Surrey v Essex 19-22 July the Oval

Bit annoying to be 2 down, but ultimately in a good position...

Have done 3 days
Watch on the streem tomorrow

Keith Powell wrote:Have done 3 days
Watch on the streem tomorrow

Part-timer

kjb wrote:

Keith Powell wrote:Have done 3 days
Watch on the streem tomorrow

Part-timer

‍�

Getting throughly sick of the number of stoppages relating to complaints about the ball. It's becoming an epidemic, and a standard tactic for bowlers and fielding captains when they are getting no joy and want to break the rhythm of the batting team.

I would favour introducing a DRS-style limit of one appeal per ball (80 overs). If the umpires agree to change the ball, you retain your ball review. If the umpires deem the appeal unjustified, then that's your lot. That would stop the nonsense and still allow for changes when the ball is genuinely out of shape.

Losing the will to live listening to Jeremy Coney…

There's a clear and obvious issue with the ball quality this year, neither side here are the only ones and I don't think any county has been remotely happy about having to do it.

As for the game, this is a great learning experience for Lawes when it comes to chasing a smaller target whilst down the order; launching Harmer for 6 there after sticking around is great...

Lawes is turning into a good all rounder. We must
play a spinner against Warwickshire next week instead
of Steel. Overton can bat 7 and Lawes 8.

We don't need a spinner. Geddes instead of Steel.

Brilliant win against what are a very good team. If we'd been chasing 200+ that might have been tricky with Harmer on that pitch. Innings from Jacks turned the game on it's head where we right in the mud. Overall though, a real team effort.

Don't think we'll see a spinner next week, which still saddens me greatly

Brilliant win. Great team effort, but have to pick out Will and Dan Worrall.

1 down, 4 to go

and hopefully Gloucs can continue to frustrate Hants

Excellent stuff. Lawes dare I say is actually beginning to look like an all rounder despite his 19 years.
Now we need Gloucester to draw with Hampshire to widen the gap a bit more at the top.

Excellent performance throughout. When you lose the toss and find yourself in the field on a day such as Tuesday you have to work hard for a win.

I agree that Lawes looks more than competent with a bat in his hand and if Jacks is going to continue at 7 then  any four of Clark (when fit), Overton, Lawes, Roach and Worrall is as strong an 8-11 as we had in the Hollioake era. (And stronger than when Giddins, rather than Salisbury, was 11.)

Credit must go to whoever has identified Lawes as someone who is ready to step up to the first team because his most recent performances for the 2s don’t exactly scream ‘pick me’. He looks like a cricketer who is wise above his 19 years.

That was an excellent win given that we lost the toss on the hottest day of the year. Good effort all round but Will Jacks incredible innings effectively won us the game. It's very early days with Tom Lawes but I do like what I've seen of him. Now we could do with Gloucestershire batting well into the final session which doesn't seem very likely ...

Chance of rain in the Cheltenham area this afternoon is quite high looking at the forecast

Wouldn’t have like to chase 250 runs the way it was helping the spinners today. But we certainly had the worst bowling conditions on Tuesday. Agree with others that Lawes looks an excellent prospect,seems to have a calm head on his shoulders.

Chinaman wrote:We don't need a spinner. Geddes instead of Steel.

You could equally argue we don't need an extra batsman instead of Steel. Moriarty took a string of five-fers in his early games and eventually we'll end up bowling on a Bunsen somewhere or other. Let's not forget Virdi was selected for all 14 matches last time Surrey were champions.

I'm assuming Pope, Foakes and Overton will all be available next week. You never know with the Exterminate the Counties Board.

Coatesy wrote:Chance of rain in the Cheltenham area this afternoon is quite high looking at the forecast

it looks like Gloucestershire aren't even going to make it last until the rain arrives ...

Pink Panther wrote:

Chinaman wrote:We don't need a spinner. Geddes instead of Steel.

You could equally argue we don't need an extra batsman instead of Steel. Moriarty took a string of five-fers in his early games and eventually we'll end up bowling on a Bunsen somewhere or other. Let's not forget Virdi was selected for all 14 matches last time Surrey were champions.

I'm assuming Pope, Foakes and Overton will all be available next week. You never know with the Exterminate the Counties Board.

If we were a Sunday village team, I would reckon that Steel's place is down to his mum making a splendid cricket tea each week.

And I could equally argue that an extra batsman is more useful because with potentially 16 points for a draw it increases your chances of max draw points. You only get 8 more for a win. Ridiculous of course but that's the ECB  Tinkerer for you.
The only pitch likely to turn in the last 4 is possibley Northants but I still doubt Moriaty or Virdi will play because, and oh dear it's getting tiresome this, Jacks is the one they are going with. Unless England grab him now which wouldn't surprise me. But as Steve Waugh once said " if you haven't got a good spinner don't play one, go with your best 11" . Ok he had Warne of course, but it seems Surrey are following what he said. Point being we don't need one, and no one has put a plausible case for their inclusion in my view. But I'd be happy to be proved wrong. Hurry though it's almost August!

This 4 seamers and a part-time spinner is something that has worked for others in the past so it might just be worth persisting with for now - not that I like it. But Geddes or Smith have to play instead of Steel if they’re going to do that.

Chinaman wrote:And I could equally argue that an extra batsman is more useful because with potentially 16 points for a draw it increases your chances of max draw points. You only get 8 more for a win. Ridiculous of course but that's the ECB  Tinkerer for you.
The only pitch likely to turn in the last 4 is possibley Northants but I still doubt Moriaty or Virdi will play because, and oh dear it's getting tiresome this, Jacks is the one they are going with. Unless England grab him now which wouldn't surprise me. But as Steve Waugh once said " if you haven't got a good spinner don't play one, go with your best 11" . Ok he had Warne of course, but it seems Surrey are following what he said. Point being we don't need one, and no one has put a plausible case for their inclusion in my view.  But I'd be happy to be proved wrong. Hurry though it's almost August!

It’s getting tiresome because you continually miss the point.

Batty has decided that Jacks is the lead spinner and has even compared him to Moeen. We are playing a spinner - its wrong to say we aren’t.

The majority of the comments about the topic on here say we could easily do without one of the 5 seamers and play one of Virdi or Moriarty, particularly as we have Patel to bowl as well.

Old Trafford will probably spin for our last game and we’ll either play 9 seamers or put Moriarty in for his first game in a title decider.

I think it's entirely fair to refer to Jacks as a "part-time spinner" until there is more evidence to the contrary than his 15 wickets at nearly 50 each. That isn't to say he won't yet develop into a more substantial option but for me the issue isn't whether we are playing a 'front-line' spinner in the team but whether we should be.

I happen to think so, but I'm very happy to concede that the management team are entitled to point to the results we've achieved to date as justification for their selections. Just as Alf Ramsey's "wingless wonders" won the 1966 World Cup, so Gareth Batty's "spinless wonders" are well on course to win us the championship.