I think we see what our potential opponents do in their QF, if they use Hundred players so should we.

Nobody, apart from Mark Robinson possibly, would select Davies ahead of Sam Hain. If Chris Woakes is available, he has to be selected.
The case for Mousley and Benjamin is weaker, especially as Jacob Bethell and Kai Smith have performed well and are both improving players.

We do not want to repeat the "errors of Badbatch" who left Bell and Trott out of a semi final that we lost.

Trott played.

Mikkyk wrote:

Tayls79 wrote:

There's another aspect to the post-100 players coming back: would they improve the team? For us the opening partnership plus three can't be improved, most of the bowling can't really be improved (come back to this) even 6/7 Ethan has locked down. But our middle order could be. As it stands its Davies, Bethell and Burgess and none of them have scored too heavily. Ot must be tempting to return Hain and Mousley.

Interesting I’d have said Ethan would be the most vulnerable.
Averages less than Shaikh and Burgess I’m pretty sure.
Obviously Burgess is the keeper and has kept well, also the fact they rested him seems to suggest they intend to play him. Whereas I don’t think Brooks has bowled in this competition, so should be offering more.
He’s also leaving at the end of the season. So I’d prioritise the likes of Shaikh and Smith above him.

We know Davies isn’t going anywhere, but could see Hain back in for Bethell who’s been pretty poor in general this year.
Would love Mousley for Davies, but suspect it would more likely be for Smith.

Gloucester brought back both of their Hundred players. Lancashire brought back some of theirs too, but were far less effective.

Hants have brought back Dawson and Crane, anyone else? Vince would have played too I bet if he hadn't been at the Oval last night.

I can't remember and CBA to look it up but Durham and Sussex chases both followed the same pattern of 4/5 getting knocked over really quickly and Barnard and Ethan having to dig it out. In both those games Barn/Eth scored 330 or so combined, though Ed did score about 260 of those himself.

BristolBear wrote:

Mikkyk wrote:

Tayls79 wrote:

There's another aspect to the post-100 players coming back: would they improve the team? For us the opening partnership plus three can't be improved, most of the bowling can't really be improved (come back to this) even 6/7 Ethan has locked down. But our middle order could be. As it stands its Davies, Bethell and Burgess and none of them have scored too heavily. Ot must be tempting to return Hain and Mousley.

Interesting I’d have said Ethan would be the most vulnerable.
Averages less than Shaikh and Burgess I’m pretty sure.
Obviously Burgess is the keeper and has kept well, also the fact they rested him seems to suggest they intend to play him. Whereas I don’t think Brooks has bowled in this competition, so should be offering more.
He’s also leaving at the end of the season. So I’d prioritise the likes of Shaikh and Smith above him.

We know Davies isn’t going anywhere, but could see Hain back in for Bethell who’s been pretty poor in general this year.
Would love Mousley for Davies, but suspect it would more likely be for Smith.

Gloucester brought back both of their Hundred players. Lancashire brought back some of theirs too, but were far less effective.

Yes, Brad Wheal. All their Undead players that they could have picked.
Adam Hose doesn't feature for Worcs, though.
Come on you Pears!

Of more significance is Keith Barker's return to the white ball Hampshire team

Be quite nice if he played Tuesday should they win

Really hope Worcestershire can win this. I feel like Hampshire have our number in white ball cricket.

What is the situation exactly with player availability for Tuesday then?

Any restrictions on Woakes/Moeen?

Looking at both sides, they look weak. if you consider that the later Hampshire batsmen from 6-11 have managed 44 runs from 64 balls. Worcestershire have Leach at 7 so no one would be too fearful of sides like that. There is a trophy here at stake, we must play the best side we can. I hate it when the ECB say that players who have hardly played, should be rested, they are cricketers, they should play cricket. At this stage, not playing players for whatever reason in stupid and has no baring on future games unless they get injured and you cannot 'Rest' players because they might get injured.

At this moment from the bits of the match I've seen I'd have to say Worcester might give us more problems than Hants particularly with the ball. Love Barker to bits but he's a threat with the red ball more than white

It's a good point, and I paraphrase just slightly, that if Hampshire play their 100 players and we don't they mug us off. It isn't, however, the point I'm making. I'm saying minimal changes because being in the 100, even if not playing, is poor preparation and also disrupts the team. We've seen this effect of this already this season when Mo came back from IPL and disrupted the vibe Davies had going on as captain and top order bat.

Speaking of which, Ali almost certainly won't be back. He plays IT20 this week (I think) while Woakes isn't needed for England until ODIs later in the month. There's a good case from England's PoV in him playing the semi, bearing in mind he also missed the last 100 game, but I bet he won't be available

They seem to be very protective of Woakes and it flukily paid dividends for England in the summer. I guess their initial plan was for him to deputise if needed for Jimmy but he comes in fresh for those last three tests and is player of the series. They might hold him back again for a few ODI's and then the world cup whereas previously they might have encouraged him play this week

He's got a degenerative knee condition so it does make sense that rests are build into his schedule. But he did play three back-to-back tests as you say so clear they can manage a lot out of him if required. Whether they build rest into the ODIs or not is a good point but the semi final would be something I think he could manage and be of benefit to him.

mad wrote:

They seem to be very protective of Woakes and it flukily paid dividends for England in the summer. I guess their initial plan was for him to deputise if needed for Jimmy but he comes in fresh for those last three tests and is player of the series. They might hold him back again for a few ODI's and then the world cup whereas previously they might have encouraged him play this week

Hampshire it is. But that was a huge choke by Worcestershire.
Lost by 10 runs with an over and a half still to go. Lost the last 5 wickets for about 20 runs.

18 runs from 19 balls for the Worcestershire lower order, just like Hampshire, having players who can get late boundaries is a godsend in these games. A lot of tailenders try to smash the hell out of it and end up missing the ball. Just getting something on it and running is best as you know that at some stage with a few wickets in hand, you will get a boundary. So we have one of our 'Bogey' teams and The Pears will be kicking themselves. Time we laid to waste the bad form against this lot and hope we can brush them aside.