Andy wrote:

Think Saturday night is a good time to play, Saturday afternoons are for club cricket!

But club cricket would finish too late to go on to watch the game so I can't see the advantage.

GerryShedd wrote:

A quick return to action today.
I will be interested to see the crowd size today compared with last Saturday when there was a really good crowd. I'm all in favour of encouraging women's cricket and back-to-back women's and men's games seems like a good idea. But whether playing a Bears match on a Saturday evening rather than in the afternoon will work is another matter.
I'm probably biased because I don't want to face an almost two hour journey home late at night so am put off attending.

You could always stay overnight at the Hyatt....................ha ha

I just do not understand why Mo was given the captaincy. Davies has obviously done a good job and he knows all the players. Mo arrives and is in charge without having seen anyone play which explains why 7 bowlers were used.

white-lightning wrote:

Bears 43/4 in the powerplay. Some poor shot selections so far. Moeen out cheaply along with Sam Hain. This isn't good at all. Why was Yates dropped after that great knock against Northants??

Obviously to make room for Ali.

59 scored off the last 4 overs may cost us. 27 off Brookes' last over ouch. They scored a boundary off virtually every over so hopefully we can do the same.

Cameraman trying too hard and moving the camera too quickly causing the blur. But hey it's free and at least the score is up to date instead of being a ball behind like at Edgbaston!!

Rather unfair dropping Yates, I feel. Now overloaded with spin

Mikkyk wrote:

I'm really not sure who drops out for Moeen, it has to be a spinner but Briggs and Lintott have both regained form last couple of games, and if you take Mousley out you lose his batting.

If you take Brookes or Barnard out you only have two seamers.

I think it might be Barnard.

Like I said before - if it ain't broke etc - so glad it's not my decision !

With the success the team is having should he just walk in to the side? I am a believer in the saying if it ain't broke don't fix it!!

GerryShedd wrote:

Every time I have a pessimistic thought about the Bears, I put a £1 coin in a jar.
It's currently half empty.

Later on when you are feeling optimistic that jar look half full!!

Don't you just love optimistic pessimists!!!

What stunning catches !!!! Who would have bet on the "best team" being bowled out for less than a ton.

Bosworth Bear you have just used a word quoted by the chairman of the ECB which is probably the most compelling reason to return to Warwickshire Bears. That word is "BRAND". Warwickshire is a brand with history and explains why kids from across Birmingham will chant it.

Birmingham as a city is so different to Manchester and Leeds/Sheffield in that several counties converge there - Worcestershire, Staffs, Warks. but then they did when the club was established.

mad wrote:

realcounties.org.uk

I'm sure you'll be aware of this campaign bosworth. It is interesting the way county identity has slipped in the much of the UK in a way that hasn't been the case in for example Ireland. Ireland has done a better job of retaining county identities in the contemporary age where in Britain people are far more likely to identify with their city or town. Britain being more of an urban metropolitan country these days with vast suburbs housing two thirds of the population. Similar to the USA and Australia post 1950's prior to which even in America there was far clearer distinction between town and country

Interesting point of view. However, the problem is we have a cricket club called Warwickshire putting out a team called Birmingham. Perhaps what is needed is for one or two teams to change their name. Warwickshire becomes Greater Birmingham and likewise Lancashire becomes Greater Manchester. Surrey could become South London, Middlesex North London.

BosworthBear wrote:

LeicesterExile wrote:

Wasn't it done to satisfy the city council being as they provided a large sum for the ground improvements. They wanted WCCC to promote the name of Birmingham.

Publicly the city council stated they weren’t pressuring the Club. In the days when Brian Halford could speak his mind in the Evening Mail.

But even if privately it was true they now have the Birmingham Phoenix.

This is such an easy PR and marketing win for WCCC to revert back to playing as Warwickshire Bears!

Totally agree - When you look down the fixture list Birmingham amongst all the counties looks a little daft. And you never hear the young 'uns chanting Birmingham la lal la !!

Wasn't it done to satisfy the city council being as they provided a large sum for the ground improvements. They wanted WCCC to promote the name of Birmingham.

Hain again. Steadied the ship and then led the way

Sad news but let's hope he can beat it.

I thought we were never going to break their 8th wicket partnership and then for a brief moment could see us failing to get the 100 runs. I agree about Davies' shot - it was the type you play last ball of a T20 needing 6 to win. But let's not be too critical as a team we have had a great start to the season. When you look back at the comments made before the start of the season on this forum I am not sure anyone predicted this. In fact without looking back I am sure avoiding relegation was an aim mentioned!!!

More than fun it's taken us to a lead of over 100 - so important. And as bowlers they avoided getting tired by scoring boundaries instead of running too many singles!!

Briggs dimissal looks a shocker - replay seems to show the ball would have gone 2 feet above the stumps. Burgess before didn't look happy either

paulbear wrote:

Could have done without losing 2 wickets overnight but a chance for the skipper to get a few. 300 would be nice but I would be happy with 250.

It would be great if the skipper was that successful - if Hain is as successful we will declare at 500 before close of play!!!