Exiled Bear wrote:

What a joke. Yates, Briggs and Norwell all got shocking decisions that have cost us that game, and probably any chance of the title.

Hain and Burgess also both seemed to be very unhappy about caught behind decisions in this match.

I’d definitely say that Bresnan would have been significantly more helpful than Holder in that match too.
Someone mentioned passengers above, it’s considerably alarming that all season in the championship, that our overseas players have been passengers. That is the exact opposite of their purpose. Farbrace needs to have a serious look at himself and his ability to attract top overseas talent.

His contract runs until the end of 2022.
If memory serves, he had a good T20 last year which resulted in his selection for the hundred, and then he got picked in 1 or 2 overseas winter t20 or t10 franchise tournaments.
But this year he’s been nowhere. Injury obviously didn’t help, but it appears he’s severely out of form, probably low on confidence, as at the start of the season he was fighting for a place in the red ball side. Whereas now he’s found himself having fallen behind Mousley and Benjamin in the hierarchy, and probably even Bresnan in terms of who they’d bring in if a batsman in this team got injured.
With Davies arriving next year, Hose really becomes a white ball specialist, because even if Davies does keep, which I don’t think he will, I’d have Burgess in the side as a pure batsman ahead of Hose.

157 needed tomorrow with 8 wickets in hand.
I’d make Warwickshire favourites but need not to lose early wickets tomorrow. Hampshire haven’t threatened much since Abbas went off, they had the same issue as ourselves Dawson can be played risk free, just waiting for bad balls.

Which makes the way Sibley and Benjamin got out even more frustrating. The Benjamin dismissal especially was really not clever, only just in, close in sight. He needs to be smarter than that to succeed in first class cricket, all well and good scoring runs on a pitch like that Old Trafford one, but that’s twice in this match he’s thrown his wicket away with unnecessary poor shots.

The coaching is and has for a while been an issue. I wondered when they were all retained, if the backroom staff are essentially in a trial year, and if they perform then they'll stay. As Robinson can only do so much himself.
But I do know that a number of players have gone externally for coaching, Hose and Hain have gone externally for batting coaching in the past. I believe Burgess arranged for Michael Yates the ex-Hampshire keeper to be brought in to do some keeping sessions with him.
Plus I know the rumour around the local club circuit from those who know, is that there have been grumbles about Tony Frosts work ethic, and that he isn't particularly helpful or flexible in regards to players asking for him to come and work with them on days off, or before mandated training sessions.

Get to 150 needed with only 1 or 2 down by the close of play, and you'd make Warwickshire favourites. Lose more than that, and let Hampshire get their tails up, and it could be difficult.

Tayls79 wrote:

Sibley and Rhodes both have got better since they joined us. We do get a lot of academy bats graduate, find elite cricket too much, then get released, which is just life independent of coaching. But Pollock seemed to get established and then plateau or even get worse. I think we can bring on one batsmen a year with current resources, perhaps attention is more with Benjamin and perhaps Lamb this year.

Streetly_Bear wrote:

In recent years can anyone name a batsmen who has improved consistently?

In my time as a member, around 8 years, our batting unit has always been the weak link.

My question for that would be, when did we last have a really good batting overseas? I can't think of one for a while, and what I've always seen from not only Warwickshire but other clubs, is that it's hard to have a consistently good batting line-up without a really good overseas. Because the best domestic batsmen either get picked for England, the Lions and often move clubs.
If you don't have that, then you need consistent and experienced players in their prime who for whatever reason aren't involved with England. Because those more experienced players and the overseas provide great learning and performance opportunities for younger, talented players. Without them, it takes more time or even prevents, younger players meeting their potential and the standard required. The club need to give younger players the platform from which to perform, and I think in terms of batting, in both the senior player department and the coaching, I don't think many of those players have been helped.

It’s round about now that we need someone like Stone, and OHD available or had picked Bresnan.
Someone with express pace or just that experience and nouse to get through the tail and break a partnership.
Briggs is doing a great job but neither of these players need to play a shot at him or take a risk, because the bowling seems very unthreatening or uneconomical from the other end.

One thing I will say about Holder, other than he is yet another poor short term overseas choice, is that the ball he bowled that went for 4 byes, is possibly the most I’ve ever seen a ball swing after the stumps.
Pitched short, going comfortably down leg, and it swung so much it almost took out Yates at first slip. Burgess and the slips were just trying to work out what on earth happened. Was one of the weirder things I’ve seen in a match.

It’s a shame but realistically, with the emergence of Benjamin and the signing of Davies, he was going to struggle getting into the T20 side. At that point, it’s harsh to say, but why keep him around if he’d only ever compete to play on the 50 over comp?

At least Burgess and Hain fought. Tea came at the wrong time for them both, they were in and would have probably been better off just stay in out there.

I suspect Warwickshire know the only way they win this is by playing T20 style, which on this pitch is also the only way they can lose it.
Even if they smashed 200 in 25 overs. I don’t think the pitch would allow them to get 10 wickets quickly enough.
More valuable and realistic to get Sibley back in form, maybe if the chance presents itself give Rhodes some time to bat, then call it at tea and give themselves an extra sessions rest and get ready for the next one.

If Somerset get a fine for a pitch that does too much. This pitch should too. It’s turgid at best. Hard to get wickets on, hard to score runs on.
No way should you get to the end of day 3 without any rain, and still have 2 complete innings to go, but neither team has posted 400. Just makes for an incredibly dull match.

I thought Holder was ok but didn’t do anything special. Was a bit loose early on then tightened up.
There didn’t seem to be too much in it for the seamers after the batsmen established themselves. Much like Hain and Benjamin’s partnership.
Think Briggs could be really important over the next couple of days.

Wasn’t bad bowling by any means, but we didn’t seem to be able to threaten and be economical at the same time.

Though that was probably as bad as Miles has bowled all season. But everyone’ has a poor session every so often.

I’d put it this way. We lost the last 5 wickets for 49 runs. But Lamb and Burgess put on 50 together. No matter what the rate.
One of them gets out early and suddenly it’s 320 not 370. And equally it could have been less with a newer ball, and less overs under the bowlers belts.
The other thing is that 140 overs in the field is really mentally draining. If our bowlers bowl good lines, keep it tight, the batsmen will be really challenged to keep their concentration and not throw their wickets away.

I assume those attacking Lamb and Burgess would also attack them if they went for the third bonus point and got out.
Only time will tell, but after 2 quick wickets, and a relatively long tail, I’d rather miss the bonus point and go score 400. A big first innings score means a win is more likely. And those extra points for a win will be worth more than a single bonus point.
As I said time will tell, but it appears my definition of shameful differs to some in here. I might direct it towards some of our supporters who only seem interested in forecasting losses and criticising players at any opportunity.

About as good a day as anyone could have hoped for today. I severely doubt they’ll get back out. Lancashire look like they’ve had enough, and just want to hit the reset and try again tomorrow.
I assume they’ll try bat big, bat once, as they haven’t scored particularly quickly meaning getting 4 innings or max batting bonus points in the time will be difficult.

I actually think they’ll play Wood and Woakes.
Woakes will come in to bat 7 for Buttler, play as an all rounder.
Wood in for Curran.

Not sure how others feel, but from watching the stream. This feels like a century partnership that’s never been settled if that makes sense. Lancashire always seem close to getting a wicket. Plenty of plays and misses or edges to third man. But at the same time, some wonderful shots have been played.
In my mind it seems like one of those times you have to just take your luck and run with it. Because other days they’d be 4 or 5 down.

Seemed a very weird decision to bowl first. But the bigger issue for me is how can the club have not planned for this and had an overseas here for the Quarter Finals.
The overseas selection in the last couple of years has been very odd. Surely finding a player to be here all season isn’t impossible?