ANY SIGN OF TOMORROW'S SQUAD?

an almost perfect 1st session, shame about the last ball before lunch

Well, that is some start. Ryan Patel has certainly justified his selection. Since that one-day game at Guildford last year he seems to be a completely different player, a world away from the one who could not get the ball off the square. The down-side, of course, is that he is bound to be snapped up for The Hundred. If you had said that this time last year we'd all have laughed.

Five years ago today, 7 April 2017,  the first day of the season under peerless blue skies, though considerably warmer. Surrey v Warwickshire at The Oval. Burns and Stoneman batted through the first session and put on 154 for the first wicket. We won that game by an innings, thanks to a six-wicket haul by Footitt in the first innings and four by Tom Curran in the second. Gareth Batty played, and while he only took one wicket his 20 overs, costing just 33 runs, allowed the seamers valuable respite. I do hope the lack of a spinner, or only playing four front-line bowlers, doesn't come back to haunt us here. We should have backed our five specialist batsmen (plus Foakes), rather than picked an extra one.

I was thinking before the game about that spell from Footitt in the first innings where he tore through them. Shame his career panned out the way it did...

Batsmen have been caught by fielders since Cricket began.Why then do commentators,almost every time it happens,say "He can't believe it." ??????????????????

come on lads, dont ruin a good 1st session

For those that were paying attention, Ryan Patel came into the side last season against Gloucestershire at the Oval and scored an assertive 62 including 10 fours. It was clear on that day he’d made some tweaks and was noticeably more aggressive. This contributed to the Guildford innings but that certainly wasn’t the start. He’s improving and well worth his place. It’s a shame he couldn’t go on today.

Eurgh

Think I'm torn between saying that was a good day or an average one. Burns dismissal in that manner was just poor, Patel's not much better but I will give some leeway with the way he was taking them on. Can't say Amla looked settled at all, hopefully just a rare off day.

Alex! wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkemRUwjJ3E

Alex - you're a good man, many thanks. This entitles you to a few jinxes this season.

Anyway, as for the game itself - Pope gone for 50 odd. Skittled by Hannon-Dalby who has bowled well this morning. Credit as well to former Surrey keeper Mike Burgess who was standing up to the lanky seamer at the time and allowing Pope no opportunity to bat out of his crease.

Do we want a result or are we happy with a draw?

I can understand not giving wickets away cheaply but surely they could have tried to get 350 within the overs.
it should be difficult to lose the match from this position but it is Surrey!

So the first big mistake of Batty's tenure looks assured now.

We went with no spinners (many of us said this was a mistake prior to the game)...yet between Briggs and Yates they've bowled 33.3 overs 4 for 68. A run rate of 2. Meanwhile 3 of there seamers have gone for 0-83 in 21-0-84 in 25 and 0-46 in 9. Only Hannon-Dalby 4-65 in 27 has bucked the trend.

I think we need to let Surrey have a bowl before we start throwing too many toys out of the pram.

A couple of Warks' wickets tonight and we'll be in a useful position.

The batting department has done its bit, thanks especially to Foakes and a handy contribution from Jordan Clark. To be honest, I didn't doubt that they would. A score of 350-plus batting first should always give you an excellent chance of a win, unless it is a complete road which I doubt applies here. Whether we win or draw the match from here will determine whether going in with just four bowlers and no specialist spinners was the right option or unduly cautious. In my experience, picking the extra batsman is always a defensive strategy that is justified under very limited circumstances (eg when you're 1 up in a test series with 1 to play). Unless you are blessed with four destructive bowlers like the West Indies pace quartet of the 80s or a spinner of the quality of the late great Shane Warne who can bowl 30-plus overs a day effectively under all circumstances, selecting five bowlers gives you a significantly better chance of winning.

Ben Foakes you beauty!

We've put 400 up?! Pinch me

Still not sure we've got the bowling power to take 20 wickets

What a start from Topley!

I’m just wondering whether Jacks has leapfrogged Virdi and Moriarty to be first choice spinner?

(At least they played the extra batter rather than 5 seamers which makes no spinner somewhat understandable, even if I disagree with it.)

I have seen no evidence that Jacks is in the same league as either Virdi or Moriarty as a spin bowler in four-day cricket.

Gareth Barry may, of course, have been working with him throughout the winter....if his bowling has been transformed
I would be delighted to be proved wrong, but I remember we had high hopes for Scott Borthwick's development that pre-season we were told Shane Warne had been coaching him...

I just want this to be a summer where we bask in the glory of Moriarty...

If Batty has been able to turn Jacks into a front line spinner during the short period where he wasn’t off playing T10/20 cricket during the winter then he should be given the head coach’s job for life! Hopefully it doesn’t hurt us in this match but I’d always want one front line spinner playing…that said, we’ll probably play both at the Oval.

https://youtu.be/TfY4A39SgrY
I really wish Roach was available for more than 5 games

The lady (i don't know her name) commentator informed us yesterday...................

"That takes Ben Foakes past 41,000 runs for Surrey"
and
"I think Surrey will go past 400"  -  they were 399 with 18 odd overs left at the time.

Church continues to annoy.

Alex! wrote:https://youtu.be/TfY4A39SgrY
I really wish Roach was available for more than 5 games

Thanks for the links Alex. With regard to Roach lets hope we make full use of his 5 games with us. So no dead wickets at the Oval.
this game must be an example of county cricket not being good enough. the county champions facing a top class international seam bowler.