I left at 3, not a big fan of watching my teams being 'Milked' about but nice that I didn't have to have my coat on. The catches dropped, have been disappointing as has watching one go past the only slip we had, before lunch, not sure why just one slip when we needed wickets. Another batting strip that never changed throughout the 4 days, hope we have some with a bit more in them for the rest of the season.

I am not hoping they score 100-2 during the first session, just pointing out that they would be in a vulnerable position. Their tail is quite long if Foakes doesn't fire again. I still think we are slight favourites.

I told myself I would be happy with 3 wickets tonight seeing as it is still a good pitch and even if they score 100-2 in the first session tomorrow, that is still only 50 odd ahead with half the side out. A really good lead and I hope this situation isn't too much for our bowlers even though they should be fresh but they won't be 100% match-fit just yet. A good day though and yes, bloody cold, more layers tomorrow I think, come on lads let's get off to the best start ever, v Surrey with a max points win.

A constant 4 per over from start to finish which was good considering we all sounded a bit nervous yesterday about the mornings batting but none of our batsmen ever really looked uncomfortable and to be honest, Surrey's bowling looked very ordinary. I have noticed over the last 4 seasons that they don't have many 5-wicket hauls from their bowlers, they appear to share all the wickets out whereby everyone takes a few here and there but today that wasn't the case. I thought everyone batted superbly. What was a surprise was keeping Lawrence on for so long with his very simple 'Milk-It-Around' bowling which just fed us runs whilst he never looked like doing much damage and even his wicket was just a giveaway. Hopefully, at some stage tomorrow we will have a big lead and time to have a go at them for a decent amount of time in their 2nd innings. A good day but bloody hell, that wind was strong and I am not talking about my own personal habits by the way.

If there is one thing to take from today, it is that Foakes got those runs by playing himself in unlike the numpties who went to Australia. If anything, this should hopefully get him into the Test side as playing in the way he does was probably why McCullum didn't want him in the side. If anyone wants to really get a good take on what McCullum is really like, read Andy Moles' book, his time as New Zealand coach was interesting and paints a really poor picture of what an arrogant bighead 'Baz' was/is.

It's all going wrong and from 65-6, Surrey will feel so good about this. We have served up a few pies and could still be in the field first thing tomorrow. Quite glad I didn't go.

'The Wizard', he's here, he's ours and no one can take him away from us.

Cold everywhere I think and that's why I didn't go, the weather looked poor on the forecast and I have hurt my back, too many weights on Wednesday and then a 4 mile run yesterday when still in a bit of pain. Will go tomorrow though, my gloves, Beanie (A 'Murphy's' one free with a pack of 4 cans) thick coat and flask are at the ready. A great start and seamers who have been relentless all morning.

My point is why pick a batsman (He can't be classed as an allrounder) who averages 10 runs per innings fewer than Malik and who has 10 first-class wickets in 44 games. If Webster can bowl off-spin and Yates bowled well last season, they could be a better bet. I just hope that Malik doesn't feel as though he's been let-down by his exclusion.

Mousley might have played ODI's but is not anywhere being in England's best XI and very rarely bowls in CC matches. He also doesn't spin it much, it's more medium pace.

I can't see that Thompson should get in just because he is new to the side after Booth was often our best bowler in certain games last season. Mousley instead of Malik is insane, did Malik's progress last season not deserve a place above a batsman who hasn't made a CC century and constantly gives his wicket away through poor shot selection a good way to make a player disillusioned before a ball has been bowled of a new new season.

I have heard that Webster bowls spin but not sure how good he is. If there isn't a front-line spinner then I would go with:
1 Yates
2 Davies
3 Hain
4 Malik
5 Webster
6 Barnard
7 Woakes
8 Smith
9 Booth
10 Bamber
11 Gilchrist
It might be that Smith won't play in which case maybe a surprise Lintott inclusion rather than yet another seam option but if Smith doesn't play then Mousley would probably get picked.

It looks very seamer-heavy with Webster, Barnard, Woakes and Booth who can all bat. If you include Smith then you perhaps leave out a bowler. I would like to see Booth play as he was really improving last season. It could mean we have Webster, Barnard, Woakes, Booth, Gilchrist and Bamber as seamers. If Smith plays, I would put him at 8 and have Woakes at 7, after all, he has a Test century and I cannot see why his talent can't see him up the order as Smith's time will come anyway. I would leave out Lintott, Thompson and Mousley from the 14 announced. There is still loads of batting and bowling there. I really am not sure why Lintott is the only spinning option.

I wonder if there will be a host of vacancies as far as the England team is concerned. There should be, I feel very sorry for anyone who has spent money to go over there.

I remember his debut v Somerset in 2002 as I saw plenty of the game as I worked nearby and could usually get the last session in. He took wickets and scored some runs. I also recall him having a spat with Stuart McGill, the Notts overseas player in a 2002 Sunday League game, they were at each other all game. We had strong batting, only Mo sheikh of our 11, not having scored a first-class 100, and in Notts futile chase of 239 to win, Wagg got McGill out and really let him know he enjoyed it. Good days.

Yes, I do think that for much of his time in the job, Rob Key has come across as a bit of a knobhead who used to come out with lots of crap whilst he was Kent captain. He once decided to bat first in September in a 50-over final and then blamed his batsmen when they didn't make enough runs after the ball moved around in its usual manor at that time of the year. He has been accused before of coming out with crap instead of thinking about what he should be saying before the mouth opens. He epitomises the McCullum/Stokes/Key way of doing things which is to not learn from any mistakes, say whatever you like and ignore any criticism as you are too arrogant to think that someone else might be right. His comments were almost dismissive and Woakes should not have been playing in that last Test being the oldest Bowler and having played the first 4 but younger players were rested which makes me wonder if they were considering not taking him to Australia anyway. There is an arrogance about those 3 and it will be interesting to see what is made of it in The Cricketer magazine when it is out.

121 first-class wickets in 51 games, Mitchell Santner has 139 in 68 games but his one-day record means he still plays but it just goes to show what priorities some clubs have, I don't see other spinners at Derbyshire actually causing any havoc lately.

Yes, that sodding tree. Maybe that is why Kent, supposedly one of the original 'Big 6', never had a Test ground because who wants to see a Test where a scorching shot doesn't get to the boundary because of some huge lump of wood on the actual playing area.

I delved into the book on Frank Foster by Robert Brooke, where he made a similar point, that we were not good enough to play Kent who then complained about us winning the title. Also I also saw on Wikipedia that a particular dry Summer in 1911 left the pitches very hard which helped our fast bowling attack, so something that we or no other human has any control over, was responsible for our 1911 CC title. The whole structure of allowing a side to play as many times as they liked as long as they played a certain minimum amount of games, was brainless anyway so should have been blamed as well as Kent's snobbishness, which backfired. It is now quite funny that we have won the CC more times than them and the same amount of one-day titles though most of theirs were in the 1970's. So go and ++++ off Kent.

Will be good if we could see him for a couple of years, he missed so many games for us over the years because he would get called up by England then omitted from the team and left to stand around not getting a game for weeks. We now have enough bowlers to be able to rotate them seeing as they appear to think they play too much. Woakes, Bamber, Booth, OHD, Thompson, Gilchrist, Barnard should give us plenty of options. Bring on 2026.