|
|
Post by philh on Jun 5, 2017 13:46:14 GMT
Here's a few notes from memory. Packed forum on Saturday. Bob Warren, Rob Andrew, Mark Davis & Keith Greenfield formed the panel. Rob in his introductory remarks referred to attacks on social media, but wasn't specific. Topics raised from the floor included: Philander will not be replaced as overseas when his contract ends - the only overseas signing is Ross Taylor for T20 (sorry jonboy). Captaincy - no decisions taken yet. Wells knee injury continues to prevent him bowling. A member called for use of 3rd Man - Davis agreed; (I noticed the position was employed later) How do ECB work out who play twice and who once - Sussex play twice v Kent & Notts and once v Derby, Northants & Glam. RA/BW are to meet with Michael Fordham (i.c. fixtures) soon. Rob sadi he is against promotion/relegation in cricket - leads to bottom Div 1 & top Div 2 clubs spending extra. Could Ollie Robinson play as batter only? Mark said he needed to be able to bowl as his batting is not enough on its own - winter shin op seems to have not been as effective as hoped. Michael Burgess remains a trialist. A questioner asked if Robson who is on trial also can play - only if he's offered a 2 year contract. Meeting went on past start of play although about 75% left when given the option at 1055. Why can Robson only play if given a 2 year deal? Also for Burgess surely he has rightly earned a 2 year contract, budget or not. There's no one immediately pushing from the academy, he's proven himself and he's about as cheap as we'll get and we must be the only county without a back up keeper. Seems that far too many of our decisions are business decisions rather than cricket decisions. One t20 overseas being an example. Surely we must find a balance. Cricket success helps business success after all. The Robson issue is down to ECB (I assume) rules. As he was registered with a county for this season, he must be offered a minimum 2 year contract to play elsewhere in the same season. At least, that's my understanding. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 5, 2017 14:00:01 GMT
Why can Robson only play if given a 2 year deal? Also for Burgess surely he has rightly earned a 2 year contract, budget or not. There's no one immediately pushing from the academy, he's proven himself and he's about as cheap as we'll get and we must be the only county without a back up keeper. Seems that far too many of our decisions are business decisions rather than cricket decisions. One t20 overseas being an example. Surely we must find a balance. Cricket success helps business success after all. The Robson issue is down to ECB (I assume) rules. As he was registered with a county for this season, he must be offered a minimum 2 year contract to play elsewhere in the same season. At least, that's my understanding. I would have thought that was open to challenge. The derogatory comments of the Leicestershire coach, which caused him to leave, could be regarded as constructive dismissal. I doubt if Leicester would have the appetite to challenge in court and the role of the ECB in hindering freedom of movement would look pretty questionable too. It is a question of whether Sussex are willing to put up a strong case. |
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Jun 5, 2017 14:03:33 GMT
Happy days
|
|
|
|
Post by philh on Jun 5, 2017 14:22:10 GMT
Indeed. There is nothing to complain about in that victory. You can say the balance of the side looked wrong (as indeed I did) but when you win by an innings, it's hard to argue, particularly against a decent team. You could argue that Briggs would have meant more variety which might have led to a quicker win and the breaking of the big opening stand by Mitchell and D'Oliveira, but, again, the proof of the pudding and all that..... It was heartening to see Finch get some much needed runs as well as Luke Wright. It would be good if Nash could hit a ton up at Leicester this week. As jonboy says, happy days indeed. Another win at Leicester and we will start to be thinking of greater things. |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 5, 2017 14:31:09 GMT
Indeed. There is nothing to complain about in that victory. You can say the balance of the side looked wrong (as indeed I did) but when you win by an innings, it's hard to argue, particularly against a decent team. You could argue that Briggs would have meant more variety which might have led to a quicker win and the breaking of the big opening stand by Mitchell and D'Oliveira, but, again, the proof of the pudding and all that..... It was heartening to see Finch get some much needed runs as well as Luke Wright. It would be good if Nash could hit a ton up at Leicester this week.As jonboy says, happy days indeed. Another win at Leicester and we will start to be thinking of greater things. Agreed, an innings victory is a great thing, as it was against Durham, before the Tunbridge Wells debacle. The runs coming throughout the team were the best thing for me here, not just the big ton from Wells but the solid scores from so many others. That would have made the difference in the first two games. |
|
|
|
Post by deepfineleg on Jun 5, 2017 16:44:09 GMT
Good result (as Mark Davis predicted). Hopefully Kent was a blip. Just seen an email from Rob Andrew summarising the forum - a good start towards transparency and including members not able to be there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jun 5, 2017 17:28:39 GMT
I echo the sentiment of other posters. Unbalanced agreed, but still a very satisfying win and an excellent timing finale, given the
heavens opened 90 minutes after the winning wicket.
Question: Which team will turn up to Grace Road? The underachievers or the side we have just watched?
|
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Jun 5, 2017 17:45:17 GMT
I echo the sentiment of other posters. Unbalanced agreed, but still a very satisfying win and an excellent timing finale, given the heavens opened 90 minutes after the winning wicket. Question: Which team will turn up to Grace Road? The underachievers or the side we have just watched? Away from home played two, lost two. Briggs has to replace Magoffin. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jun 5, 2017 17:54:40 GMT
cv,
I can't see Magoffin playing much more cricket this season due to his latest injury, so an almost cert.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jun 5, 2017 20:39:06 GMT
Good result (as Mark Davis predicted). Hopefully Kent was a blip. Just seen an email from Rob Andrew summarising the forum - a good start towards transparency and including members not able to be there. Interesting. Can you post it here as not seen by me |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Jun 5, 2017 21:04:26 GMT
Here's a few notes from memory. Packed forum on Saturday. Bob Warren, Rob Andrew, Mark Davis & Keith Greenfield formed the panel. Rob in his introductory remarks referred to attacks on social media, but wasn't specific. Topics raised from the floor included: Philander will not be replaced as overseas when his contract ends - the only overseas signing is Ross Taylor for T20 (sorry jonboy). Captaincy - no decisions taken yet. Wells knee injury continues to prevent him bowling. A member called for use of 3rd Man - Davis agreed; (I noticed the position was employed later) How do ECB work out who play twice and who once - Sussex play twice v Kent & Notts and once v Derby, Northants & Glam. RA/BW are to meet with Michael Fordham (i.c. fixtures) soon. Rob sadi he is against promotion/relegation in cricket - leads to bottom Div 1 & top Div 2 clubs spending extra. Could Ollie Robinson play as batter only? Mark said he needed to be able to bowl as his batting is not enough on its own - winter shin op seems to have not been as effective as hoped. Michael Burgess remains a trialist. A questioner asked if Robson who is on trial also can play - only if he's offered a 2 year contract. Meeting went on past start of play although about 75% left when given the option at 1055. Why can Robson only play if given a 2 year deal? Also for Burgess surely he has rightly earned a 2 year contract, budget or not. There's no one immediately pushing from the academy, he's proven himself and he's about as cheap as we'll get and we must be the only county without a back up keeper. Seems that far too many of our decisions are business decisions rather than cricket decisions. One t20 overseas being an example. Surely we must find a balance. Cricket success helps business success after all. We won't have one T20 overseas though if our current squad is anything to go by. We only had five Englishmen in our team today, albeit two others English qualified - which I think means GCSE C or above. Three Saffas and an Aussie made up the eleven. That must be the 'pathway' Greenfield speaks of. Not a path to be proud of, for me. Presumably Davis blew his budget on Kolpaks and we were never gonna get another legitimate overseas players after Philander or to accompany Taylor in T20. Shame.
Putting that headache aside, this is another quality and much needed win which, without question, most people consider to be the important thing. I don't mind us being hit and miss right now, it's better than regular bore-draws. Wins and losses combined outweigh draws in the points tally.
|
|
|
|
Post by philh on Jun 6, 2017 9:18:57 GMT
Interesting fact. Our 3 CC defeats have brought 6, 7 and 8 pages of posts. Our two victories have both brought 4 pages.
Do we just like to moan?
|
|
|
|
Post by northfan on Jun 6, 2017 10:45:59 GMT
Interesting fact. Our 3 CC defeats have brought 6, 7 and 8 pages of posts. Our two victories have both brought 4 pages. Do we just like to moan? From a mainly distant observer's perspective, the answer is unequivocally yes! |
|
|
|
Post by deepfineleg on Jun 6, 2017 19:34:02 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jun 6, 2017 19:48:22 GMT
dfl,
Thanks. Very interesting. Good to see Andrew already making his mark.
|
|
