Gloucester away

Any news about Foakes? Cheers.

guildfordbat wrote:Any news about Foakes? Cheers.

Not on the YouTube stream, no. It's been two Gloucester chaps all day. Churchy, who probably has some Foakes news, is doing audio-only commentary on the Beeb.

The only useful commentary thus far has been that David Steel (silver fox batsmen from the 70s) had the nickname "crime" as in "crime doesn't pay". Apparently he was a tight-arse and wouldn't get a round in.

Thrilled for Jamie Smith. While both Will Jacks and Sam Curran are great strikers of the ball, what sets Jamie apart is that he seems to make runs when they are really needed, in difficult situations. He did it at Northampton in September, making a century after coming in at 15/3 and he is doing a similar job today. I make it that he now has centuries in three of his last five championship matches. When Ben Foakes is back I hope Jamie keeps his place, even if one or even both of the above two have to miss out to accommodate the five front-line bowlers we need to be playing.

Smith's shots on the offside in particular are so pleasing to watch. Everything just looks good.

Bit of a shocker for Pope to get the way out he did

Suffice to say that Sam Curran is also making me eat my hat

Missing Leg wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Any news about Foakes? Cheers.

Not on the YouTube stream, no. It's been two Gloucester chaps all day. Churchy, who probably has some Foakes news, is doing audio-only commentary on the Beeb.

The only useful commentary thus far has been that David Steel (silver fox batsmen from the 70s) had the nickname "crime" as in "crime doesn't pay". Apparently he was a tight-arse and wouldn't get a round in.

Thanks anyway, Missing. I've ducked in and out of the Gloucester chaps during the day - have to say I've found it quite refreshing and enjoyable to have a break from Churchy. He's a decent guy but never exactly someone to challenge anything.

The nickname of ''crime'' rang a vague bell from the past. I thought it was just a play on his surname. Didn't know he was a tight-arse. Remember him being sponsored a lamb chop by a local butcher for every Test run he scored - guess he didn't share those out!

Anyway, I may not know much about The Hundred but I still remember the 70s.

Good toss to lose.

Cee Gee wrote:Good toss to lose.

Yes, but van Buuren's fault. He had two options open to him and chose neither - bat or think about it and bat.

guildfordbat wrote:Any news about Foakes? Cheers.

Bad back, according to Will Macpherson on Twitter.

Pitch was tricky this morning to bat on and both Burns and Patel were dropped, but they were out anyway at 16/2. But from 60/3 at lunch to 294/4 at close a great effort. Pity Pope gave his wicket away but blimey Bracey is a worst keeper than Butler!

The report on the Surrey website is a cut and paste of the report on cricinfo from the ‘ECB reporters network’. It doesn’t contain any information about Foakes. I’m not sure why Surrey couldn’t have mustered up some original content for the website.

I love Sam dearly, but he is a luxury pick as a specialist batsman. No foot movement, and still no hundred.

CDG bowled first ball off a no-ball

Now he's been dropped at slip and he's still on 0 !

This is a bizarre/stupid hour of cricket

That is precisely why Jacks is wasted in this role. Granted this is not a typical line-up with both Curran and CDG ahead of him, but when the more conventional Ben Foakes is playing along with a strong top four, if Jacks is selected it should be as a tatsman, and he should bat at 5 ahead of Foakes to maximise the chance of bonus points. He had no time today,coming in at 8, and still nearly got us to 350.

It seemed a bizarre approach to get the 4th batting point. There was no urgency until the 110th over by which time it was almost too late and Jacks threw away his wicket attempting a slog off the final ball when only one run was required.

Agree about the commentators,they make Churchie sound like John Arlott

From a batting perspective Smith is absolute joy

Live stream with 2 sensible,normal commentators and no sign of the insufferable Church.Happy Days!

Well played Jamie Smith

Hard to drop Smith after this innings!! Amazing concentration from the youngster. Well played!!!

I think they can justify the decision of bowling first at 12-3 or whatever it was. And this may turn out to be (ironically) a NZ style wicket where you always bowl first, 400 plays 600 plays 200-ish.

As we all knew, runs are never going to be the issue. Well bloody played to Smith and Clark.

I still expect this to be good for batting whenever we look at declaring, but it's pleasing to see us take on the 'bat once, bat big' mantra...

Not sure why we are still batting after tea ,need to try to get 20 wickets after all.