Should be a draw from here. This is more or less the template of the last few years. A OK score batting relatively slowly does make us tough to beat though would have preferred a few more bonus points. With regard to selection, I don't really know what would improve things from here. Surely the point is a lot of decent bowlers are missing so we're down to the next best, drop any more and it's academy picks. I get the point with Bethell but all that does is make us stronger at 6/7/8 and adds another left arm spinner.

Thanks Reabank for the link. Unfortunately, it's a broken link, but I'm not surprised we're a bit up against it. When I was a kid I used to read our financial reports as accountancy practice so always find this interesting. What's our expenditure just now? I presume ground redevelopment still and problems from the pandemic. I guess our incomes are still fairly decent.

And agree that Davies as a permanent batting signing was the priority. Now it turns to a change-up seam bowler.

Reabank wrote:

Yes I think lack of money was why we didn't join the Pakistani bowler chase. I have Warwickshire dead last in my county financial rankings (see below). Also signing Davies from Lancashire probably used up quite a bit of budget and left us rummaging through the bargain bin when it came to overseas four day players. And it's only one bad day, McAndrew may look like an inspired decision by the end of the season.

http://sideoncricket.blogspot.com/2022/04/bentley-forbes-consulting-rankings-2020.html

Yeah. It's hard to think much further than money to be honest. Weirdly, bowling is now our issue and especially if Stone and Woakes are missing. The rest of the attack is right arm and not express so a left arm quick would have been great - this was obvious from the end of last year. Shaheen Afridi was available and keen on the UK - but ot looks like we could never get near him.

BristolBear wrote:

On McAndrew I believe he arrived at Edgbaston on the second day of the Essex match. So in the country just under a week.

I thought he was supposed to be a bit quicker, bowl a heavy ball, get some bounce, a bit like Norwell. But we’ll see how he pans out.

What doesn’t change is that in terms of available players, no way do I believe that he was the best possible bowler the club could acquire for the overseas position. I listed the calibre of players in an earlier comment, so I’d love to know want Farbrace was doing when all those other bowlers were signing deals elsewhere.

Ha! I do like the John Robinson example. I come clean as a Communications and Media manager - but agree you always need to understand the business well in whatever business you are in. Easier if you love the game in this situation.

GerryShedd wrote:

I, too, can't see the political correctness angle.
But I do think it would be difficult to imagine someone doing the job with the necessary commitment and enthusiasm if they didn't have a love of cricket.
The nearest equivalent I can think of is John Robinson, who was Bishop of Woolwich in the 1960s even though he didn't believe in God.

To be honest mate, I think it's more likely they're looking for someone with communication skills and experience dealing with the media than someone who's 'politically correct'. What do you mean by that in this context anyhow?

Highveld wrote:

It is concerning that "A love of cricket and knowledge of sports media useful, but not essential."
Sadly it seems being "politically correct" is considered more important than ability to do the job.

I'd guess it's unlikely. You wouldn't want to encourage him to come back if he was actually concussed. As Gerry says, a fair deal. And how good was that wicket at the death? Wonder how Laurence will go. A yone know his status?

DOM SIBLEY SIX CLAXON!!!!

I think that makes the most sense and would be what I would go for. Will they be tempted by Benjamin over Bresnan? That's the only tweak I could consider ...

Andy wrote:

Sibley
Rhodes
Yates
Hain
Lamb
Burgess
Woakes
Bresnan
Briggs
Miles
Norwell

My interpretation of this is George can get a far more impressive portfolio while not shackled to Cricinfo. He's outgrown it basically. I know freelancers who write the match reports on there, it's not a huge amount of cash. Good luck to him, I've noticed he's very responsive on twitter so I think we won't be hearing any less from him.

Some changes to that team from the squad with some coming from outside the squad. Few covid changes perhaps?

There's no way England can say he needs to be rested!

In this case, I think Woakes needs to play, but I think more generally there is a problem with the England multi-format players. He's in a worse place but Ben Stokes has been in similar place to Woakes this year: played and hasn't played, got injured, rushed back all against a background of travel and family turmoil and he's cracked. I read a piece in the Standard on Wednesday the Stokes is nowhere near a return yet, suggests a bigger problem than first thought.

As you say though, Root vs Woakes would be a nice little test for them both at the end of the season.

Is anyone watching? Have batting conditions got easier like it was suggested it would do?

Not really any great insight from me on the game, but two wider points: did we ever have realistic goals of winning the county championship? I don't think we did. Personnel I'm happy we have snapped the poor form of 2020 and am happy there is a better set of coaches and perhaps players in place.

Secondly, and this point was mainly brought on by the test match yesterday, is we need to learn how to win some key moments. Do it when it matters. Hants have done this now, but we always seem to fold when we really need to perform. This might be a result if being a relatively new team or it might be lack if confidence. We could get this instinct.

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.

Annoyance is the first emotion that comes to mind with this news. Shame to let someone of his entertainment value go, but I can't make an argument in runs scored for his retention. I guess my annoyance is that for all his apparent skills he hasn't really improved and I think this is the clubs coaching fault. England had the same problem with Jason Roy at one stage (ie asked to score so quickly they are more susceptible to loss of form) but they managed to still improve him overall.

I don't think they were ever going to go for it and I think that is fine. A loss is worse than a draw. At some point in this teams evolution I think they need to be a bit more positive than this though. Lancs have scored a little quicker and that might have made a difference had Warwickshire done the same over both innings. For now I'm just happy they have played better than in 2020, a full winter with a more settled set up they should get better still.

Well documented that bonus points don't determine the destination of the pennant so I'm minded to agree with those who said slowing up was the correct thing to do. What you can't prove, at least easily, with data is whether bedding in gives the initiative to the opposition and allows them to regroup, allows them to gain confidence. As I type 340/7 so it was no guarantee that a blockathon would deliver a 400 score. Its not as simple as saying bat slowly = less chance of losing wickets.

Yah. He and Norwell in the wickets against what looks like Worcester's first team. Good news for the business end of the season.

The_Lickey_Banker wrote:

Playing today for the Seconds, in the 4 day game at New Road.

Reply to Paul-bear, white-lightning and Andy

I think that is a good point about the central contracts having a perverse effect for Woaksy. Especially this time around where it seems the bruised heel was from playing after a long period of not playing. That NZ tour was totally absurd, remember that. You do have to remember with these contracts though he is the ECBs employee, not the Bears. If you aggregate it all up though, is it so far from equilibrium? He hasn't been playing that much and he has a chronic knee injury. These facts are linked.

In far better and less controversial news, however, the club posted a gif of him bowling in the nets. Might be ready for the Kent QF after all.

Good update, would have missed that. Cheers.

I stirred the pot a bit there but didn't offer an opinion of my own. I don't think we can blame England at this point (though definitely in the past). Have to remember Woaksy is now a 32 year old with dodgy knees. It seems, on the face of public statements, he was being managed because of this and an extremely unlucky run of not playing then got a stress injury, bruised heel.

I think he and his team will have to work hard to manage a few more years of his career, and unfortunately I think that will see a fair bit of franchise cricket and less with the bears. I think he loves the club and wants to do more for us. But might not be as simple as that.

GerryShedd wrote:

Chris Woakes update - Chris Silverwood hasn't a clue.
According to Cricinfo, "Woakes also remains a doubt for Headingley after sustaining a foot injury prior to the series, with Silverwood admitting he "didn't have an answer" about his prospects of a return."

The time is ripe for more idle Woaksy predictions. T20 quarter final? There's not much more for him to play on this year, I can't see him going straight into the test squad.