MCC v the Champions

Joined: 13 Jan 2015, 19:59

23 Mar 2016, 09:52 #51

I wandered to Oval 3 at Lunch. Checked with the scorers. Sidebottom had bowled 11 overs in that game.
Reply
Like

Joined: 13 Jan 2015, 19:59

23 Mar 2016, 11:47 #52

I "love" this place. They've just started cleaning the seats in the Hospitality Boxes. You know. Just after Tea on Day 4. What forward planning.

http://ball-sup.blogspot.com/2016/03/****-heap.html

Phil
Reply
Like

Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 11:26

23 Mar 2016, 12:31 #53

Hate losing to anyone even though it was a friendly, but overall a very good display considering the number of players missing for various reasons.

Bresnan has almost 4 weeks before our next "proper" match to get fit, so hopefully will do.
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Sep 2008, 12:41

23 Mar 2016, 13:13 #54

In a way it's a continuation of the one problem last season - not enough runs from the top order, needing the lower order to bail them out. It's good that the runs are still coming from the likes of Rhodes and Hodd, but hopefully it won't be down to them all the time in the 'proper' games - otherwise they will lose more games.
Reply
Like

Joined: 14 Aug 2007, 12:51

23 Mar 2016, 15:12 #55

A defeat! Something of a novelty.
From a distance it would appear that the match result turned on the difference in spin resources: Tredwell and Patel versus Carver, Lyth and Leaning. It's fairly easy to understand why we lost!
It's also worth reflecting on what may well prove to be a very significant shortcoming in the season ahead. Let's hope for a seamer friendly season and for the sustained fitness of our key bowlers. (Did Bad Brooks turn up at Abu Dhabi?)

By the way, my remarks shouldn't be interpreted as a criticism of young Carver. He did we'll in this match and remains a player of considerable promise.
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 16:58

23 Mar 2016, 16:17 #56

Carver and Rhodes are the big plusses from this trip, good to see they're progressing from last season.
Reply
Like

Joined: 06 Jun 2015, 04:44

23 Mar 2016, 18:52 #57

A defeat! Something of a novelty.
From a distance it would appear that the match result turned on the difference in spin resources: Tredwell and Patel versus Carver, Lyth and Leaning. It's fairly easy to understand why we lost!
It's also worth reflecting on what may well prove to be a very significant shortcoming in the season ahead. Let's hope for a seamer friendly season and for the sustained fitness of our key bowlers. (Did Bad Brooks turn up at Abu Dhabi?)

By the way, my remarks shouldn't be interpreted as a criticism of young Carver. He did we'll in this match and remains a player of considerable promise.
Jack looked totally out of sorts both innings,struggled with line and length at times Lets hope he is saving himself for 17th April against Hampshire
Reply
Like

Joined: 20 Aug 2013, 11:26

23 Mar 2016, 19:08 #58

.....if he gets picked. Surely it will be Rhodes at 3, Gale at 4, Ballance at 5, Bairstow at 6, then 5 bowlers, or even Willey at 3 to play just as a batsman.
Reply
Like

Joined: 02 Apr 2014, 09:31

23 Mar 2016, 19:52 #59

Not sure why you say 'surely' when giving that line up.
Surely, it will be Ballance at 3 given he keeps batting there and scoring runs?
I'd have thought Rhodes best chance of playing v Hants would be if Bresnan isn't fit.
Reply
Like

Joined: 07 Aug 2014, 16:58

23 Mar 2016, 20:01 #60

Ballance will definitely be at three until Williamson arrives. At best, Rhodes is vying with Leaning to bat six. As for the bowling, if everyone's fit then Bresnan, Sidebottom, Patto and Brooks are in possession having won two titles I'm a row. Willey and Plunkett can't and hopefully won't expect to walk into the championship side.
Reply
Like