Smith looked good. With then begs the question why is he down at 8, and his first opportunity to perform is after 4 matches?
Think I’d consider dropping Sibley or Brookes for the next match. Brookes hasn’t really fulfilled that all rounder spot, needs to offer more with the ball.
I’d consider moving Smith to 6 or 7 and play another bowler (think Miles is back).

On Lamb, hate to say it but I don’t think anything he does now will matter. I think the clubs made up its mind on him.

That’s the issue isn’t it. He’s playing but not given an opportunity. He’s playing again today in a 34 over match, unlikely to need a specialist batsman at 8. And when he has batted he’s had a couple of balls or got out quickly.
I’ve said it from the start, it’s nothing against him, and it’s no comment on his ability. But if you’re going to play a young player, actually have them contribute and develop.
All his inclusion does currently is make it harder for the team to win, which then makes it harder to give young players a chance, and also prevents a Johal, Simmons or Shaikh playing and developing.

It’s one of those days where Leicestershire played it perfectly.
Win the toss on a flat pitch, let the bears cook in the field, build a big lead, and then bowl to defend rather than take wickets, as they knew chances would be created by scoreboard pressure. It was Englands go to approach under Eoin Morgan so often, build huge scores and let the opposition implode under the scoreboard pressure.

I will say though that chasing 300 out there would have been much easier than 340, and I hate to flog a dead horse but picking Kai Smith instead of Simmons or Johal has arguably resulted in a tie and a loss from 2 winnable matches.

But also apart from Burgess and Pandya, if sides bowl defensively, we struggle to find the boundary. Rhodes and Lamb of late have especially been guilty of this, chewing up balls, and dragging the scoring rate down.

And if so, fair enough. But we saw Johal perform well last year.
This game is just another example of the limited bowling options causing issues. Brookes obviously isn’t seen as a true 6th bowler, so if they can steal a couple of overs from him and Yates, great. If not, it’s the same 5 bowlers having to bowl no matter what. Which is never great in limited overs cricket. And I’m not entirely sure Rhodes is particularly good at rotating his bowlers and changing his plans depending on the circumstances.

It’s clearly a flat pitch and fast outfield so a 300 plus score is to be expected. But from 200-5 with 15 overs left, you’d have though they’d scrape 300, not motor to 340.

It’s just bizarre at this point. You’ve got Shaikh, Sidebottom, Simmons, all sat there ready to offer something and yet they insist on playing a specialist number 8. Just one of a number of bizarre selection decisions this season by Robinson.

I really don’t want this to come across as a go at the player or anything like that. It’s not his fault, he’s doing his job. But I really hope they don’t pick Kai Smith again.
I’m sure he’s talented and a great kid. But if he’s going to bat 8 or 9, only bat once out of three matches, not keep, doesn’t bowl, why pick him? Pick an extra bowler. You’d have more overs up your sleeve for later on, so can rotate seam bowlers better, and can keep Pandya back a bit if necessary. Because they clearly struggle with bowling in the last 10 overs, and it’s almost self inflicted if they keep picking Smith.

Same as Surrey. Should never have gotten that close. It’s like we get to the last 10 overs and forget how to bowl.
Tough slow pitch, and I think we bowled 2 slower balls in that last 10. Loads of full tosses. And Norwell has no variations, so he’s pretty easy pickings.

Is it just me, or has the standard of fielding in the last couple of matches been way down?
Dropped catches let Kimber off last week. And now they’ve dropped 2 now plus some more throws. Could really be the difference.

Pitch only looked to be getting slower too. Suspect the best time to bat is the new ball, and once the ball gets softer and pace comes off with the spinner it gets much harder.
Hope the bowlers note that, use plenty of cutters and similar deliveries.
You could very obviously see Yates struggle more and more as the innings went on. I suspect partly because it got harder to bat and partly due to the heat.

Hamza Shaikh does indeed play. Garrett in for Miles. But Kai Smith still plays meaning it’s very tight for bowlers.

Norwell, OHD and Pandya the only recognised top quality bowlers. Then other 20 from Rhodes, Brookes, Yates and maybe even Lamb if needed.

Would really like to see Simmons get a go. He might be young and a bit wayward but I’ve heard he’s apparently express pace, which is useful at any level.

I think Pandya is a going to prove himself to be a superb overseas signing, he clearly wants to take on a big role and be a leader.
Kimber was good but also he was dropped at least twice arguably because fielders were in disciplined and weren’t in the right position. He survived 2 run out attempts too that should have been out with good throws. Plus at least 25 of his runs came from big edges, cue ends and all sorts of bizarre shots going behind square.

Burgess’ interview was interesting saying that the bowlers were bowling back of length because that’s what our batsmen struggled with. And that worked for the first 7 wickets. But after that we should have bowled like they were tailenders because eventually they miss or sky it. Like we were trying to be too smart.

Rhodes and the bowlers on the field have plenty to answer for. But there’s still off the field questions like why we don’t have a plan for tailenders, what the bowling coach has been doing and why are they picking Kai Smith (nothing against him as a player but he’s unfairly picked to just field seemingly)?

I hang a lot of this one on Rhodes as a captain. But what does confuse me is Kai Smith. Why wouldn’t you play Simmons or Garrett if the kid is going to be a specialist fielder? A young kid who might do something not just for the sake of it.

I was at the game today and what I will say was the captaincy and fielding was a huge difference between the 2 sides. Surrey fielded superbly and set their fields and made good bowling changes.
Burgess and Pandya were superb, rebuilt (but somehow upped the rate) and then exploded. But the outfield was horrifically slow. It sped up as the day progressed but it had clearly been watered a huge amount as was very lush and green. So when batting the bears didn’t get value for their shots.

Bowling was good until halfway through and then it all feel apart. Bizarre field placing, awful long hop bowling, Kimber and Dunn should have been caught at least twice each but fielders weren’t on the rope or the edge of the ring, why he out Yates back on I have no idea. What did become clear was Pandya took over with a few overs to go, was very obviously in charge. But the death bowling was awful, they bowled for 10 overs like they were bowling at peak Viv. If they’d have bowled full straight and fast they’d have missed one or skyed one. I know I’ve been banging this drum a while; but it feels once again that it’s the bowling that’s the weakness and letting the batting down.

What a lovely place to watch cricket. Was very glad I made the journey both for the location and the result. Just always seemed in control.
What was interesting today was just how upbeat and content the team was; you could see them joking with each other, very relaxed and enjoying playing. Very different from the atmosphere we’ve seen in the CC and T20.
It does make me wonder how much the overseas and new signings in all formats have destabilised the changing room. As this team was essentially the team that won the championship last year minus Hain and Briggs, and it showed. They were top class in every facet.

Perhaps some of the signings, new personalities, T20 prioritisation and behind the scenes issues have had a much bigger on field effect than we realised (as well as seeing 3 big name players leave this year).

Interesting that OHD played no part against Cheshire, I thought he might want a white ball run out after being part of the T20 outcast group.

I hope he gets to play a bit and they rotate him, Miles and Norwell, so the likes of Garrett, Simmons and Johal get plenty of overs, and the senior players are managed for September.

Also, I know it was only Cheshire, but watching Burgess’ innings highlights on Twitter today and knowing his championship form, it makes his exclusion from the T20 side even more confusing.

Interesting last sentence there. Rumour is Burgess won’t keep all, or potentially any of the RL matches. He’s apparently been nursing an injury the last few rounds of the championship. Which is why the club has signed both young keepers. Burgess apparently wants to play but the club would rather not risk him, and if needs be fully rest him for the championship. It’s supposedly some sort of leg injury, and he was seen at the oval in deep conversation with the physio, and tape around his lower leg.

The other apparent undisclosed injury issue is Rhodes’ back. He’s had an ongoing problem he’s been managing this year, and is why his bowling has been off and far less overs than last year.

Who do we think actually plays? I can’t see OHD playing more than a couple. Doubt Norwell plays at all.
I suspect Maddy has been signed so Burgess can rest and won’t play every game. Expect Rhodes and Sibley will be given time off too.

Hope to see plenty of Johal, Simmons, Garrett, Brookes, and maybe a chance for Khan too. It’d a shame Bethell is just going to be carrying drinks in the hundred rather than getting actual white ball match experience.

To me it seems more of a case of missed opportunities with bat and ball. When the bowlers have stepped up like against Kent, the batting didn’t take advantage. Or when the batsmen have put good scores on the board, the bowling has repeatedly let sides off the hook.

For me though I still think the bowling is the bigger issue, it’s the best way to put pressure on teams, and we don’t do that enough. You have to take 20 wickets to win, and this bowling line up can’t take 20 cheaply enough. There’s limited wicket threat and as shown against Surrey, there’s barely any control in terms of economy too.

I think the time for big changes has gone. If that was going to happen it would have been before the Kent or Surrey matches.
I hope they bring in a big name overseas bowler for McAndrew. Bring Lamb back in for Wheal, and make them all fix the mess they’ve got themselves in.
You ditch the likes of Davies or Briggs now, you probably destabilise the team more than they already have with the way they’ve disrupted the squad and the great attitude from last season.

That is sickening. When you get beaten it always stings. But when it goes like that, it really feels gut wrenching.
Surrey batted well second innings and they did a really professional job on a pretty batting friendly deck at the end. But that position was manufactured by 2 pieces of horrendous umpiring that entirely changed the game. You take out the highest run scorer who’s set and looking comfortable. Then the second highest run scorer who’s just stroked 2 to the boundary.

It’s not all down to 2 decisions, but due to the timing and the players involved. Those 2 decisions have a much bigger impact than if those were given on the morning of day 1.