Surrey v Lanccs

Jackers wrote:Right, I'm just back from my fortnight around Europe, and while I was initially sorry that I would be missing this game I now feel I dodged a bullet.

I can accept that we had an off-day today, and that we were generally below par in the match. I also accept that Lancashire are a very good side (our biggest rivals, along with Essex - certainly both of them are ahead of Warwickshire and Hampshire). But this nonsense of routinely putting the other side in needs to stop now.

Onwards and upwards - a busy July with some vital (and winnable) Championship matches. Rory: if you win the toss, bat. If you are in doubt, think about it, then bat. If  you have very big doubts, consult your colleagues, and then bat.

Some old fashioned cricket sense there based upon years and years of the game's history.

When Burns put Lancs in on a blisteringly hot and sunny Sunday morning, it was always likely imo to end one of two ways that evening. Both were lose-lose situations for Surrey.

Either Lancs would be 400/5 and looking to go strong again the next day or, if we bowled well, 275 all out an hour or so before stumps. The latter was how it transpired. However, rather than being rewarded for our efforts, that left us facing a 4 man seam attack who knew that they could put everything into it for the remaining 20 overs before having a cold bath, plenty of cold drinks and a night's sleep before bowling again. That's just what they did that evening and pocketed 4 wickets in the process leaving us struggling.

Chinaman wrote:Not really sure why we've signed Latham. He looks well below par. Surely we should play Geddes. Burns is in awful form and probably should drop himself for Patel. Glad I didn't go this morning.

Because Lathams an international quality overseas batter and we thought he’d score more runs. But it’s cricket, sometimes they don’t.

Get a grip people.It's our first home defeat since August 2020.

Cee Gee wrote:

Chinaman wrote:Not really sure why we've signed Latham. He looks well below par. Surely we should play Geddes. Burns is in awful form and probably should drop himself for Patel. Glad I didn't go this morning.

Because Lathams an international quality overseas batter and we thought he’d score more runs. But it’s cricket, sometimes they don’t.

I hate these 'drop in' signings.

We can’t blame Steel and Patel for today can we!

guildfordbat wrote:I commented during the match at Canterbury upon my dislike of the tactical use of a night watchman. Particularly in view of that, it's only fair to say that Williams played the role today pretty much to perfection. His determination and calm approach should be an example to all batsmen, especially our top order.

The only thing anywhere near to a positive for me today was that Lawes showed what I say normally happens whenever a night watchman is used.

Jhe10077 wrote:We can’t blame Steel and Patel for  today can we!

we can't but Patel should have been playing

guildfordbat wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:I commented during the match at Canterbury upon my dislike of the tactical use of a night watchman. Particularly in view of that, it's only fair to say that Williams played the role today pretty much to perfection. His determination and calm approach should be an example to all batsmen, especially our top order.

The only thing anywhere near to a positive for me today was that Lawes showed what I say normally happens whenever a night watchman is used.

To be fair, he did as well as anyone else!

Sibley,playing for Ashtead today,was out STUMPED !!!

Badges wrote:Sibley,playing for Ashtead today,was out STUMPED !!!

So he HAS still got England ambitions...