I made my 3 suggested changes based on clear issues that are not going to disappear. Not just impulse.
I’d change the captaincy as I don’t believe Rhodes is a great strategic captain in terms of fielding and bowling decisions. I also believe it is negatively effecting his performances this season. He can contribute more as a player and his batting has been down the last 2 seasons.

As for the director of cricket, I don’t want someone at the club who doesn’t want to be there. Fairly consistent rumour is that Farbrace wants out, he wants to coach again. It’s well known he lost out to Silverwood for the Sri Lanka job, and is looking for a head coaching role. How can someone be in charge of the long term running of the club if they’re not planning on being there. Also both his domestic and overseas recruitment have been decidedly patchy, and the pathway hasn’t exactly been churning out players. Plus squad planning has been poor, we can argue injuries but we also all know Woakes, Norwell, Miles and Stone have well known injury issues and last years run of fitness was more luck than skill. So having a bowling unit so reliant on those players is very naive.

Robinson seems to have created a big divide in the dressing room, and I’m not entirely sure how big a role he played last year. It was Troughtons squad. We’re losing players this season like Hose and Sibley. Also his character pushed Welch out the door as Welch couldn’t work for him and we’ve seen the effect that’s had on the team. He also has apparently alienated a number of players this season, who are unhappy with their treatment. Rumours are abound about Lamb being gone this season, and Rhodes, Burgess, OHD and even Hain going into their final years next year.

So it’s not impulsive, I think the club is in a very unstable place, lacking a clear plan, with the 3 figure heads in very different places with very different priorities, and it’s at the long term detriment of the club.

BristolBear wrote:

I made my 3 suggested changes based on clear issues that are not going to disappear. Not just impulse.
I’d change the captaincy as I don’t believe Rhodes is a great strategic captain in terms of fielding and bowling decisions. I also believe it is negatively effecting his performances this season. He can contribute more as a player and his batting has been down the last 2 seasons.

As for the director of cricket, I don’t want someone at the club who doesn’t want to be there. Fairly consistent rumour is that Farbrace wants out, he wants to coach again. It’s well known he lost out to Silverwood for the Sri Lanka job, and is looking for a head coaching role. How can someone be in charge of the long term running of the club if they’re not planning on being there. Also both his domestic and overseas recruitment have been decidedly patchy, and the pathway hasn’t exactly been churning out players. Plus squad planning has been poor, we can argue injuries but we also all know Woakes, Norwell, Miles and Stone have well known injury issues and last years run of fitness was more luck than skill. So having a bowling unit so reliant on those players is very naive.

Robinson seems to have created a big divide in the dressing room, and I’m not entirely sure how big a role he played last year. It was Troughtons squad. We’re losing players this season like Hose and Sibley. Also his character pushed Welch out the door as Welch couldn’t work for him and we’ve seen the effect that’s had on the team. He also has apparently alienated a number of players this season, who are unhappy with their treatment. Rumours are abound about Lamb being gone this season, and Rhodes, Burgess, OHD and even Hain going into their final years next year.

So it’s not impulsive, I think the club is in a very unstable place, lacking a clear plan, with the 3 figure heads in very different places with very different priorities, and it’s at the long term detriment of the club.

I agree with you completely BB. A few here said your earlier comments were over the top. I think the 3 changes you suggest are essential - and needed at the end of this season.

If it is true that certain players feel pushed out then it must be a bad atmosphere in the dressing room. I am not sure just what sort of team we have to pick any of the sides for any game, but who has the final say in selection and is the one person who does, pick the best team despite what the others say. Some of our sides this season have looked poor and you often wonder what a certain player has done to stay in despite consistently bad performances. The players not picked must scratch their heads in disbelief if they feel their chance should have come. Some of the earlier comments were tongue-in-cheek but there is a general frustration that certain players are going and some have just not progressed very well.

From what I’ve heard it’s a combination of some players feeling selections don’t reflect performance and clear favourites of the DoC and coach; some players have been asked to play with knocks and niggles, whilst others are rested and protected; this has also resulted in some players feeling that the CC has been devalued as players were rested or held back in the CC but played in T20 matches; and finally the feeling that newly signed players especially those with a white ball focus have been much better treated than those who have been at the club for a while.

What you don’t want is a situation where they chase the T20 so much you end up with a bunch of white ball mercenaries, who won’t help younger players progress, and won’t be round long enough to care about the club.

That can be a real danger and focussing too much on T20 does leave some counties without any focus for the whole season. When Gloucestershire won a lot of one-day cups, they didn't get out of the 2nd division because they just didn't seem bothered and same for Worcestershire after their only T20 success. I remember back in 2012 when Sussex and Somerset were both in with a chance of the CC and played each other the day before T20 final day which they were both involved in. It was a close game and when it rained with Somerset needing 5 wickets and Sussex needing 49, a lot of the commentators/journo's pointed out that both sides just seemed to want to get on a coach and head to Edgbaston instead of trying to win the game and it ended in a draw. I hope that is not a trend whereby CC cricket is not looked upon as being important because T20 bypasses everything.

Mikkyk wrote:

If you could 'only' make three changes for next season Measham, what would they be? (I've got a few more than three in mind!)

Only just logged back in so apologies for not responding sooner.

1. The opening pair/alternatives to it rather than sticking with Davies & Sibley no matter what (personally I think we should have put Sibley on gardening leave for at least the one day games once he announced he was leaving). It has meant that out middle order has been under pressure all season and in all competitions.
2. A reliable fast medium partner for OHD. The club cant be blamed for Briggs form but we took a punt on Miles & Norwood who both maxed out last season and Rhodes is not a front line bowler. We have responded by bringing in an Indian international but is it too late?
3. A thought out plan of personnel to play across 3 formats and including the loss of players to the hundred. Some players have not been given enough of a chance and some (Davies in particular) have been given too many chances, costing us heavily.

Garratt, Johal & E Brookes should be getting game time by now they are 20, 21 & 22 yrs old now but undercooked. Other counties would have given them lots more game time allowing the coaches to make decisions on whether they are good enough or not.

Regarding point two, hopefully Ed Barnard will help next year. If only Norwell could stay fit for a whole season, I think he has plenty to offer. George Garrett is a puzzle to me. Yesterday, I thought he bowled a consistently good line and length whereas earlier in the season, he was all over the place. Maybe playing a few games in a row has helped him.

What do people think of the Barnard signing? I’ll admit to not having gone out of my way to watch much of him. But what I have seen, he looks reliable if not world beating.
I got the feeling he’s going to offer the consistency Bresnan sometimes lacked in his time with us. He’s probably not going to win many games single handedly, but will always contribute something. He seems to have had no fitness issues so far, which for our bowling attack is a big plus.

I think the point about the youngsters is very poignant. We have a lot of players who we’ve seen glimpses of potential, or been told how talented they are for a while but don’t seem to get the opportunity they would elsewhere. Now obviously they can’t all play at once, but to me it seems that Ethan Brookes, Johal, Garrett, Mousley, and Bethell are all in the exact same place they were 2 years ago when we first started seeing some of them. The only one to have really progressed is Yates, and that’s been stunted this year.
It’s too early to properly judge Smith, Shaikh and Maddy, but you don’t want the same stagnation of their progress.

Re: George Garrett. I know a close family member of his who tells me that he and the other youngsters are frustrated by how little cricket they are getting to play. May explain their consistent inconsistency which somewhat strikes against the ECB's attempts to reduce the amount being played. George is off to Australia to play grade cricket this winter - hopefully this will toughen him up a bit.

Before I saw him play I thought GG was never going to break through. Having now seen him twice I think he might do - but there's stuff to work on. It seems his action is a bit slingy and early against Middix it all came out a bit wrong. But he got better the more he bowled. Against Soms he was good line and length all the way through. If this spell in Aus can make that accuracy better while improving his pace, then I think he might come out alright.

I'm not sure about the rumour of him being frustrated comes from. He's had a whole set of games in this comp. If he wants a whole series of CC games he has to prove he's worth his place ahead of, say, Norwell or Miles. Which is what it will need. That's life really.

SC_Bear wrote:

Re: George Garrett. I know a close family member of his who tells me that he and the other youngsters are frustrated by how little cricket they are getting to play. May explain their consistent inconsistency which somewhat strikes against the ECB's attempts to reduce the amount being played. George is off to Australia to play grade cricket this winter - hopefully this will toughen him up a bit.

Well, from what SC_Bear said, a close family member saying something might be where the so-called 'Rumour' comes from but playing a competition like the Royal London will not always give players a good test of how good they are.

Having just watched the last hour of the Hants v Kent semi-final, the craziest decision of the year is for Kent not to be offering Darren Stevens a new contract - 84 off 65 balls to see Kent home by three wickets with an over left.
Maybe they will do what they did last time and change their minds - and possibly they do it just to get him psyched up to perform these miracles.

STEVENS FOR WARWICKSHIRE, we can make it happen, just believe.

Interesting that Kent have made the decision that they will select for the RLODC Final from the same squad of players that got them to the final - in other words, not selecting any players who were in the Hundred or otherwise not available. That means that Daniel Bell-Drummond, Zak Crawley, Fred Klaassen, Matt Milnes, Jack Leaning, Sam Billings and Jordan Cox will all miss out.
Will Lancashire do the same?

Good point, I often feel that any management might say "You got us this far so why shouldn't you be the ones to try and win it". I cannot help but feel that apart from the monetary rewards, anyone playing in 'The HunDread' do not care that much for it as a team game compared to playing for your county with players you know well and it makes me wonder if they long to play in a final but can't do much about it if not picked.