Hope I am wrong but this squad doesn't look great at all.

Resting Ali suggests we aren't confident at all.

He was a wonderful appointment. Absolutely first class!

Doesn't look that different to what they showed before. Presumably just an attempt to get central government money.

It's not great that they are calling the County Ground, Edgbaston as Edgbaston Stadium and that they acknowledge Birmingham but not the rest of the County.

Bit worrying they see members are one of a range of stakeholders rather than literally the only stakeholder.

Of course paid employees can advise but the Board is answerable to the owners of the Club - the members.

Also worrying they seem to be trying to dilute membership by allowing Hundred ticket holders full membership rights.

It's Warwickshire County Cricket Club!

Cant see any point in shutting up shop at any point.

Best thing that could happen is a few sixes.

Provided we bowl Hamps out first innings which we should.

So if Yorkshire lose do we need 3 bonus points and a win to stay up?

But the Yorkshire match looking a bit more hopeful and will show how many bonus points we need.

It's Edgbaston v Warwickshire CCC

Technically the former doesn't exist but thats who the Board think they report to.

If we have an analyst I hope they are telling our bowlers to replicate exactly what Price has done!

its only the third day

Well its in our own hands. Poor Somerset have now batted at 1030 three times in this match!

The one bright spot from the late rally is Somerset now have to bat at 1030 so hopefully gives our openers a bit of respite!

I worry its expectation management.

Float out extreme bad ideas and then anything will look a more reasonable compromise.

It was spot on Terry but maybe reveals why they set such a high bar in terms of signatures needed to call an SGM.

Also in this case an SGM cannot be called in time to bind the Chairman to vote on behalf of members. So the only other option is no confidence after the event.

Cain's reply worries me the most as it seems to indicate that both the Board and Senior Management Team are not accountable to Members and make their own minds up. If this is the case who are they accountable to?

Still concerned that Board aren’t accountable to members and neither are senior management team.

Who do they think they act on behalf of?

It also is wrong that we require 250 signatures for an SGM when Lancashire with a larger membership require only 100.

The members committee is clearly a sham.

So the constitutional changes have marginalised the membership and reduced the incentive to join.

I really hope we can send a message on this one or the future is bleak.

I signed it on Sunday, I am in contact with Alan, I can't attend Edgbaston this week due to work but I've posted the link on here.

what are you doing?

I hope we won't be passive this time.

I am concerned about this. he seems to indicate that "Senior Management" and "the Board" are free to take their own view and will do so on the proposed changes.

This seems to indicate a step change from being a members' club.

There is the sop of the Members' Committee but I know in the past that several people were told at interviews they couldn't join it if they opposed Club policies.

I appreciate the Club did get its constitutional changes through a couple of years ago (including the extremely high bar of 250 signatures for an SGM which is higher than most clubs) but we are still a Members Club. It seems incredible that the Board and Senior Management feel they are completely unaccountable and can decide what they like.

Ultimately i think - like Lancashire - we need an SGM to hold the Chairman and Board to account and remind them who actually owns the Club!

They clearly think they are no longer a members club because if the constitutional changes a couple of years ago.

The members committee might as we be disbanded. They openly say they don’t want anyone on it who disagrees with Club policy.

I think an SGM is the only way to indicate serious disquiet at the lack of accountability.

They clearly think they are no longer a members club because if the constitutional changes a couple of years ago.

The members committee might as we be disbanded. They openly say they don’t want anyone on it who disagrees with Club policy.

I think an SGM is the only way to indicate serious disquiet at the lack of accountability.