GerryShedd wrote:

Still top of the table now that the other matches are finished:
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/county-championship-division-one-2023-1347099/points-table-standings
Rob Yates may have been a bit in and out with his batting so far but he seems able to catch anything at first slip.

ESPN tables are always a bit unreliable.
We're joint top with Surrey both on 60 points. Ten ahead of third placed Essex.

One ghost we're slowly laying to rest is this assumption we're quite a cautious, even negative dour side David Hopps for instance has banged on about it for three seasons and the Somerset commentators were for whatever reason incredulous that we didn't try to smack it about on day three and pull out early on that last day and set up some kind of contest and bring Somerset into the game.

Today we're the only side that has pushed the boat out and won. All 7 other fixtures this weekend have been draws

Great result, made my day. Don't know who was responsible but (4 games in) looks like we made some really shrewd decisions over the winter. As for negative views of Warwickshire, seems to come with the territory - every time we've won the title in my life time it's been met with a mixture of backhanded compliments and downright whinging. Makes it all the sweeter when we come through.

Rushworth with 10 wickets in this match was outstanding, what a great piece of business to sign him. A shame that Ed Barnard fell only 5 runs short of a century. Burgess did very well with the bat as well. To think, we still have Liam Norwell to come back! Very encouraging indeed.

Reabank wrote:

Great result, made my day. Don't know who was responsible but (4 games in) looks like we made some really shrewd decisions over the winter. As for negative views of Warwickshire, seems to come with the territory - every time we've won the title in my life time it's been met with a mixture of backhanded compliments and downright whinging. Makes it all the sweeter when we come through.
I agree, there are always negative comments when we win anything, in 2004 we got a lot of comments because we won only 5 games. We did draw 11 but lost none and by July, it was obvious that a side who would go on to have a lowest score of 265 in the CC were not going to lose any games and during July we were so many points ahead of 2nd, that all we had to do was keep accumulating points. No other side had the nerve to declare too many behind and try to encourage us to set up a finish so what were we to do. In 1995, Mike Brearley said our pitches were green-tops prepared for our bowlers. If your first 3 bowlers are Donald, Small and Munton, you are going to win a few games and it doesn't explain how we played 2 spinners every game, any 2 from Smith, Davis and Giles. And in 2021 we got all the "They only won because it was a different format and Essex and Notts had better records" - Tough, all the counties knew the score from ball 1 and if they didn't play well enough to get in to the top tier and carry forward any points, then that is their hard luck. We have won more trophies during the modern era and if you take any block of a 5 year period going back to the mid-90's we are in the top 3 of trophy winners in EVERY period, I suppose the other counties think this is all a fluke as well. Happy Bank Holiday everyone.

When looking at the championship batting averages the most consistent players are Sam Hain and Ed Barnard, indeed they are the only two who have what could be considered an acceptable average. Looking at the average minus tghe highest score, a more accurate way to show a batsmans value over the season, Sam is averaging over 41, with Ed on 28.67. Yates has a, minus best score, average of just 10.5 and for Davies it's 22.75, niether of which is acceptable for a specialist batsman.

for consistant success a much greater contribution is needed from both openers.

I don't disagree about the need for more consistency but for context it would be useful to know how the 'minus highest score' calculation works for other players in Div 1. It won't just be our batters whose average drops in this way.

What has to be considered too is that we’ve only batted 5 times in 4 matches. So naturally taking out a batsman’s highest score at this stage of the season will do that.
What’s important is that as a lineup they are currently able to put scores together. That might change, then questions might need to be asked. But currently, it’s early season, the ball has moved and seamed, batting has been hard and the bears have by far the most batting points of any side in Div 1. So there’s room for improvement, but needs to be in perspective too.

Good points from both @BristolBears & @Coolerking.

If I have time I'll look at other counties players. The main point however is the neither of our openers are really doing any better than last season, and are the main area of the team that needs improvement. The side has a great middle order, an excellent keeper and one of the best bowling attacks, it would be a shame to miss out on success due to the consistent failures of the openers.

An average of 30 is, in most places, considered to be the minimum acceptable for a specialist batsman, to be perfroming c30% below hat ism't acceptable. so to be over 60% below is totally unacceptable and should be raising questions about the players place in the side.

Fantastic win at Hampshire with virtually everyone making significant contributions.
It’s somewhat disappointing that some posters continually talk down the efforts and achievements of certain players, notably Rob Yates and Alex Davies.
The foundation for our win at Hampshire was their first innings partnership in the final session of day 1 in difficult conditions against one of the best new ball opening bowlers in the country. Both were unlucky to bat in very tricky conditions on the morning of day 2 when they fell with little addition to their overnight scores. Sam and in particular Ed will be at the head of the queue to thank them both for seeing off the new ball, giving them the opportunity to score heavily later in the game in much better conditions.
Both Rob and Alex had poor seasons last year, but will be more likely to succeed with support rather than unwarranted criticism.

One other point about Yates and Davies specifically is that they're opening batters which is a pretty thankless role at this stage of the season. I think they should be compared to other openers.

MalmesburyBear wrote:

Fantastic win at Hampshire with virtually everyone making significant contributions.
It’s somewhat disappointing that some posters continually talk down the efforts and achievements of certain players, notably Rob Yates and Alex Davies.
The foundation for our win at Hampshire was their first innings partnership in the final session of day 1 in difficult conditions against one of the best new ball opening bowlers in the country. Both were unlucky to bat in very tricky conditions on the morning of day 2 when they fell with little addition to their overnight scores. Sam and in particular Ed will be at the head of the queue to thank them both for seeing off the new ball, giving them the opportunity to score heavily later in the game in much better conditions.
Both Rob and Alex had poor seasons last year, but will be more likely to succeed with support rather than unwarranted criticism.

Agreed. The criticism is a bit bizarre and not really necessary after such a thumping win (especially given both players contributed, as you say)

It is very disappointing that some posters are willing to accept, and indeed even approve, of the consistent mediocrity, or worse, of some players.
In any workplace if people are consistently failing to perform at the required standard it puts extra pressure on the remaining team members, as well as having a very demotivating effect.
Good management ensures that the under performing members improve, to an acceptable standard, or are they are replaced with someone who can perform at the required level.

You seem to be glossing over the fact that the opening partnership between Yates and Davies was the third highest in this match and laid the foundation for our win.

Am amused to see Warwicks thump Hampshire in pressing circumstances with some great bowling performances and people are moaning about the batting (after scoring 400). Two things from me:

i) It's no good complaining that x or y's output is "unacceptable". The club has struggled to produce batsmen, they might just have turned the corner, but they either pay money we don't have to get a batsman in, or we throw in a teenager from seconds or academy and pray we get something out of it. The reality of it is that whatever some players produce there is no real alternative. By the situation's very nature it is totally acceptable. That is where we are, discussing changes is for the birds.

ii) This measure of just skipping the highest score to calculate an average isnt a regular statistical technique . You can strip out the outliers, that's fine, but not simply the top scores, so exclude the top score, or top two scores, along with the lowest one or two as well. I would love to see Zak Crawley put through some of these adjusted averages.

A great win in under 3 days. I must admit I was underwhelmed by the signing of Chris Rushworth but he has been absolutely brilliant. I was more enthused with Ed Barnard and he has showed already the balance the team needed as a genuine all-rounder.

Highveld wrote:

Good poinys from both @BristolBears & @Coolerking.

If I have time I'll look at other counties players. The main point hower is the neither of our openers are really doing any better than last season and are the main area of the team that needs improvement. The side has a great middle order, an excellent keeper and one of the best bowling attacks, it would be a shame to miss out on success due to the consistant failures of the openers.

An average of 30 is, in most places, considered to be the minimum acceptable for a specialist batsman, to be perfroming c30% below hat ism't acceptable. so to be over 60% below is totally unacceptable and should be raising questions about the players place in the side.

My recollection of last season is that match after match Sam Hain was effectively an opening batsman as 2 and 3 wickets fell very early on. This season we have seen at least one of the openers getting a decent score apart from the Surrey game

To echo what has been previously said, how do they compare with other Div 1 openers?

The RAW data will be available on several websites, I don't have the time to analyse the data now, but please feel free to do so.

In the games we have played the average opening partnership is 28, with 2 of the five innings having a partnership over 40.

Our opponents, from 8 innings, have an average opening partnership of just 7.5 with the highest being 17. Which shows our opening bowlers are very effective with the new ball.

While there's room for improvement for most of our batters, the one that worries me most right now is the skipper.

Agree on Rhodes - and I think his form has been a slight concern for a while. I'm not sure I see a fix anytime soon either.

Re Yates and Davies, although they have both clearly had struggles, to take away their top score to calculate an average at this point in the season seems a little unfair/nonsensical. If you did it at the end of the season it would make more sense.

You also have to not just look at averages and the 80 odd for 0 they got us to at the end of day 1 was a crucial period in the game. It gave us a massive platform for day 2 and the match outcome could have been very different had they both been out early.