On the second division being good to develop young players, I do believe that’s true to an extent. The issue is, especially for sides like Sussex & Worcestershire, can they keep them when big sides come calling. Sussex’s problem is that they can’t, Salt, Orr, Burgess, Brown to name a few recent ones, a lot of players they’ve developed and turned into top talent go to clubs with more money. I know for a fact Salt was told if he had England aspirations that under the previous regime there was a preference for players who are content for trophies and get into crunch moments.
As for the opening partnership, as I said before the issue isn’t just that first wicket, other clubs have had the likes of Vince, Lawrence, Pope, Abell, Elgar, Sibley, Burns, Bedingham and more either at the other end or coming in preventing multiple wickets falling.
We’re a bit more fragile in that top order and often if we lose 1 we lose 3 or 4. As Hain hasn’t been about or at the same level this year, Yates and Davies are aggressive and don’t really play that role, Mousley & Bethell aren’t there yet in red ball, Rhodes can’t be a hero every time, so we can lose 3 or 4 quickly sometimes and it’s not until Barnard and Burgess you have faith that we can battle. By that stage bowlers have their tails up, still with a newish ball.
That being said, the bowling is the bigger issue, and does feed into the batting problem because often we’re on top and then we can’t finish sides off, the momentum swings, we’re out in the field far longer than we should be, and that does effect the way other teams come out against us and how we bat.
I know I sound like a broken record but it does come down to balance, of the side, the squad and the formats.

I think in terms of physical ability. Your timing, your reactions, pace for bowlers, eyesight etc that probably isn’t going to improve.

But your approach to the game, your technique, mental strength, mastering new shots/skills, the mental attitude you have, that can always be improved. Seen plenty of players make technical improvements throughout long careers.
Even things like being in the gym and getting that bit stronger and fitter.

On the manner of dismissals/batters approach. It’s interesting to note that Yates has the highest strike rate of any of the recognised batters in the averages above.
That and his up and down form, doesn’t scream of a player you’d consider a natural opener. Normally I’d wonder if a move to 4 might suit him well similar to Root early in his career, but we saw how Yates form was effected when he moved to 3 a couple of years ago.
He has so much potential, just need a top level batting coach to work with him.

It’s context. It’s valuable as to how you make decisions and analyse things.
Dismissing says far more about the person than the information.

On the opening stands.
I’ve just gone back through the scores:

0,1,6,5,26,62,5,52,106,19,29,48,15,38,3,21,18, 59,10,56,116,343,37.

That’s an average of just over 46.
Take out the ridiculous situation of the 343 stand with the kookaburra in those silly early season games, that average goes to 33.
2 (+1) hundred stands, 4 fifty stands, 6 single figure stands. 3 of those big stands are with those kookaburra early season matches. With a dukes the average is far lower.
The issue in my mind is the lack of consistency, both players run very hot and cold, having looked through the numbers too often they’re out very close together so those scores are often as much for 2 as they are for 1. So it’s always worse than just 1 wicket, and we’re often left with 2 brand new batsman facing a relatively new ball and fresh bowlers.

And another season comes to an end. Probably the most disappointing for some time for various reasons.

I can’t imagine it’ll be a particularly pleasant end of season review, and it’s clear significant changes are needed to bring back the feel good factor, let alone a trophy.

Lancs need to score 250 and to win to stay up. Our batting so far doesn’t fill me with confidence, so need Worcs to do us a favour.

I’m clinging to the crumb of comfort that it does look like a good batting pitch. And that we’re still in the first innings going into the second session on the 3rd day.
As long as we don’t throw wickets away, we can take time out the game, to ensure it ends as a draw.

Saw someone make the perfect point. This is the part of the season when it matters most, should be the crescendo for teams fighting for the title, promotion and relegation, and the weather is determining the outcome not the players.

Dobell confirming that Benjamin is off to Kent next season.
Not the biggest loss. Has never offered much in red ball.
Got consistently worse in T20, with this season being atrocious.
Probably the best outcome for both sides. Frees up a T20 spot for Barnard or Smith.
Still plenty of keeping in the squad for next season with Davies and Smith.

Andy wrote:

5 batters, 1 keeper, 1 genuine all-rounder, 4 bowlers. I know this forum loves a pile on but we cant criticise that can we?

No, that’s a balanced side.
My comment was more about the rest of the season, when it was clear we couldn’t bowl sides out. But played the extra batter, with Burgess at 8.
It didn’t help out the bowling being a bowler down. And it didn’t really help the batting either because we were still reliant on the exact same players, who were still being put in an equally poor situation.
Compare it to Surrey who have gone the other way entirely and who have either had a team make up similar to this one today, but often just went with 6 bats, and a bowling all-rounder at 7 in Clark. At one point they had Curran at 6. Not dissimilar to Hampshire too. Both go much stronger on the bowling, and bowlers who can bat. Rather than stronger on the batting, and batters who can bowl. You can quibble about different players and their abilities but it’s a point of consideration.

The_Lickey_Banker wrote:

Team:-
Yates
Davies
Rhodes
Hain
Mousley
Barnard
Burgess
Briggs
Miles
Booth
OHD

As KoS said, Robinson has done his usual 'cunning plan' in packing the batting ranks. So, a lot on the shoulders of the 3 seamers (and some aspiring 'CC spinner' called Briggs !). I think Barnard & Rhodes will be called upon a fair bit.

I can’t understand why Robinson has this approach. When we won the championship, Burgess spent most of the season at 6. Bresnan at 7. Then Briggs, Miles, Norwell, OHD.
So now when our bowling is weakest, he keeps strengthening the batting. Part of it is a comment on our consistency with the bat, partly to do with low bowling reserves. But it seems counter intuitive. And I suspect a lot to do with Robinson’s preference not to drop his favourites, as typically they’ve been the ones most vulnerable.

I don’t think Highveld is wrong at all.
We keep trying this formula for the last 3 years, it’s achieved nothing.
Until this year Davies hasn’t been good enough. He got a boost (as did Yates) with the early season Kookaburra nonsense, but he’s backed it up throughout the season. Now he needs to do it again next year. Though his captaincy hasn’t been up to the mark this year.
We’re a bit blind to Mousley and Yates performances because they are home grown and they have the peaks that show their undoubted potential but no consistency, so those peaks are too infrequent. And rarely when needed most.
I think next year they’re heading into crucial years for them as red ball players at this club. Yates will massively have to step up because Rhodes steady hand at 3 will be gone, and Mousley needs to find a way to score match defining 100’s not attractive 50’s.
The need for a top order overseas is hard to ignore for next season.

Manufactured draw incoming.
Surely Notts try produce the flattest of flat pitches. Forget bonus points. 8 each sees both teams safe.

Highveld wrote:

It is not about if Robinson is a good or bad coach, but his methods are no longer effective. That is seen in many walks of life with managers.

What we want is for the club to have good leadership, on and off the field, that performs well and makes sensible signings of players to improve on what we have.
signings like Viari, Ali & Jamaal etc have failed to do that. Also the record on releasing young players, but giving extended contracts to ones who had performed worse than the released players does suggest a number of errors in the clubs internal decision making.

I think this sums it up nicely. What may have once worked in one or 2 places, may not now work in a third.
What must be remembered is that Sussex had the makings of a great squad already, and they’d just been left a huge grant by a supporter that essentially made them the richest club in the country at the time.
Similarly with England women, the ECB had pumped a lot of money into women’s cricket at that time, above anybody else but Australia. And again a lot of the core was already in place before he took charge.

Here he inherited a squad that was enjoying their cricket together, all seemingly performing at their peak and got some luck with fitness.
But it needed building upon to account for age, fitness, depth, form. And what’s been obvious is, very few of those players have performed to those levels again consistently. In fact you could argue the more Robinson has interacted the worse some have got.
The reinforcing of that squad has been very poor, for various different reasons.
And it seems there is a lack of accountability within the club currently because we seem to be rewarding failure. That’s at all levels, execs getting increases, longer contracts for underperforming players whilst better players get 1 year deals or leave, coaches who succeed are allowed to leave whilst those who have a history of poor outcomes continue to be allowed to stay in their role.

Can anyone tell me what style of cricket we play in 4 day cricket?
I look at Surrey, Somerset, Essex, even Hampshire and know instantly.
Surrey will batter the opposition their seam attack, no let up, lots of batters who can occupy the crease. Accumulate, keep sides in the field, rest the bowlers and go again.
Somerset, bit more attacking with the bat, make the opposition work for every run with the ball, spinners who can dry up the runs or attack, at least one seamer who can be a point of difference.
They cover all their bases but also, the roles are very clear depending on the conditions and situation.
Are we looking to be aggressive with the bat because we’re suited to it. But our bowling is the complete antithesis. Our bowling thrives in conditions completely unsuited to our batting. We lack a consistent top order player to bat around, on those tracks where our batters thrive, we don’t have the seamer or spinner who can really take advantage.

Just seems so disjointed. And it’s made worse by the fact we make poor decisions in the field repeatedly.

100% senior leadership plus cricket coaches.

If you asked the senior club management what their aim was for their job. Not 1 would answer “win trophies and make Warwickshire the most successful county and grow the game in the county”.

You’d get, make edgbaston a top venue for live sport, conferences and weddings. Maximise revenue through investment into a redeveloped ground.
Continue being a venue for test matches and international sport.

The way we judge success needs to change. And that means hiring people in the head coach role and director of cricket role that work together to achieve those aims.

If this team is able to get up off the canvas and put in a good performance against Notts I’d be staggered.
Not because they’re not capable of it, but they just look broken. All the confidence seems to be drained from them. Those in charge are already scrambling to save themselves, by shifting blame.
The disquiet is obvious to all by the play on the pitch, and there are those amongst us that have been privy to information confirming it as such behind the scenes too. (No I won’t be saying how, because that’s a betrayal of trust, so accept it or not).
The leadership is not there on so many levels, building a balanced squad that can compete on all fronts, funding recruitment, inspiration & motivation, and repeated demonstrations of tactical ineptitude.

That looked way too familiar. Being unable to finish off teams.

Also, staggering tactical naivety. Field settings made no sense, I understand in theory with no Rushworth, you want to ensure OHD is good to go for the new ball. But it’s 1 wicket needed, a 10:30 start, 20 overs until the new ball, give OHD a proper go at it in conditions suited to him.
Once again, we just let it drift. And a poor start to the batting too.

We’ve seemingly approached the rest of the season on the back foot, why change now.
And to be very cynical, Robinson won’t want the season ending poorly because his job might depend on where we finish in the championship table.