More than fun it's taken us to a lead of over 100 - so important. And as bowlers they avoided getting tired by scoring boundaries instead of running too many singles!!

Watching us bowl now, and how they bowled this afternoon, this pitch seems to be very overhead condition dependent.

Sunny this morning and Rhodes and Hain were comfortable, the ball did very little in the air or off the pitch. Since it clouded over after lunch it’s been going off the pitch and in the air. And apart from the last wicket partnership, it’s looked very tough to bat on.

Least the umpiring is working both ways. Doubt Essex will be thrilled by that Lawrence decision. Thought it was going down.

I’m not sure, he got a long way across. Could easily have been hitting leg I think.

With the way Lawrence was wafting about like a schoolboy. it is debatable as to whether or not he deserves to still be in after way he played. great days entertainment, we looked so comfortable before lunch and that last wicket stand was superb and although it sounds like hindsight, I had a feeling about Hassan and his batting and fancied him for a good 30 but he went beyond. I feel we can get 2 more before they wipe off the deficit and feel it could be over tomorrow anyway.

A good outcome overall today. That great last wicket stand has probably swung the match our way. A bit disappointed with the collapse in the afternoon, but the last two rescued the situation. Rushworth has been a revelation !

Another absorbing days cricket.

Snater and Bracewell were a bit loose initially after Cook and Porter and it allowed us to build a platform. Rhodes didn't exactly look great, he probably never will, but full credit to him for gutsing it out, he needed that. After lunch I think Essex probably got the luck they had lacked prior to the interval. Sam Cook is an interesting prospect, bowls slightly off the wrong foot and he can't be much quicker than 78mph or so but bowls a very tight line. Bracewell was fairly sharp, Porter likewise. Re. Burgess dismissal, to me, they seemed to be a slight bit of confusion over whether the ball carried? He definitely nicked it. Hassan and OHD, wow, that partnership has put the game massively in our favour, it really deflated Essex, at one point they had all 9 outfielders on the boundary. That boundary towards the Rae Bank is alarmingly short too. Also I think there is still this belief amongst cricket followers that once sides are 7 or 8 down then the innings should be wrapped up fairly quickly. Not so, there's not many rabbits around these days, most tailenders can handle themselves now and they have a couple of shots coupled with a sound defensive game. I still don't think the ball is swinging majorly, it was too cold for it today, but there is definitely some assistance off the pitch and maybe a hint of uneven bounce crept in in the final session.

Last word, Rushworth. I thought he'd struggle a little bit to be honest back in Div 1 having been in Div 2 for 6 or 7 seasons. I was wrong. I still thought he'd have his moments but not quite to this remarkable extent. He has this incredible ability to hit pads and gets great nip off the pitch. He gets so many LBW's and even the close/tight debatable ones seem to go his way every time.

Surely this game ends tomorrow? If not you'd have to assume Essex have staged an excellent counter attack and someone has played a big innings.

Rushworth was always a solid signing for me. There are no guarantees but he was always more likely to continue being one of the country's top 3 or 4 wicket taking seamers of the last 12 years than struggle here. He's still bowling a sequence of deliveries whether it's in Div 1, 2 or test level he'd do a similar job.

It's as good a signing for me as Hampshire picking up Keith Barker four years ago. Quite unusual for us to get a bowler with such a pedigree as we've become accustomed to obtaining rough diamonds to fashion from Wright, Rankin through to Norwell and Miles bowlers making their way

The question I'm left pondering is are batting sides now as good as they were when he was last in Division 1 before the ECB demoted them in 2016? Also how will Warks attack look in mid-season if/when we have a drier spell with less seam friendly conditions. Norwell, Brookes come into the equation?

Did they really need to set the wicket so far over leaving a crazy short boundary to the Hollies side?

Another really good win. Good job we didn't need too many more runs!

Man of the match has to be Hassan Ali, wickets and a crucial innings, at a point where we looked like we were potentially losing the upper hand we'd gained in the first innings.

Good to see Rhodes get some runs, Davies yet again plays a stupid shot very unbefitting of a vice captain.

If I remembered rightly Surrey had already started to pull clear of everyone else at this point last season, so to at least keep pace with them is good and it will be interesting to see how they cope with not being clear at the top.

I thought we were never going to break their 8th wicket partnership and then for a brief moment could see us failing to get the 100 runs. I agree about Davies' shot - it was the type you play last ball of a T20 needing 6 to win. But let's not be too critical as a team we have had a great start to the season. When you look back at the comments made before the start of the season on this forum I am not sure anyone predicted this. In fact without looking back I am sure avoiding relegation was an aim mentioned!!!

Won again. Very sporting pitch, said at the start of the day I wouldn't have fancied us chasing 150.

That partnership between Hassan and OHD was worth double. Essex will maybe think that that a mad half hour has cost them.

Here's my report from today:
https://deepextracover.com/2023/05/warwickshire-ccc-vs-essex-cc-day-three-report/

At least their tail having a wag, gave us a bit more of a day rather than when they were 7 down, I had visions of it being over before lunch. Another win though and if you consider we won only 2 CC games last season, this seems more like it. Let us hope that Middlesex can hang on v Surrey but I doubt it. The bowling is not a worry but the batting might be as the season goes on but good to see the skipper get a few. A few words said when Yates got out as Essex didn't like catch he took to end the innings. Tough, I didn't particularly like how Essex and Lancashire 'Swapped Wins' in a couple of Sunday League/CC games in 1991 to deny us the title so a catch they didn't like is just tough.

Ah, yes, the 1991 allegations were made by Don Topley who played in those matches and was commentating at Edgbaston this week.
Mind you, Topley is allegedly not the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Those who heard Geoff Miller speak at the Cricket Society last winter will recall him telling the story of how Topley was bowling in a match. As he started to walk back to his mark part way through an over, he asked the umpire: "How many balls?" "Three" was the answer. He got back to his mark but, instead of running in, he walked all the way back to the umpire and said: "Is that three gone or three to come?"
Anyway, the allegations were never proved and, 32 years on, we don't hold grudges (well, not too much!)

There was a fair bit of needle in this match never going over the top mind. Jamie Porter psyching himself up as he gathered himself to run in and bowl. Thought the Burgess feather through to the keeper looked like it might have dropped short too and there were a few questionable lbw decisions. Then there was Snater giving OHD a very vocal send off more in frustration at himself than anything untoward. And Hassan I'd agree man of the match alongside Rushworth and Rhodes. Three (possibly four?) dropped catches so unlike us this season could've had this settled before the luncheon interval had they stuck.

Wonder if we've now established the kind of rivalry with Essex we had with Kent in the 1990's
Champion side pre-COVID being knocked off their perch somewhat

Surrey are rolling through Middlesex this morning, so looks like it will be second place at the end of this round of fixtures.

Surrey are rolling through Middlesex this morning, so looks like it will be second place at the end of this round of fixtures.

GerryShedd wrote:

Ah, yes, the 1991 allegations were made by Don Topley who played in those matches and was commentating at Edgbaston this week.
Mind you, Topley is allegedly not the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Those who heard Geoff Miller speak at the Cricket Society last winter will recall him telling the story of how Topley was bowling in a match. As he started to walk back to his mark part way through an over, he asked the umpire: "How many balls?" "Three" was the answer. He got back to his mark but, instead of running in, he walked all the way back to the umpire and said: "Is that three gone or three to come?"
Anyway, the allegations were never proved and, 32 years on, we don't hold grudges (well, not too much!)

Difficult to prove but then both umpires had umpired the previous days Sunday League game and could see the way it was all going. When the 3rd innings declaration came, Holder and Dudleston stood and looked at each other with Dudleston giving it the 'double Teapot' in a 'You are not serious about a target like that' scenario. I do hold that grudge and if you consider when Essex were struggling to buy their ground, Warwickshire gave them an interest free loan. That game as much as anything, gave the ECB food for thought about having 2 games involving the same 2 sides, running into each other and soon after the practice was stopped. Cannot see any reason why Topley should make up that story and I don't think any Essex/Lancashire players, at the time, came out in incredulity to pour scorn on the comment.

I admire Topley for having done what he did and whistleblowers should be treated with more respect than he was but he's a terrible commentator.