|
|
Post by 2015t20everpresent on Aug 19, 2017 9:22:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by coverpoint on Aug 19, 2017 10:29:51 GMT
There were 3 games that let us down in this campaign. The tie to Kent, the loss to Middlesex at Lords and the game at Taunton that should never have seen a result. Game at Taunton is the real sickener especially as Somerset went through. By my calculation I estimate we would have gone through if Essex had scored 15 runs less. |
|
|
|
Post by philh on Aug 19, 2017 12:35:09 GMT
Good effort but we're toast. Should've set more often. If you look at the stats for setting and chasing over the last two years we're phenomenally better setters. Learn the lesson. Ultimately we're a pretty decent but under performing side in this form. We could be so much better with the right OS signings and by simply setting. Getting the balance consistently right would help too. Tonight it was Garton who just bowled one over. It's usually Wiese, it's been Beer, it's a total waste of what should be a batting position. My head says that we should have 5 bowlers and bat first. The facts regarding 5 or 6 bowlers don't bear this out though. With 6 bowlers, we won 4 lost 2, tied 1 and 1 NR. With 5 bowlers, we won 1, lost 3 and 2 NR. As for batting first, the facts favour batting first but we only batted first 3 times with 1 win and 2 NR. |
|
|
|
Post by joe on Aug 19, 2017 12:55:31 GMT
Nothing wrong with going with 6 bowlers as long as you've got the batting power up the order, unfortunately apart from Nash, we didn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonboy on Aug 19, 2017 12:56:13 GMT
Good effort but we're toast. Should've set more often. If you look at the stats for setting and chasing over the last two years we're phenomenally better setters. Learn the lesson. Ultimately we're a pretty decent but under performing side in this form. We could be so much better with the right OS signings and by simply setting. Getting the balance consistently right would help too. Tonight it was Garton who just bowled one over. It's usually Wiese, it's been Beer, it's a total waste of what should be a batting position. My head says that we should have 5 bowlers and bat first. The facts regarding 5 or 6 bowlers don't bear this out though. With 6 bowlers, we won 4 lost 2, tied 1 and 1 NR. With 5 bowlers, we won 1, lost 3 and 2 NR. As for batting first, the facts favour batting first but we only batted first 3 times with 1 win and 2 NR. I was sceptical at first, but I've come around to having the extra bowling option, certainly if Van Zyl is not to be used. The only proviso is, that we have to have five specialist T20 batters. We can't really go with Brown in this system, so we need to look for a specialist overseas keeper. With youngsters like Salt, Rawlins and Garton, who can all contribute in this format, we are not far off. |
|
nemmo
Captain 2nd XI
Posts: 285
|
Post by nemmo on Aug 19, 2017 18:49:25 GMT
You need 6 bowling options in a T20 really. It's easy to look at a game where you only need 5 and wonder why you need 6, then you get those games where one bowler gets spanked all over the place and you realise why you need that extra option. I agree that if we want to take it seriously next year an overseas keeper would be a good idea as would a lower order hitter that can bowl a few.
|
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Aug 20, 2017 8:46:44 GMT
Good effort but we're toast. Should've set more often. If you look at the stats for setting and chasing over the last two years we're phenomenally better setters. Learn the lesson. Ultimately we're a pretty decent but under performing side in this form. We could be so much better with the right OS signings and by simply setting. Getting the balance consistently right would help too. Tonight it was Garton who just bowled one over. It's usually Wiese, it's been Beer, it's a total waste of what should be a batting position. My head says that we should have 5 bowlers and bat first. The facts regarding 5 or 6 bowlers don't bear this out though. With 6 bowlers, we won 4 lost 2, tied 1 and 1 NR. With 5 bowlers, we won 1, lost 3 and 2 NR. As for batting first, the facts favour batting first but we only batted first 3 times with 1 win and 2 NR. See, unbeaten in three. Nah, if you look over results last year you'll see our setting record is much better than our chasing record. You can see from memory this year we've chased poorly, resulting in two or three nailed on wins turning out as losses. You can't be rigid in this but in the back of our mind we want to chase. Results suggest it should be the other way round. It's a trend to chase but as with all trends if you ain't got it you're just gonna look like a fool.
As for six bowlers, the stats this year don't really back up my point but ultimately, rather than can't, you won't get away with six bowlers for long if it's detrimental to your batting line-up, which ours currently is. Everybody can see that from our top six.
Of course six bowlers is better, ten bowlers would be better still, so get it the right way, it's completely doable, six that is. You have six batters and six bowlers if you sign the right overseas players. Follow the blueprint, it's obvious.
Bat Bat Bat Bat/keep - OS Bat/bowl - OS Bat Bowl/bat Bowl/bat Bowl/bat Bowl Bowl
Get on it Sussex.
|
|
nemmo
Captain 2nd XI
Posts: 285
|
Post by nemmo on Aug 20, 2017 15:27:23 GMT
I actually disagree that ten bowlers is even better! We had this situation a while back when we had loads of bowlers, Nash and Wright were still bowling. Yardy, Beer and Hamilton-Brown were all playing. Then you also had your regular 3 seamers. I think Yardy had so many bowling options that he got utterly confused about who to bowl when.
Historically I've always thought we were a much better side batting first.
From your lineup pattern you'd have
Wright
Nash
Van Zyl
(De Kock/ Dhoni / whoeverwecanactuallyafford)
(Anderson/ Neesham / Pollard)
Evans/Salt
Weise
Jordan
Archer
Beer/Briggs
Mills/Garton
Of note though Afghanistan are getting test status which means their international players will be up for grabs in the T20's as overseas players, of particular note for the counties will be wicket-keeper Shahzad (pending his suspension) and all-rounders Nabi and Naib
|
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Aug 21, 2017 8:06:49 GMT
joe,
I have an apology to make. During the toss on Friday evening Brown was interviewed and stated that Taylor had gone home early due to
his pregnant wife about to give birth.
This leads to various questions. Presumably, when the Ross Taylor contract was signed, he must have told the Club and they were happy
to go ahead even though Taylor might miss the most important final games of the T20.
Also, on a different timeline, if Sussex had reached the QFs would Taylor have been allowed to return and rejoin the team 'if' his wife had
already given birth. What are the rules regarding this?
PS: As of today, there is no mention of a new child on his Twitter.
|
|
|
|
Post by joe on Aug 21, 2017 10:01:38 GMT
I think the whole Ross Taylor story is one the club will want to quickly forget. His form and captaincy were equally awful. I wish him well but I don't want to see him in a Sussex shirt again.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Aug 21, 2017 10:06:23 GMT
I think the whole Ross Taylor story is one the club will want to quickly forget. His form and captaincy were equally awful. I wish him well but I don't want to see him in a Sussex shirt again. Come on, joe - get off the fence.  |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Aug 21, 2017 16:46:49 GMT
Yeah the line-up pattern's right Nemmo but the personnel is yours - there are no Kolpaks in my team, they're not needed.
We won the thing around the time you're talking about when we had all those bowling options mate, Yardy managed them in 2009 if not at other times. More the better I reckon but not at the batting's expense.
|
|
