He's not quick through the air but he's quick off the pitch. Nip.
He's not quick through the air but he's quick off the pitch. Nip.
Great performance from OHD!
Pitch seemed bit lively and batsman across teams struggled to score quickly. Rhodes is so frustrating, playing well and it seems he gets a tad bored and plays silly shot.
As captain (or a senior batsman) if you get a start you really need to do your best to capitalise on it. Rhodes seems to get too many starts and then out. Could have easily been 5-6 down tonight
240 off 55 tomorrow are we thinking?
or
275 off 60?
To get there we need a swift Warks declaration tomorrow (perhaps following a completely in vain attempt to thrash our way to 1 bonus batting point) then joke bowl Northants up to around or just after lunchtime
Plenty of joke bowling will go on tomorrow around the counties so would be a shame if Warks decline
A bold declaration.
Northants are desperate for a win to give them just a faint chance of avoiding relegation so it will be interesting to see how things play out from here.
Burgess opening the bowling!
Looks like a deal has been done to give both sides a chance of a win.
Mousley bowling seam up
Anyone watching this live... Are they not tucking into the buffet? Or is the bowling of Burgess, Yates and seam-up Mousley just a bit too incisive? Guess we have to know what target they have in mind. More importantly, who was keeping to Burgess?
They aren't rally tucking into it - played themselves in. Burgess was probably slightly better than expected. Rhode was keeping to Burgess, suffice to say he won't be taking up the gloves again anytime soon.
I know it's been mentioned before but Clive Eakin's breath intakes are infuriating. It's bad enough when the game is exciting, when it's dead like this at the moment... i'm turning off because of it.
Tayls79 wrote:
Anyone watching this live... Are they not tucking into the buffet? Or is the bowling of Burgess, Yates and seam-up Mousley just a bit too incisive? Guess we have to know what target they have in mind. More importantly, who was keeping to Burgess?
Rhodes keeping wicket. Very bizarre from Northants. I thought they would be looking to go 5+ an over minimum. Not much intent so far
OK think I worked it out, I think they have pulled out of engineering a result now.
The Warwickshire twitter has it that we batted on this morning to get their bowling rate back up to speed in exchange for, I believe, a chance at setting up a result. But they've gone cold on that now. There's only 60 odd overs left in the game which I guess is the minimum they need to get the wickets and there's nowhere near enough runs to prevent us winning if they bowl.
I don't know if radio comms have deduced anything more??
ajones1328 wrote:
Tayls79 wrote:
Anyone watching this live... Are they not tucking into the buffet? Or is the bowling of Burgess, Yates and seam-up Mousley just a bit too incisive? Guess we have to know what target they have in mind. More importantly, who was keeping to Burgess?
Rhodes keeping wicket. Very bizarre from Northants. I thought they would be looking to go 5+ an over minimum. Not much intent so far
ajones1328 wrote:
Tayls79 wrote:
Anyone watching this live... Are they not tucking into the buffet? Or is the bowling of Burgess, Yates and seam-up Mousley just a bit too incisive? Guess we have to know what target they have in mind. More importantly, who was keeping to Burgess?
Rhodes keeping wicket. Very bizarre from Northants. I thought they would be looking to go 5+ an over minimum. Not much intent so far
I think rather than "cafeteria bowling" its more a case of whittling down the overs so Warwickshire have less when chasing the total.
Presumably because of another substandard Edgbaston wicket - four an over would be extremely challenging for us. I wonder if the agreement is les than that.
I hope the over use of Edgbaston will be raised at the agm.
We've got a good deal out of this.
Seems to be the case. So 176 or around 57 overs, which isn't much more than three runs an over. Is the pitch so bad that this will be too difficult? Or was it the case that Northants really feared an slow over rate penalty?? Seems unlikely on the latter point.
ajones1328 wrote:
We've got a good deal out of this.
I think Northants are just desperate to get a win and are willing to risk defeat by setting a gettable target in the hope that the Bears will self destruct (which of course they may do).
I don't think it will be easy at all on this pitch.
Scoreboard pressure and all that.
This agreement rather revealing about what Will Rhodes thinks of the pitch!
I really hope lessons will be learned!
176 off 60 overs as lunch was taken no further overs are lost
Think the pitch and the match situation played the biggest parts in the negotiations.
Both teams struggled to score on it, so that will have played a big part.
Also, Northants knew the bears were in control of the clock. We could have killed that game in the first innings to guarantee a draw, so had to be something really generous to make it impossible for Rhodes not to agree to it.
We did them sort their over rate out too.
19-3 - this is predictable!