One thing that does annoy me is when an Asian team is playing, is the use/mis-use of first names and last names in certain teams. There is no consistency in any of it. For instance in the past why was Waqar and Wasim used on scorecards instead of Akram and Younis. Today I have noticed on the Bangladesh card, Tanzid Hasan's full name used, his opening partner being named as just Das, Mehidy Hasan is called Mehidy, Mushfiqur Rahim is just Mushfiqur and so it goes on. I cannot understand why we have this confusion with what are full names, first names, last names and why there is no explanation unless someone on here is wise to this whole subject,

It seems to have escaped many but I get the feeling once we get to the crucial stages to see who gets to the semi-finals, it will gain more interest especially if England get to the last 4. Still think India will win it.

Despite Liam Dawson being top, still do not rate his bowling, I wouldn't expect him to run through sides like other spinners do/have done over the last few years. He does not send fear through counties unlike Patel/Harmer who over the last 10 years were 2 spinners who no one liked facing during any game situation. I would not expect Dawson to bowl a side out in a Test if he does get picked to go to India.

So that's it, another season gone. Not too bad a win/loss ration in all formats though the ability to not win knockout one-day games in very annoying, lots of hard work undone by one game.

If hard cash was on offer for a 3rd position, perhaps a few wives breathing down a few players' necks, saying "think what a few extra £'s could do..". That never hurts for getting things moving, or am I being sexist now.

Great partnership, Barnard is turning out to be a Diamond and Briggs is so good for a number 8.

Same old story again, letting a good position go. Good job it's not an important last game as we have had in the last 2 seasons.

Exiled Bear wrote:

Highveld wrote:

If the council had signed a contract to loan the money, they are legally obliged to honour the contract, or face legal action, and extensive costs, for breach of contract.

We can only hope that the voters of Birmingham remeber which party caused the severe financial mismanagement at the next local elections.

We can also hope that voters remember which party are the reason that local authorities across the country have no money to spend in the first place.
All parties are responsible but Birmingham city council getting into debt has been highlighted since the 1980's it's just now that it has gone too far but the whole council should have been investigated for years and proper auditors brought in to keep an eye on the books.

Always thought we would win as long as the rain/bad light didn't take too much time out of the game. Taking wickets in clumps of 2 or 3 really does help and we didn't get into a stupid panic situation whilst chasing. Miles this morning was hostile and effective, more of the same please Craig.

We might just need 7 overs to get that but we have to get out there first. Very dark, pity because we have played really well here.

What the ECB never realised was the trenchant support for certain territories in the UK when trying to convince us of this competition. Did they take into account that they would alienate certain Lancashire fans from supporting a side names 'Manchester'. There will be similar examples but it is ridiculous that there is not a single team to represent the West Country and if you consider the size of the crowds at Taunton in games when Somerset were already knocked out of the T20, what sort of crowds might they get if a WC Hundred side were introduced, full of Somerset/Glouc players. Perhaps if this competition had been introduces as a county competition, it might have meant a bit more to some but I get the feeling that trying to suddenly come up with new teams with 'City Names' put people off from the start in much the same way as the 'Birmingham Bears' change made some people throw their membership card at Colin Povey. I went with it on the basis that it was still Warwickshire but if we'd have bought in outsiders from other counties (It would never be allowed I know) I would never have started to watch it.

I would love 'The HunDread' to be played on the moon. The dusty surface would help no one but it might mean it would take forever to finish and would stop the rest of this format's competitions from ever starting.

So pleased for Leicestershire and especially Chris Wright. I always warmed to him as a good sound county pro who gave his all. I never took to Barker, always a bit miserable and never appeared to be a warm person although a terrific bowler. Why we ever let them go is beyond me. What a cracking last over Wright bowled, to give the 19 year-old rookie something to play with in that last over. A terrific team effort seeing as Leicestershire had just 5 bowlers and one of them was limping. One of the best comebacks ever in a final, 89-6 and you still end up winning, a ton at number 8, really! Hope that despite this not being at Lord's, people will talk about it like some of those great finals we saw in the past.

So even if the pitch is difficult to score from, this is a target that is more in our favour but yet again, the batting has carried on the way we have seen in the past month. Seems a long time ago when we were getting decent CC scores. Losing here would be a total embarrassment.

There was a certain confidence to his bowling around this time. His pace upped considerably and he swung the ball a lot more and as we all know, extra pace with swing will get you a hell of a lot more wickets. When we first drafted him in from Yorkshire, having seen him, I didn't think it was a good move. I did also wonder about our recruitment when we got Jeetan. Please can someone never recommend me to hunt for future Warwickshire players.

Weather caught me out, yesterday it looked awful so decided I probably wouldn't go. This mornings forecast was completely different but had already got into 'Not Going' mode. Good start though.

Wouldn't say the Surrey attack is up to much after the opening bowlers but we are making them look like 1950's Surrey here.

Well, a few of us questioned Rhodes' decision to bowl first and now a score of nearly 400 puts us under pressure. Even if we batted first and got 300,we would be in the game but the pressure our batsmen seem to feel in the face of a big score, has come back again. For whatever reason, Rhodes wanted to bowl first, it was wrong, even if he was looking further ahead in the game, if a pitch says 'Bat', then you bat and if it is The Oval, it is even more apparent.

A wife would never joke about something as important as cricket.

Cannot see any reason to bowl first. Even if the overhead condition are telling you to bowl and the pitch looks a little green, it doesn't always mean anything. We could be staring at 500+ tomorrow. Rhode4s did this at Taunton, not sure if it was last season but they made loads and we lost. Perhaps Rhodes has a touch of the 'Grant Elliott's', "we'll have a bowl" mentality.