinarily eventful way : in his earlier spell almost every ball seemed to be destined either to be hit to the boundary, go for four byes over Brown's head or threaten to take a wicket. 3. Briggs bowled at the other end because he had taken two crucial wkts and we wanted a spinner at one end to get the over rate up. In the fourth over of the added eight Briggs then served up such a load of ****e (including two consecutive, horrible dragged-down half-trackers) that Wright had no option but to replace him with Wells for the last two from the sea end. Yes arguably Mags should have bowled. But them's the reasons he didn't and I wouldn't criticise Wright's captaincy at all (even if he might have had an extra close catcher or two towards the end...) Funny old game. Weakest Sussex batting line-up I can remember in years, and they score 500 plus and set up what could/should be an innings win! I wouldn't say it was the weakest batting line up, but more importantly it had everyone batting roughly where they should be. Maybe we are one quality batsman short, but by having Wiese at six, the side looks a lot more balanced. I know I've been banging on about it for yonks now, but I really believe that the lack of balance has been a major contributory factor in our ills this, and last season. Whether it's Wiese, or someone similar, our improved form since we balanced the side, points the way ahead for next season. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Aug 16, 2016 7:43:08 GMT
1. Because Jordan had proved to be the best bowler in the innings and so took precedence over Mags and deserved to 'lead' the attack in the final eight 2. Jordan was replaced by Archer not Magoffin because the former was making things happen in an extraordinarily eventful way : in his earlier spell almost every ball seemed to be destined either to be hit to the boundary, go for four byes over Brown's head or threaten to take a wicket. 3. Briggs bowled at the other end because he had taken two crucial wkts and we wanted a spinner at one end to get the over rate up. In the fourth over of the added eight Briggs then served up such a load of ****e (including two consecutive, horrible dragged-down half-trackers) that Wright had no option but to replace him with Wells for the last two from the sea end. Yes arguably Mags should have bowled. But them's the reasons he didn't and I wouldn't criticise Wright's captaincy at all (even if he might have had an extra close catcher or two towards the end...) Funny old game. Weakest Sussex batting line-up I can remember in years, and they score 500 plus and set up what could/should be an innings win! I wouldn't say it was the weakest batting line up, but more importantly it had everyone batting roughly where they should be. Maybe we are one quality batsman short, but by having Wiese at six, the side looks a lot more balanced. I know I've been banging on about it for yonks now, but I really believe that the lack of balance has been a major contributory factor in our ills this, and last season. Whether it's Wiese, or someone similar, our improved form since we balanced the side, points the way ahead for next season. I agree that Wiese gives more balance, but it is still a very weak line-up. Davis had a thoroughly miserable game, inept batting combined with some poor fielding, and in the absence of Machan or Finch there is a big hole in the middle order. Brown played extremely well and could probably go 6 with Wiese at 7. With Robinson perhaps back at No 8 for the next few games when Jordan inevitably goes off to the England one day squad there is a resilience to the later batting that we haven't had this season. All we need is a spinner who can turn the ball and bowl to the demands of the game. |
|
