Notts have missed out on another bowling point but Leicestershire are 9 down so will be following-on anytime soon. If it's a draw they will go 1 point above us.

But would the same thing apply if you go into a game with an injury?

Leicestershire need 86 to avoid the follow on and if they do, it all depends on how many behind they finish (If indeed they do) and how many overs are left for Notts to force a win. Will Notts feel confident that they will set a total which isn't huge or will they eye up the 8 draw points, I think they won't want to lose 8 points and lose just to get 8 more for a win. Depending on how many wickets they get in the next 22 overs, Notts could be level with us if they draw.

All out, only 38 overs bowled, no bowler can be knackered so get them in again. Massive lead.

Good, we are starting, come on lads get stuck in and let's win this.

If Hampshire are bowled out before lunch as I expect they will be, we will not have bowled that many overs so the bowlers will hardly be knackered. It's not just rain but bad light to take into account, bowl again and I would be surprised if they bat out the day with Suthar ready to twirl.

Brilliant plan to get out for less than 400, so we can get them in for a burst of wickets. Yessssssssssssss!

As the commentators have said, Hampshire are in need of a win or two and maybe they might just try and set up something if the game drifts a bit tomorrow and be happy to chase some sort of target to try and get a win.

If there is turn there, I fancy our in form Indian spinner to get a few, wouldn't it be great if he could have a massive game where he is unplayable and 'fills his boots'.

Yes 400 would be nice and then we hope Hampshire have one of their awful batting days which in the CC, has happened quite a few times in the last 2 seasons. COYB

Typical that Somerset are moving on in their game and like so many have said on here, the rain will maybe decide the title and it could be won by the side who get as much play in as possible. We actually have a good start here but have been stopped at a time in the season where years ago, this would be the last game of the season. Batting at this time is difficult so if you are bowling first and bowl a side out, you can bat and try and maybe not try and get a huge lead because of the time element but if you bat first, you are then in a situation as to either try and bat a side out of the game but leave yourselves with less time to bowl them out twice or pull out early to buy yourself a few overs. That is the stupidity of playing CC cricket right into the end of September.

Obvious that the side winning the toss would bowl but we did the same to Notts and they managed to fight through it so we need our batsmen to just bat time if they can and we have the bowling to win it if we get some runs.

I don't agree about the 'In Name Only' bit of a title challenge, strange things happen towards the end of a season and it takes 2 rain-affected draws whilst a side can pick up a win and a high points draw and it all changes. Had the Notts game gone into another day, the scenario would be different from both sides and it doesn't mean we would have been bowled out for 185, exactly the same thing cannot happen in different circumstances and if we had been given the weather we had 2 weeks ago and 4 good days, we might have batted having won the toss and made a good score, thus changing the whole game. 'Up there' is better than the opposite way round and as long as we keep pace with the other 2 sides, there is always a chance.

It does sound all a bit dodgy if the umpires decide what is a cynical declaration, do you have to be 8 down? What if we'd got to 176-5, would that be bad sportsmanship, it's all a matter of opinion.

Just looked on the BBC site and so many posters are saying the same thing about the lack of a declaration. Brainless.

Total tosh, Notts did so against us in 2012 at Edgbaston, as soon as they avoided the follow-on, they declared, as far as I know, there are no reasons for you not to declare when you want to after avoiding a follow on, Hampshire did it as far back as 1965 and it handed Worcestershire the game and the championship. I would like an explanation if anyone has one but it is bloody stupid if we have missed a trick to deny Notts a bonus point

Hopefully we can get the 13 runs needed without any further loss and declare rather than give them a chance for a 3rd bowling point.

Gloucester used to do a dirty little trick that New South Wales used to do. After a batsman had hit the ball into the outfield, the fielder would chuck it in from such an angle that the batsman had to step out of his crease to avoid being hit, Russell then took the ball and ran out the batsman. I saw them get Darren Lehmann out this way when they played Yorkshire. It's a filthy bit of bad sportsmanship and they were not above it at all.

BosworthBear wrote:

paulbear wrote:

We could only get batting points by getting to 250, that will take forever so Notts sacrificed trying to get another 25 runs for another batting point and deny us another bowling point so that they hope to get a few wickets for bowling points.

So should we declare if we lose another wicket?

Notts could ask us to follow on, if you declare short of the follow-on margin, there has to be an agreement by the other captain that you can declare short of the 176 we need to avoid the follow-on.

We could only get batting points by getting to 250, that will take forever so Notts sacrificed trying to get another 25 runs for another batting point and deny us another bowling point so that they hope to get a few wickets for bowling points.