Mikkyk
Member
sheffield_blue wrote:
So is it the case that the top team goes straight to the semi final, and 2nd and 3rd play a quarter final? If this is the case we need to win and hope Leicester fail to win, and there is a winner of the Middlesex/Sussex game.
Assuming we win and there is a winner of the Middlexex/Sussex game, then all the Leicester result does is determine whether we play the QF at home or away? We qualify regardless I think.
Someone at the ground today said Burgess could be out for the season. Very anecdotal though so not sure how true.
No idea on Pandya
It's great to win with a 16, 16 and 17 year old.
Bowling was better but Garrett is still a major concern - I just don't think he's good enough, and sadly his fielding isn't up to much.
Hamza Sheikh had a great little knock though, and the catch was very good - was he definitely in play though?
Re Durham - they only have three players (maybe four) in the hundred by my reckoning, three playing for England, and are still that poor. Feel sorry for them.
Johal must be leaving, to not get in the team when the bowling has been so poor in the last couple of games.
I also wouldn't make the wholesale changes that have been suggested but my main concern is the same as yours Highveld, the bowling coaching - made especially more concerning when both H Brookes and Miles have had decent showings in the Hundred...
The scores we've conceded in this comp so far are:
264 v Gloucestershire
293 v Surrey
306 v Sussex
338 v Leicestershire
257 v Nottinghamshire in 34 over game
374 v Middlesex
That's too many runs for my liking. The T20 campaign was referenced above as well but that was built on batting not bowling.
My changes for next season would be:
- Shake up of bowling coaching
- Not automatically starting Davies in all formats when available
- Give young players more opportunity (sort of links in with above)
- Different approach with overseas players
- Change T20 name back to Warwickshire Bears
If you could 'only' make three changes for next season Measham, what would they be? (I've got a few more than three in mind!)
This could be a massive defeat.
Sounding like a broken record but the bowling was poor yet again, and far too much pressure on the batting as a result.
So many loose balls, and didn't make the most of the favourable conditions early on.
paulbear wrote:
Not sure why Rhodes put them in. Not always a successful ploy this season in any format we have played.
Commentator said in 7 List A matches at that ground, the team batting first has won 7 times.
Burgess gone off injured
GerryShedd wrote:
Preview here:
https://edgbaston.com/fixtures/first-xi/middlesex-vs-warwickshire-19-august-2022/#match-match-previews
No Pandya in the squad but I haven't seen any updates about the extent/nature of his injury.
Pretty strong side: Eskinazi, Robson, Stoneman, Yadav and... Pieter Malan
On paper a great signing
First '50 over' game i've managed this season and have to say it was very entertaining!
Some very encouraging batting performances (Sibley aside and i've made my feelings clear on him already) but still concerning issues with the bowling.
For long periods we don't seem to be able to stem the flow of runs or have real plans of attack (applies in all three comps). The crucial wicket was Patterson-White, which resulted from bowling to a plan: wide outside off stump to the bigger boundary. As a Notts fan I would be fuming with him though - absolutely no need to try and hit a six at that point and he'd massively got away with it the ball before. I think Notts win if he doesn't play that shot.
I'd have Sheikh in (good catch under pressure towards the end) for Sibley next game, push Smith up the order, and possibly rotate E Brookes out. Is Miles available or in The Hundred? I'd give Johal another go if the latter.
It's been mentioned before but the big issue seems to be coaching of the bowling - young bowlers stagnating/regressing and senior bowlers underperforming compared to last year. The only bowler having a better season than last is OHD, who was excellent again yesterday.
Great selection with Sibley again. Surely Shaikh has to play next game.
Rhodes 14 off 40 is a very poor return. I think this is a 300 bat first pitch. Hope to be proved wrong
Perhaps! And he's just got his second fifty in 22 so maybe i'll be made to eat my words.
Would love Yates to go on and get a hundred.
The third player who you would probably put in the same category is Lamb who can hopefully also recover earlier season form.
There is absolutely no way this is sustainable, no. And as it stands the obvious format to disappear is the 50 over (both at county and international).
I agree that would be a shame, and also an issue as The Hundred will not be sustainable as a format alongside T20 - it's too similar. I can't see how they can both run concurrently for a long period.
I'm disappointed that Sibley has been picked. He's leaving at the end of the season anyway and we know his white ball game isn't the best. Commentator just said one century in 22 games and no other scores above fifty.
What's the point when we have so many potential younger options? Really feel we've wasted a lot of the young talent this season.
Edit - didn't realise Mousley had been picked for The Hundred and thought we had just not selected him so maybe not as many options as I thought! But I'd have probably still picked another young bowler (Johal) as there are enough batsmen in this lineup.
I dread to think too. Our batting this season didn't really start off too great, and hasn't got any better at any point. Relied on one man performances in each innings where we've scored okay.
Highveld wrote:
Yet another poor performance by Davies, it must be wonderful to know you'll be selected for everygame regardless of how badly you perform.
Can only assume he's been given a decent contract and they feel like they can't not pick him as a result. Looking like a very poor piece of business so far.