Highveld wrote:

60 runs off five overs from our overseas players, plus zero runs from two balls faced. Combined with the top three failing to go on from a reasonable start, left a situation where Sam Hain and Jacob Bethell both needed to play a large innings to secure victory. while Jacob did his part, Sam was out early, leaving an impossible run chase, as there was no support for Jacob.

Also, good to see Sue Redfern umpiring the game today, she really is an excellent umpire.

Ali and Jamal as our overseas players when we'd already signed two fast bowlers makes zero sense.

Highveld wrote:

60 runs off five overs from our overseas players, plus zero runs from two balls faced. Combined with the top three failing to go on from a reasonable start, left a situation where Sam Hain and Jacob Bethell both needed to play a large innings to secure victory. while Jacob did his part, Sam was out early, leaving an impossible run chase, as there was no support for Jacob.

Also, good to see Sue Redfern umpiring the game today, she really is an excellent umpire.

But no mention of yet another failure for Benjamin?

Missed following today's game and sorry to read the scorecard. Jamal 25 in only over and out first ball !! Hassan Ali is hardly an inspiring signing either. Bejamin failed yet again. Should the three of them be dropped for the next game ?

We're down to 5th in the table now, and our next two fixtures are against the two teams directly above us - Yorkshire & Derbyshire.

Against Yorkshire on Friday i would go with: Davies, Yates, Barnard, Hain, Bethell, Burgess, Garton, Briggs, Mles, Lintott & Gleeson.

Yes, many players failed today, but over the last 3 seasons, Robinson has accepted consitantly poor performances from many players, in some cases rewarding the failing players with new improved contracts.

Questions need to be asked about the selection of the overseas players, are the club actually searching the entire market, or just getting what is offered by a small group of agents? Our neighbours down the M5 seem to be getting much higher quality, and better performing overseas players, that actually spend more time on the field and contribute more to the side.

There probably, also, needs to be a major rethink about the selection of the T20 side. Ed Barnard was a leading T20 player at Worcestershire for years, will Rhodes is a good all round player, who is a leader and knows how to win games, and, of course, there is the stupidity of not playing the clubs best wicketkeeper, who is also a leading batsman.

Devon_Bear wrote:

We're down to 5th in the table now, and our next two fixtures are against the two teams directly above us - Yorkshire & Derbyshire.

Against Yorkshire on Friday i would go with: Davies, Yates, Barnard, Hain, Bethell, Burgess, Garton, Briggs, Mles, Lintott & Gleeson.

Yes I’d go with that, looks a much more balanced side.

Inside-edge wrote:

Devon_Bear wrote:

We're down to 5th in the table now, and our next two fixtures are against the two teams directly above us - Yorkshire & Derbyshire.

Against Yorkshire on Friday i would go with: Davies, Yates, Barnard, Hain, Bethell, Burgess, Garton, Briggs, Mles, Lintott & Gleeson.

Yes I’d go with that, looks a much more balanced side.

I think whatever way we go we are at least one high quality batsman away from competing for finals day.

I do think its time for Burgess to have a go.
...I wouldn't hold my breath, I don't have much faith in the leadership

Here's my (fairly brief) report (and I know it should just be "Bears" but I didn't write the headline):
https://deepextracover.com/2024/06/vitality-blast-match-report-birmingham-bears-v-durham/

Garton doesn't have a huge amount in his locker with regards to change up deliveries and yorkers does he...Jamal just looks hittable, everything sits up, properly average cricketer im afraid...Hassan, he's OK but you can see why he's no regular at International level...Benjamin has struggled for a long while now and is a passenger in the field...Hain doesn't look himself, body language etc...Mousley had a good game today...Davies is trying so hard to rally, bringing energy etc but the bowlers are letting him down...Bethell looks exceptional and what a boundary rider.

We have prioritised our budget to target this tournament yet the everyone can see our deficiencies with the bat. It is a batman's game in this format and we are overloaded with bowlers.
A big reset is needed. It simply cannot go on with Benjamin. I'd even consider giving Rhodes a go. Barnard is good enough to warrant an opportunity too. Burgess maybe.
If Robinson isn't strong enough to make the necessary tough decisions to find a winning formula then I'm afraid he has to go after another season of failure.

I think Mousley deserves to stay in the team. He was our leading wicket taker last season after all! Plus 2/23 in the total of 195 today is excellent. It's a shame that his bowling seems to have got better at the expense of his batting

Should have won that one. Their bowling is nothing special and it was a pity to see Davies get out when set and there were some lame shots. It looks like a fairly comfortable win for Durham but at certain stages we were so much in control that people around me were saying that they could not see us losing unless we started to give wickets away. We did well to claw it back to under 200 but we must pick things up now and look to change the side. The batting looks weak and surely Barnard has a place in this side, he should replace Benjamin, would score more than him and bowls as well. He scores quickly, it wouldn't be so bad if Benjamin came in, got 25 off 15 balls and then got out but he is getting a run a ball and then doesn't kick-on.

If Benjamin does get dropped, it's not the end of him, far from it. He needs to find his confidence again, possibly on loan

I wonder if Robinson is worried about dropping players because he sees it as more significant to their overall future at the Bears..because I can't understand why we're so hesitant to drop out of form players.

Alex Davies says: "We had a few decisions that were really questionable - we ran Bedingham out early and it wasn't given."
I missed that - and so did the umpire - but that could have made a massive difference because he played a superb attacking innings.

I remember thinking it looked out at the time whilat sat in the stands and that the umpire appeared to be not looking. Shocking.

Yes, it's on youtube and it's in the first over. If you freeze it at the right moment, it definitely looks out.
Highveld says Sue Redfern is an excellent umpire and I would never doubt his word; but I think she got this one wrong.

Even the best umpires make mistakes, they have to decide from a single viewpoint at real time speed, without the benefits of multiple angles of slow motion replays.

Looking closer to home for the reasons for the defeat might be more productive.

Not surprised it was Redfern who missed the run out. However, that wasn't the reason we lost. We weren't good enough.

GerryShedd wrote:

Alex Davies says: "We had a few decisions that were really questionable - we ran Bedingham out early and it wasn't given."
I missed that - and so did the umpire - but that could have made a massive difference because he played a superb attacking innings.

Just smoke and mirrors. These things happen every day in cricket.
He was also criticising the schedule and saying playing back to back wasn’t conducive to winning and that’s why they had to rest Gleeson. (Forgetting of course Durham played away at Leicestershire the evening before as well).
Maybe being aware of the schedule we sign players who are able to cope with it, or have adequate stand ins.

I don't like it when either coaches or players start making excuses, i always feel it's to cover for their own inadequacies. The reason we lost the last two games is because we conceded too many runs in both matches, 370 in 40 overs going at just over 9 runs per over. The reference to Gleeson is just another excuse, because Jamal came into the side for him and bowled one shocking over. But to cover the cracks the excuse is 'we had to rest Gleeson' - justifying Jamal's selection. And why rest Gleeson anyway - can't he manage to bowl 8 overs in two days?