Gloucester away

https://www.kiaoval.com/virdi-atkinson-worrall-and-de-grandhomme-named-for-bristol-trip/

4 additions to the squad

Worrall, CDG, Virdi & Atkinson in for Taylor, Steel & Smith

It's a strong squad, and I'm pleased to see Worrall and CDG adding reinforcements to our bowling attack, as well as Virdi included for the first time. Having said that, my recollection is that Bristol is among the least spin-friendly grounds in the country, so I would be tempted to pick an all-seam attack (with Jacks's occasional spin as back-up) and bring Virdi in at The Oval next week. I understand that they are paranoid about bowlers breaking down at the moment, but as far as Topley is concerned we can't keep playing him 'one-on, one-off'. If he is bowling well and there are others sharing the workload he needs to keep playing regularly.

My team: Burns, Patel, Amla, Pope, Jacks, Foakes, De Grandhomme, Clark, Overton, Worrall, Topley

Gloucester have an overseas spinner so it would be odd not to expect some spin.

I assume it'll be something along the lines of Burns, Patel, Amla, Pope, Foakes, CDG, Jacks, Curran, Clark, Overton, Worrall

On paper, the runs shouldn't be an issue at all. I do worry about taking 20 wickets this time, from the little I've seen in Glos' games so far they've shown some stubborn resistance in trying to save games, and came mightily close to holding off against a very, very good Lancs bowling attack

If Curran can't do more than 15 overs inside 4 days I'd still give him the boot despite his batting heroics last week, probably for one of Virdi or Topley. Smith not being in the squad is mightily disappointing...

I read a quote from Azhar saying as Sam batted for 3 hours we didn’t want to risk him bowling the final 5 overs of his generous allocation in the second innings. I would guess that he is replaced by CdG for this game and Worrall comes in for Clark, who probably needs a rest.

From this distance the evening before a match, we can never be sure of the eleven. What's the track going to be like? Will Topley stub his toe getting out of bed? Etc, etc.

However, unless the ECB impose new and even more ridiculous restrictions, I find it hard to visualise Sam being left out. He scored more runs than any other Surrey player against Somerset. That should be sufficient to see him picked as a batsman alone.

I'm not so sure as some of you folks that Worrall will play tomorrow. I wouldn't be amazed if he has to wait a bit longer to make his Surrey debut and joins Atkinson and Jacks on drinks duties.

guildfordbat wrote:From this distance the evening before a match, we can never be sure of the eleven. What's the track going to be like? Will Topley stub his toe getting out of bed? Etc, etc.

However, unless the ECB impose new and even more ridiculous restrictions, I find it hard to visualise Sam being left out. He scored more runs than any other Surrey player against Somerset. That should be sufficient to see him picked as a batsman alone.

I'm not so sure as some of you folks that Worrall will play tomorrow. I wouldn't be amazed if he has to wait a bit longer to make his Surrey debut and joins Atkinson and Jacks on drinks duties.

Hi GB, should be an interesting XI announcement in a few hours. I’ll be taking a close look to see whether your suggestion of Jacks missing out materialises. In the cricinfo article Alex shared on a separate thread, Batty was typically bullish on Jacks being the first choice spinner on merit (I’m not sure how a previously part-time red ball spinner can earn a spot on merit while working in the nets only, but that’s a separate point) so it would be odd for Jacks to miss out and Virdi to play, unless Batty argues Virdi’s recent 50 merits promotion!

I note your points on Worrall and agree it’s also likely he won’t come straight into the team. I’ve got a hunch that Overton is a candidate for ‘resting’ this game and being unleashed again at the Oval next week.

Lots for the Burns/Batty brains trust to consider in order to resolve what appears to be a positive selection dilemma.

Well I am here in Bristol and it's fine and sunny, albeit a bit nippy. Off to the ground shortly and will hopefully give you an on ground update later.

Here's my preview of the Champo clash between @Gloscricket and @surreycricket at Bristol, starting today: http://www.ovalworld-online.com/prevglosurcc2022.htm

First-class stats sheet for @surreycricket vs @Gloscricket http://www.ovalworld-online.com/fc_stats_surrey_gloucestershire.pdf

For Surrey's fixtures and scorecards go to: http://www.ovalworld-online.com/cards.htm

I cant see the top of the side changing much, apart from CDG coming in at 6

so that means: Burns, Patel, Amla, Pope, Foakes, CDG, Jacks

The remaining 4 places are anyones guess. If we only go with 1 spinner (Jacks) than I presume it will be Clark, Overton, Topley and either Curran or Worrall, but if Virdi is playing I presume he comes in for 1 of those 2. In saying that, Clark has bowled alot already this season, so do 1 of those 2 play instead of him, and if its Curran will we get enough overs out of him. There is also still the threat of the Topley rotation situation as well, although I note the article on the Surrey website from him saying he is coming back to his best.
The Curran situation is slightly worrying and strange. He was picked last week knowing that he could only bowl 15 overs in the match, therefore pretty much as a batsman who can bowl. Then because he spent so much time batting, it was decided that he wouldnt be risked bowling in the 2nd innings.

Put into bat. BBC says Foakes is out and Smith is now keeping. Overton kept out of the side, no Virdi...

What is the point of the squad release the night before when it has zero relevance?

how can it have zero relevance

for all we know Foakes has woken up this morning and not felt well. Yes they could have asked Pope to take the gloves, but wouldnt you rather have Smith there

I am assuming Virdi is not playing due to the wicket

what I will say about the side is that I will presume that Clark, Worrall and Topley will do alot of the work in the bowling

I’m sure we’ll find out via a hidden sentence in the cricinfo report this evening that Foakes is rested by the ECB. Clearly no need to let the supporters know.

Coatesy wrote:how can it have zero relevance

for all we know Foakes has woken up this morning and not felt well. Yes they could have asked Pope to take the gloves, but wouldnt you rather have Smith there

I am assuming Virdi is not playing due to the wicket

what I will say about the side is that I will presume that Clark, Worrall and Topley will do alot of the work in the bowling

Because Smith wasn't named in the 14 but plays ahead of people who are. He's clearly with the team and able to play so why not named? I have no issue with the personnel, just seems a little pointless to bother with the grand squad announcement. No major issue.

All good from cricket pespective.

To my knowledge Smith was playing yesterday with the 2s, either he drove down last night or first thing this morning...

We must await information about Foakes's absence. I can't believe there is any other explanation than late illness or injury (he was out for weeks after slipping on the dressing room floor last year, remember!) I am pleased Jamie Smith has an opportunity, but there is no way on earth he should be taking the gloves when Foakes is available to us.

Slightly disappointed that Curran, who I assume will not be bowling much, has been selected ahead of Overton. A five-man bowling attack with all pulling their weight would reduce the workload on the others, and obviate the need to rest any of them if they are on form.

Cee Gee wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:From this distance the evening before a match, we can never be sure of the eleven. What's the track going to be like? Will Topley stub his toe getting out of bed? Etc, etc.

However, unless the ECB impose new and even more ridiculous restrictions, I find it hard to visualise Sam being left out. He scored more runs than any other Surrey player against Somerset. That should be sufficient to see him picked as a batsman alone.

I'm not so sure as some of you folks that Worrall will play tomorrow. I wouldn't be amazed if he has to wait a bit longer to make his Surrey debut and joins Atkinson and Jacks on drinks duties.

Hi GB, should be an interesting XI announcement in a few hours. I’ll be taking a close look to see whether your suggestion of Jacks missing out materialises. In the cricinfo article Alex shared on a separate thread, Batty was typically bullish on Jacks being the first choice spinner on merit (I’m not sure how a previously part-time red ball spinner can earn a spot on merit while working in the nets only, but that’s a separate point) so it would be odd for Jacks to miss out and Virdi to play, unless Batty argues Virdi’s recent 50 merits promotion!

I note your points on Worrall and agree it’s also likely he won’t come straight into the team. I’ve got a hunch that Overton is a candidate for ‘resting’ this game and being unleashed again at the Oval next week.

Lots for the Burns/Batty brains trust to consider in order to resolve what appears to be a positive  selection dilemma.

Hi Cee Gee - good call on Overton!

All carefully worked out by me and almost entirely wrong. My thinking on Jacks being left out was that Batty in an earlier interview seemed keen on him batting at 7. The need for and likelihood of that would appear to fall away with Sam and C de G both being in the side and (probably) above him in the order. Thus, Virdi could have played as a frontline spinner - a category which Jacks doesn't fall into yet, despite Batty's bullishness.

Here's where the rails come off then

Oh Rory. That was poor.

The commentary is woeful from the Glos commentators.

RB wrote:The commentary is woeful from the Glos commentators.

You're not wrong. They've just announced that Ben Foakes is the new England captain.

not much better on BBC updates, who stated this morning that Sam Curran was playing his 1st game of the season

RB wrote:Oh Rory. That was poor.

The commentary is woeful from the Glos commentators.

Not worse than Bob Hunt, surely?

Have to say these two have been brilliant

Pope must be blessed by his namesake, his numbers are just bonkers.