I bet us and Surrey have used the same amount of players this season in the Championship. Roughly.

Difference between us and Surrey performance wise this season is that they get way more runs from their lower order than we do. JOverton, Abbott, Clark, Lawes etc are all decent run getters down the list, a different one puts theyre hand up each game.

They get quality overseas players in too all season.

Id imagine their batters averages aren't too much different to ours. I've gone out on limb there though admittedly.

You've lost me here. Mediocre this season?

Who, outside of the XI who played here, could have made a difference to the outcome of this game had they been selected instead? Considering we lost an absolutely enormous toss Tuesday morning.

You say players can come back from being dropped, they can also come back from a bad performance.

People are overreacting.

I can't of think anyone who has been on such a sustained run of bad form that they actually should be dropped. Indeed we don't need wholesale changes to the squad at all. To say this season is similar to last season is way wide of the mark. Last season we struggled to bowl sides out and barely won a game. When we batted we batted so slowly that even when we batted 100 overs we might have only made 240. This season we've bowled sides out, put up bigger totals and actually won some games. Won away at Hampshire, we don't do that often. Beat a strong Essex side at home. Beat Kent on a flat pitch with the useless Kookaburra ball, a huge win, wouldn't have won that last season. We were capable of none of this last season.

In terms of the squad after losing Sibley and letting Lamb leave we are probably a back up batter light but prior to this game. Bethell has done quite well particularly when you factor in what he's been exposed to i.e Essex away on a raging turner and S. Harmer. Players like Bethell need to be given opportunity, they won't always do well, he's had 1 bad game in a game where many batters didn't get a score. Barnard is getting criticism but remember he wasn't exactly a heavy wicket taker at Worcestershire though yes he has had a poor 3 games with the bat and he could do with a score. He balances the side, a 4th seamer who can run through some tight overs and maybe nick us a wicket, he has done this for us. He's never gonna run through sides, he's never done that.

One area that does need addressing at the moment is game management. That's 2 weeks running now where we've had a significant collapse right at the start of the day. Today's was totally avoidable, Hain getting out like he did to de Caires exposed the lower middle order to the new ball against fresh bowlers. Mousley getting out yesterday afternoon was huge in the context of this game, Middlesex were starting to look a little bit demoralised and were dying to get off for the forecasted rain. So for Mousley to get out the way he did, after playing so well, with the field set the way it was (no slips in, Middlesex were in total defensive mode), was incredibly frustrating/naive. Had we have started today with Hain and Mousley, 2 well set batters at the crease against the new ball, today could have gone a different way. Maybe.

Game management.

I wasn't aware we were having such a poor season.

Honestly Barnard bowled fantastically v Lancs, best we've seen him. Bethell is only in as a spare batter and was decent v Essex and Kent, not sure he'd have played anyway if Briggs was in.

Yes Davies does look a touch out of form.

I don't know about that. Like who?

Ethan Bamber. Why can't we bring them through like this? He doesn't do anything special but he does the basics right over and over again, always putting the ball in the right areas. So consistent.

BristolBear wrote:

I think we got a bit unlucky that they managed to build that score. Umpires screwed us badly.
Davies and Simpson were both out but not given multiple times early in their innings. If they’re out early as they should have been, they don’t bat those 20 overs between them. So De Caires and Higgins come in on a tougher pitch, newer ball etc. and they probably struggle the same way we did. It was clear it got easier to bat the older the ball got and as the pitch dried more through the day.

This is a fair assessment.

Re. Outgrounds. I sometimes feel the idea is better than the reality. They often feel overcrowded and uncomfortable and the viewing is often terrible from your folding chair. The novelty quickly wears off with them. It's not nice using portoloos all day either.

Scarborough is good though.

Is it only points deduction worthy if its considered dangerous? I'm not sure.

This is proper Jamaica 1998 stuff, look at that ball Davies got, that ain't normal!

BosworthBear wrote:

If they have to reserve wickets for the Hundred why on earth didn't they plan ahead and use an outground?

Especially during the school holidays.

Unfortunately we seem Edgbaston obsessed these days!

Which outgrounds do you suggest? Rugby school was always rubbish and apparently Stratford used to cost a fortune.

Truth is Barwell has the arse and has put us on a minefield.

Burgess batting about a foot and half out of his crease to TRJ

I've seldom seen batting conditions so difficult.

It's jagging everywhere off the pitch. OHD would have had a field day with ball in hand here.

Green pitch, ball swinging, 4 down. Toss was vital here.

Bethell and Brookes in for Rushworth and Briggs.

Lost the toss, batting.

Fair play to Johal, he's been decent for the 2's lately and in the Birmingham League.

Shame Pieter Malan won't be playing. An absolute walking wicket.

Yeah only one team was winning this had it not rained and it weren't the home side.

GerryShedd wrote:

I know that I have defended our groundsman and his pitches on here, probably to the annoyance of others. But the fact that this match is being played on the same pitch that was used for Finals Day is very worrying - it's not surprising that it has deteriorated massively.
I get the fact that the Edgbaston square has to accommodate an enormous number of matches. But my suspicion, maybe unfounded, is that we will have a pristine new pitch for the first match in The Hundred.

The pitches for 4day cricket at Edgbaston are painfully slow and they just get slower and lower as the game goes on. Rhodes mentioned this in his post day interview with Radio WM's Mike Taylor yesterday, Robbo has mentioned it numerous times this season and last season. Its really hard work for the bowlers. My back hurts just watching Michael Burgess taking everything round by his ankles even on Day 1. And don't get me started on the Test match pitch!

It's not a knock on Barwell I must stress this, huge respect for him and his team, so hard working, it is a busy ground, so many matches, square gets a lot of use. I think it's just the way it is Edgbaston. It's never gonna be like Headingley or Old Trafford.

We don't exactly have a brilliant record of producing our own seamers through the pathway/academy, maybe the pitches are a factor? That might be a reach though I admit. An entirely different issue altogether.

This match won't live long in the memory.

Agreed 100% that somehow there will be something with a bit of pace and good carry for the Blundred though.

BristolBear wrote:

The keeper and slips seem to keep pointing to something Jennings is doing with feet when he’s coming down. That’s what OHD was pointing at too.

Suspect they’re all very unhappy with some of the decisions that have gone against them this morning.
Would be interested to know what it was all about.

Jennings was batting outside of his crease then advancing into the protected area. Think our fielders felt the umpires should have addressed it. I'm not sure what the protocol is to be honest.