Monday 24 April 2023

Middlesex LV Championship Div 1 at Lord's Day Loss 6 points Report

 

Day 4

CAVALIER NOTTS HAND MIDDLESEX WIN

Notts a victim of Bazball mentality?

That's entertainment so Paul Weller wrote all those years ago and that's what skipper Steven Mullaney wanted to provide to the patient Lord's crowd which had waited 4.5 hours for some action. He surprised everyone by declaring on the overnight score after nearly two sessions were lost at Lord's today because of light drizzle and setting a Middlesex a sporting 249 in 40 overs. On a slow pitch with a short boundary it seemed implausible that Notts could take 10 wickets to win the game particularly when bowling with a wet ball. The gamble was that conditions would remain cloudy, however most of the play was played in sunshine before the light deteriorated in last 10 or so overs. But English cricket in 2023 is supposedly about being cavalier and forgetting about risks. It was all about entertaining what was a very small home crowd.

Unfortunately, fortune certainly did not favour the brave as it didn't go to script as Notts decided to set negative defensive fields from almost the get go which gifted the Middlesex batsmen too many easy runs. Many a quick two was run as Mullaney posted his men pinned on the distant Tavern ropes. The tactics then turned to legside short ball bouncers from Broad and Hutton, some late wickets were gathered and the effort was certainly there but Middlesex always looked like getting the runs after their rapid start winning by four wickets with an over to spare at 1836.

Play commenced at 1530 with Middlesex requiring 249 off 40 overs. Broad (Pavilion End) and Hutton opened the bowling. Eskinazi and Stoneman got off to a rapid start. It was a relief when Broad had Eskinazi (11) plumb leg before, 34 for 1 off 4.2 overs. Middlesex raced to 50 in 7 overs. In the 8th over Hutton was hit for six over mid-wicket by Malan. It was looking rather too easy for the struggling home side who had lost their opening two games. With the field set back Middlesex were hitting easy singles. Paterson replaced Hutton in the 10th over. In the 11th over Stoneman hit Broad for six into the Grandstand, the over costing 12. The following over, Paterson had Stoneman leg before for 42, 82 for 2. Holden immediately hit Paterson for two fours. James replaced Broad for the 13th over. The Middlesex 100 came up in the 14th over. It was looking like a cake walk.

The runs were flowing far too easily with the fields set deep Holden and Malan were picking up easy singles and twos without taking any risks. Patterson-White was brought on for the 18th over. James got hit for two boundaries in the 21st over. Malan got to his 50 off 54 balls with just two boundaries and one six, the runs came easily through running singles in the vast spaces in the outfield. Mullaney came on for the 23rd over with Middlesex needing less than 100. Malan survived a stumping chance off Patterson-White when on 59. Clarke, hardly an experienced red ball stumper, was having a nightmare behind the stumps conceding 4 and 3 byes respectively off Patterson-White in the 26th over. Perhaps two Danes are better than one?

Malan (61) holed out to Slater at deep square leg off Mullaney, 176 for 3 in the 28th over. Broad replaced Patterson-White for the following over. Holden reached 50 off 54 balls with a single off Mullaney. In the same over (29th) Simpson hit Mullaney for 6 into the middle tier of the Grandstand. Holden was dropped on 51 by the diving Clarke off Broad with the batter running two. Going for a repeat shot off another short delivery from Broad, Holden this time was caught by Clarke for 53, 192 for 4 in the 30th over. Hutton returned for the 31st over and had Simpson (17) caught by James on the deep mid-wicket ropes, 204 for 5. Hollman hit Hutton for six over wide long on. Broad decided to place Paterson as long stop but he had to stand to Clarke's left to ensure that there were not two fielders behind square on the legside. What a strange afternoon this was turning out to be.

Hollman (13) was caught low down at mid-wicket by Mullaney off Broad, 223 for 6 in the 34th over. The light was fading and the umpires were checking the light but it was deemed satisfactory. Paterson replaced Broad for the 36th over. Higgins hooked Broad for four over keeper Clarke's head. The end was nigh, Middlesex only needed 8 off 3 overs. Paterson only went for two off the next over as Robson get bogged down. Robson and Higgins got the six they required off the next over delivered by Stuart Broad, who was now playing the part of the pantomime villain with his gamesmanship. The winning run was obtained by Robson who belatedly set off for a single as James flung himself to try and run him out, nearly decapitating himself in the process as Robson blade he hit him on the bounce. Middlesex 249-6 off 39 overs with Higgins with a run a ball undefeated 22 and Robson on an 18-ball 12 not out.

The Seaxes who now stand like Notts with two losses and one win after three games. You could argue that Notts had thrown away a game that they had dominated for three days and handed what could be a potential relegation rival a bonus 11 points and depriving themselves of five themselves. How this effects the table come late September is still to be determined.

Bazball rules OK to some, but maybe next time Notts should be more roundhead than cavalier! MAG






Day 3

ALL OUTCOMES POSSIBLE HEADING FOR DAY 4

After an extremely long days cricket where both bowling line ups bowled well, Notts lead by 248 with 4 second innings wickets still standing. It sets up a fascinating day tomorrow where morning rain is forecast followed by a clear afternoon.

Middlesex started the day on 111 for 2 off 30.1 overs with a 104.5 overs in the day. An overcast day was promised, however both the morning and evening sessions were played in sunshine the middle session being a much cloudier and cooler affair.

In the 37th over, Broad had Eskinazi (3) excellently caught by Montgomery at leg slip, the ball travelling to him at a fair rate of knots,123 for 3. An obviously planned dismissal. Max Holden (7) chipped Broad to Hameed at short mid wicket who took a smart catch by his ankles, 133 for in the 41st over. Broad completed an superb spell of 6.5 3 19 2. Hutton ( 9 2 16 1) had bowled an excellent probing and economical spell from the Nursery End and he was finally rewarded when he had Stoneman leg before for 76, 148 for 5 in the 46th over. James replaced Hutton for the 50th over. James had Simpson (6) strangled down the legside in his second over of the morning caught by keeper Clarke, 171 for 6 in the 52nd over. Patterson-White came on from the Nursery End for the 56th over as James switched ends. Middlesex 197 for 6 off 62 overs at lunch with Higgins on 31 and Hollman on 13.

Broad (Pavilion End) and Paterson returned after lunch and in the 67th over, Broad had Hollman leg before for 20, 208 for 7. The seventh wicket had added 37 runs. Andersson was caught by James diving at deep gulley as Paterson claimed his first wicket 213 for 8 in the 70th over. Notts let Middlesex off the hook somewhat by allowing them 60 runs for the final two wickets, At 1435 a two through the covers by Higgins off Paterson saw Middlesex avoid the follow on in the 72nd over. James replaced Broad and a short loosener was dispatched for a leg side four by Higgins (53) but he played onto his middle stump off the second delivery , 241 for 9 in the 75th over. Patterson-White was introduced to speed up the over rate. A leg side four for Roland-Jones off James saw Middlesex to their first batting point of the season in the 79th over. Mullaney bowled the 80th over. The new ball was taken with Middlesex on 267 for 9 off 80 overs by Broad and Hutton. With his sixth ball of his new spell, Hutton had Bamber (5) caught at slip. Middlesex 274 all out, Roland-Jones 27 not out. Broad 4 for 68 and James 3 for 58 were the leading bowlers. Hutton deserved more than his two for 39.Notts led by 90 runs. The difference between the two teams being Duckett's innings.

Notts had 51 overs to bat, but once again too many of the top order disappointingly failed. Are Notts too reliant on Duckett? Should an overseas batter be signed? These are the topics the members at this fixture are asking.

Bamber (Nursery End) and Roland-Jones took the new ball. Roland-Jones went for 13 off his opening over, including an edged four for Hameed and three threes. Duckett (7) edged Roland-Jones to Simpson, 22 for 1 in the 6th over. Notts 28 for 1 off 8 overs at tea with Hameed on 20 and Slater on 1.

Ten minutes after tea. Hameed (20) was caught behind by Simpson off Bamber for 20, 34 for 2 in the 11th over. Bamber bowling very well with five successive maidens. Ryan Higgins was introduced for the 16th over. Bamber picked up a deserved second wicket as Montgomery (9) was caught behind by Simpson standing up, 50 for 3 after 17 overs. Slater was dropped on 12 by Roland-Jones diving to his right at extra cover off Bamber. Bamber (2-16 off 10 overs) finally came off and was replaced by Andersson from the Nursery End. Hollman came on for the 26th over and with second ball bowled Slater for 25, 88 for 4. James was dropped on 3 by the diving Stoneman in the covers off Andersson. Clarke smashed Roland-Jones (Nursery End) for a six over mid wicket in the 37th over. With 11 overs remaining Higgins returned from the Nursery End and James going for a legside shot left his leg stump exposed and was bowled by the Zimbabwean for 20, 133 for 5 in the 41st over. After a spell of 9 1 22 2 from Hollman, Bamber returned, this time from the Pavilion End. Clarke (52 off 94 balls,6x4, 1x6) edged the second delivery of the last over, bowled by Higgins, having an excellent game, to the boundary to reach his 50 but three balls later he was adjudged leg before by umpire Saggers to a ball that was going to miss the stumps and drift down legside. A very poor decision and sad end to Clarke's best innings of the season. Although Higgins perhaps deserved the luck. Notts a shaky 158 for 6 off 50.5 overs with Mullaney on 11.

Notts now lead by 248 runs, the result very much up in the air and much will depend on the timing and the amount of rain that arrives at Lords early tomorrow. A very fast drying ground, but clearly the water table is high, the outfield having been slow during the whole game. How much more rain can it take? Fingers crossed that this hard fought contest isn't ruined by the weather. MAG





Day 2

BIG DAY TOMORROW AFTER DUCKETT 177 AND STONEMAN FIGHTBACK

On another truncated day Middlesex trail Notts by 253 runs with eight first innings wickets still standing.

After a dank and wet morning the skies started to clear at lunchtime and the vast majority of the cricket was played in sunshine although the temperature remained cool throughout.

Play started at 1410 as a 64 over day. Higgins (Pavilion End) and Andersson opened the bowling with overnight pair Duckett and Mullaney looked comfortable on the slow surface. Hollman replaced Andersson in the 77th over and his fourth ball was dispatched for a 6 on the short legside boundary into the Grandstand stand by Mullaney.The new ball was taken by Bamber and Roland-Jones with Notts 295 for 5 off 80 overs. A single by Duckett to third man off Bamber saw Notts to 300 in the 83rd over. Mullaney (46 off 85 balls, 5x4, 1x6) was lbw to a delivery that kept low from Roland-Jones, 315 for 6 in the 86th over. The sixth wicket had added 90 in 24 overs. Notts were to lose their last 5 wickets for 49 runs. A four through extra cover by Duckett off Roland-Jones saw him to 150 off 222 balls. Patterson-White (12) dangled his bat to Bamber and he edged into Simpson's gloves, 336 for 7 in the 93rd over. Hutton only lasted five deliveries before being bowled off his pads by Bamber for a duck, 344 for 8 in the 95th over. A two for Duckett off Higgins saw Notts to 350 in the 96th over. Notts 358 for 8 off 97 overs at tea with Duckett on 175 and Broad on 4.

Notts only lasted a further 15 deliveries after the interval. Duckett (177 off 257 balls, 17x4, 1x6) finally perished skying Higgins to Andersson at long leg. A magnificent effort that held the whole innings together. Paterson went for a golden duck having his stumps splattered by Higgins. Notts 364 all out off 99.3 overs, Bamber 4 for 89.

Broad (Pavilion End) and Hutton opened the bowling but like the Notts openers the previous day Stoneman and Robson were in little trouble against the new ball on the flat pitch and they saw Middlesex to 38 for 0 off 12 overs. Paterson replaced Broad after a six over spell. After 15 overs, James replaced Hutton from the Nursery End. In the 18th over James had Robson lbw for 17 to a delivery which came back up the slope, 50 for 1 in the 18th over. Stoneman, who has a great record against Notts, reached his 50 off 70 balls with a four through mid wicket off James. Hutton and Broad returned for the with 6 overs left. The docile nature of the pitch could be gauged by Clarke standing up to the stumps to Hutton whilst Malan was facing. Patterson-White replaced Hutton for the penultimate over and conceded seven runs. Broad then removed Malan lbw for 24 to the opening ball of the final over and stumps were immediately drawn at 1856 with Middlesex 111 for 2 off 30.1 overs with Stoneman with 60 not out. Tomorrow, weather permitting, will be long with 104 overs to be bowled, given the way the surface is playing, a draw appears to be the most likely outcome. MAG




DEJA-VU

Day 1 read from a similar script to the Somerset game; Act 1 - lose the toss and be asked to bat,  Act 2 - a commanding Notts opening partnership, Act 3 - a procession of wickets, Act 4 a batting bonus point.

The variation this game was that Duckett, who escaped losing his wicket when on nought, was still in the middle at tea, but not forgetting Lyndon James' nice innings which kept the scoreboard ticking over during a period where Middlesex had quietened-down Duckett.

Last week rain put paid to the second day, so will there be play today, as the rain arrived earlier after tea on the first day?

Pravda TV had an interview with Duckett at the close of play (conducted in a corridor by a stairwell) - if Duckett said the pitch was a good batting one once, he must have said it ten times through the course of the interview. Before the rain Duckett's plan was to crack on after tea with Notts target being something over 400. Duckett also revealed that, had Notts won the toss, Notts would also have asked their opponents to bat (Lord Broad  had decided).

I think the weather has perhaps now put a literal dampener to a fourth batting point expectations, the bowlers now refreshed.

Lord's too, much like Trent Bridge, has the installed super drainage; so how much time will the game lose? HBD


Day 1


DUCKETT LORD'S TON


In form opener Ben Duckett scored a chanceless undefeated 119 off 176 balls (11x4, 1x6) as Notts reached 252 for 5 off 69 overs on a truncated first day at Lord's.

The first two sessions was played in glorious sunshine albeit with a very strong North-easterly wind.The storm clouds gathered during tea time and only five more overs were possible before bad light ended play for the day. The heavens opened about 40 minutes later.

Middlesex won the toss and inserted Notts on what looked a good batting surface, a very strange decision by skipper Roland-Jones.

The only change from the victory against Somerset was that Montgomery came in for Moores as Clarke with donning the gloves. Notts dominated the opening session against some pretty mediocre Middlesex bowling. Bamber (Nursery End) and Roland-Jones opened the bowling. With Notts 47 for 0 off 12 overs, Higgins was introduced and three overs later Andersson had a bowl from the Pavilion End, Notts reaching 50 in his first over (the 16th). With Notts 79 for 0 off 22 overs, leg spinner Luke Hollman was introduced. There were milestones galore in the 26th over bowled by Andersson: Notts reached 100 at the same time as Hameed reached his 50 off 86 balls via a single, next ball, a six over square leg by Duckett saw him to 50 off 69 balls. Bamber returned for the 28th over and made the surprise breakthrough with his fifth ball having Hameed (55 off 92balls, 11x4) caught at first slip by Eskinazi, 117 for 1. Both openers having looked so solid. At lunch, Notts were 123 for 1 off 30 overs with Duckett on 60 and Slater on 4. Slater finding the wide third man ropes off the penultimate delivery before lunch, what would prove to be his sole scoring shot of his knock.

Roland-Jones (Nursery End) opened the bowling after lunch. Slater's innings was very scratchy scoring 4 off 29 balls before being very unluckily run out at the non strikers end after a Duckett straight drive was deflected onto the stumps via the wrist of bowler Roland-Jones, 133 for 2 in the 37th over. Bamber picked up his second victim as Montgomery (9) edged him to keeper Simpson, 151 for 3 in the 42nd over. Clarke played a dreadful shot to fall for a three ball duck caught in the covers by Andersson off Roland-Jones, 152 for 4 in the 43rd over. James unfurled a series of wonderful cover driven boundaries including one which got Notts to 200 in the 55th over. Duckett reached his 100 off 152 balls with a swept single off Hollman. A typical Duckett innings full of sweeps mostly along the ground. In the 62nd over, James (41 off 66 balls, 8x4) edged Andersson to Simpson behind the stumps, 225 for 5 in the 62nd over. Notts 235 for 5 off 64 overs at tea with Duckett on 112 and Mullaney on 8.

The weather completely changed during tea the bright sunshine being replaced by dark cloud. The floodlights were very noisily raised, appearing to badly need an urgent application of WD40. They were then switched on. Notts reached their 250 via a two for Duckett off Roland-Jones but bad light stopped play at the end of the over with Notts on 252 for 5 off 69 overs with Duckett on 119 and Mullaney on 14. It looked a batter friendly surface throughout, tomorrow frequent showers are forecast. MAG





Peter's squad fails to answer the bowling selection question, although of the three Ball, Stone and Broad, only Jake hasn't had a turn yet.

Ben Duckett
Haseeb Hameed
Matt Montgomery
Joe Clarke
Lyndon James
Ben Slater
Steven Mullaney
Liam Patterson-White
Brett Hutton
Dane Paterson
Olly Stone
Stuart Broad
Jake Ball









......................................

Middlesex, one of three counties in Division 1 without a win from the first two rounds of games, sit bottom of the table.

In 2022 a rampant Notts failed to beat the London county in either match, so as they say in Division 1, there aren't any easy games.

Which three bowlers will the rotating Peter pick this round?

Luke Fletcher was out with an anke injury last week.

Jake Ball is currently in 2s playing at Lady Bay.

Olly Stone was not selected but fit against Somerset.

Stuart Broad, Dane Paterson and Brett Hutton all played their part in the win against Somerset.

The rule change has certainly made batting bonus points more valuable with just 18 being won collectively in the division and Bears, sitting top, have 8 of them for themselves.

How injured was Tom Moores? Who will keep wicket in his absence, stopper Joe Clarke, not on England's keeper-radar Ben Duckett or specialist Dane Schadendorf who is currently playing at Lady Bay but did have 70 overs behind the stumps on Tuesday.



Then we have Ben Slater batting at three. The stats say that he's not happy at 3 but having improved that low average so far, (averaging 18.75 in 2023) does Peter stick with him, and if so, for how long with Monty waiting in the wings?

30 comments:

  1. Seems likely to be a choice between an extra batter or bowler given no likely wicketkeeper other than Clarke or Duckett are in the squad, Four man pace attack might be nice but that would mean Hutton at number 8, Would we better with Monty to maybe go for batting points ? Guess the pitch tomorrow will make their minds up.

    ReplyDelete
  2. For me, you should always select a specialist wicket keeper. Is Moores worried that if he picks Schadendorf, he will show up the shortcomings of junior Moores.?The answer, probably yes.Its not as though Clarke even deserves selection as a batsman, let alone keeper.
    Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Montgomery finish higher in the batting averages than Clarke last season, and if so, why has been omitted from the first two games.It doesn't add up to me.
    How many more talented players will leave the club, through never getting a fair crack of the whip.
    I can tell you, plenty more while Moores is picking the team.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With Moores doing what the ECB instructs him to do regards selections, Montgomery would have been the obvious (to my eyes) selection to bat at 3 from game 1 - a spot he filled well when filling in for Duckett in 2022. But, Moores is loyal to his signings, those he sees as a no brainer, I've got to save face selections. Therefore, Clarke will always get the nod over any of the players that have earned a place through performance and hard work in the 2s.

      Delete
  3. Jake Ball unfortunately broke down whilst bowling at Lady Bay today

    ReplyDelete
  4. Shame about Jake but realistically would Notts have risked him given his injury record? Can't help but think a white ball contract would suit both Notts and Ball given his record in that format.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jake has only marginally played more for Notts since 2021, than he has for Welsh Firemen.

      Delete
  5. Slater and Clarke's form a major concern

    ReplyDelete
  6. 75NOT OUT
    4day games played in April .
    How many results are ducted to by the prevailing weather . It could be as high as 50%. The same in late September when bad light is a problem . The weather bias being worse for teams up North . As ever , the weather plays a major part in final Championship placing .

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hope this result doesn't come back to haunt us come September

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Santa arrived at Lord's on St George's Day with a gift for Middlesex.

      Delete
    2. 6 or 7 RPO is no challenge these days for sides in 40 overs. Combine that with a short boundary and a massive area on the other side to defend with a flat track easy pitch. What was Mullaney thinking? He must believe all the Stuart broad hype.

      Delete
  8. Stuart Broad hardly ever delivers for Notts in 4 day matches, ther's too much hype surrounding him when he plays, Notts have literally given a match away, so annoying.

    ReplyDelete
  9. 75NOT OUT
    Some would argue it was a sporting declaration that was 70% -30% in favour of Middlesex . But it was a well deserved reward for the long suffering spectators , quite a few who travelled the 120 miles from Nottm . We managed to get 6 wickets and the game went to the wire . With the benefit of hindsight we can all be armchair Generals. If NOTTS had batted on again at the 3.30 resumption and added another 50 runs or more then the game would have been dead . I say well done to Mullaney for giving us an exciting finish and something worth looking at . It turned out to be a good advertisement for the 4 day game and WE NEED THAT!?

    ReplyDelete
  10. I wouldn’t be so harsh on Steve either.it had to be an old fashioned 3 day cricket style declaration job, a bit soberesque in its execution perhaps and it didn’t come off this time. Middlesex started well and doesn’t Stoneman usually do well against notts which ever county he has played for? . Afternoon of entertainment that not one would of got rather than shake on a draw at 5 .
    Thought the Middlesex coverage and commentary team were good too. Kevin hand , gus ( lugubrious and down trodden as ever but still worth a listen) and mike selvey ( similar, indeed hard to tell them apart at times) foxy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Harry Carry Cricket24 April 2023 at 08:46

      If nothing else for the rest of the season Peter, keep Stuart Broad a million miles away from our One Day Cup squad please. For all his experience, he was clueless at Lord's.

      Delete
    2. Re Middlesex co-commentators: they worked well, quietly correcting Kevin Hand without telling him that he was talking complete balderdash 50% of the time, Subtle.

      Replays feature makes the presentation more like TV presentation now, than webcam as it was in 2020. Not watched Pravda's 2023 version yet.

      Delete
  11. I just wanted to see some old fashioned straight bowling. They miss, you hit, but the tactic of banging it in so the batsman could paddle it away for a single was baffling.

    ReplyDelete
  12. 75 NOT OUT
    ARE THE WISE FOLKS ON HERE FORGETTING THE PAYING SPECTATORS ?
    Most fans want to see a good contest and an exciting finish rather than an early finish dead game. That’s what the fans got . Ok so NOTTS lost on this occasion . But on the next similar challenge they may well win . Notts tried to win the game- hence the declaration . I say well done to Mullaney for giving it a go . With our bowling attack we could very easily have won it with a bit of extra luck . Surely it was a collective team decision in the dressing room to declare and set them a target of 6 r p o.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Would the paying spectators be more happier watching Division 1 rather than Division 2 cricket next season? I suggest the chances of Notts bowling out Middlesex in 40 overs yesterday on that wicket were very small, especially as they had Robson at number 8 to shut down the shutters if required. So why declare when the odds are so stacked against you? If Notts would have set more conventional fields they probably would have saved it....

      Delete
    2. Was there any paying spectators there , other than Nottsview's roving snapper? Check out the snaps on Harry Butler Daft's facebook, the stands were as nearly as empty as the vast outfield's acres of space to drop singles into.

      Delete
  13. 75 NOTOUT
    It’s all very debatable!
    It’s what this site is designed for .Differing points of view.
    If NOTTS had won yesterday in the last over then Mull would today be a hero who’s gamble paid off!
    You cannot win ‘em all!?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing wrong with setting a target for Middlesex to chase on this occasion, but this one wasn't much of a challenge. They should have taken some overs out of the equation, 280 from 35 overs would still have been a carrot to chase without being a sixteen point gift.

      Delete
  14. The Curmudgeon Kid24 April 2023 at 23:44

    I tend to come down on the side of saying well done Notts for going for the win, despite the inherent risk. It's early in the season, points for a draw are diminished, etc, etc. Maybe we'll regret it in September, but if it'd gone the other way, and on, and on . . . .

    One thing that has struck me about the first circa three weeks of the first-class season has been how many players seem to be changing their approach (especially to batting) to be more positive/attacking, not just to be à la mode but also, one could be forgiven for thinking, to catch the eye of the selectors. Nowt wrong with that.

    So, if there is a shift in the prevailing culture of approach (unfreeze - change - refreeze) then perhaps the 'brains trust' in the Notts' dressing room are taking the hint, and that the thirst of the ambitious, upwardly mobile players to 'go for it' and 'don't die wondering' influenced the decision on Sunday afternoon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He who dares, lost on Sunday because the brains trust didn't appreciate that Middlesex wouldn't be bowled out in 40 overs without having to go at it harder. If Middlesex also had Bazball Fever then they would have chased 10 runs per over, just as they did 6 and a bit (with some ease). Reckless decisions will only be regularly rewarded if all teams adopt the Devil may care attitude. Stephen Fleming would have asked a more difficult question of Middlesex, I am sure.

      Delete
  15. Interesting talking points,conducted by all with with respect for differing views which I like and as it should be. Next time the dice might fall in our favour, like u say we won’t know till September.
    Back to the coverage if I may, the bbc commentary is by necessity a ball by ball radio commentary that is matched up to the stream; the Middlesex coverage was an almost old style tv coverage that was able to let the picture paint the picture a lot or the time. Both welcome, sky sports would do well to pipe down and let
    the general ambience ooze in sometimes I reckon. Foxy.

    ReplyDelete
  16. 75 NOTOUT
    The various “ live streams” are proving a godsend for cricket fans all over the world . It’s a wonderful innovation and it’s free at the moment . It’s bound to be chargeable in the near future - but the coveredge is improving and I for one will be willing to pay a few shillings to watch the games . For those of advancing years , who love their cricket then watching their favourite team over 4 days is a real bonus

    ReplyDelete
  17. How did Notts escape that game without a points deduction for slow over rates. Broad's "gamesmanship" in slowing it right down and being told by the umpire to get on with it, can't surely have been within the time allowances. In 2022 we lost 5 points for not paying attention to the red numbers on the scoreboard enough. In 2023 we lost 5 points because we didn't compute the yellow numbers on the scoreboard enough.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The Curmudgeon Kid25 April 2023 at 09:29

    All captains live and die by their decisions, even the very best. Many will recall Stephen Fleming not enforcing the follow-on when Notts were well on top against Lancashire at TB in 2006, seen as a disappointing, conservative decision at the time. Lancashire went on to win the match comfortably and a couple of months later Notts were relegated by 0.5pts - a year after being crowned champions. Whether Stephen F regretted his decision and the consequences I'm not sure, but I hope Stephen M is not judged in late-September for a decision made in mid-April.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Should games of first class cricket be decided by "a roll of the dice", as Pravda suggests in their headline? What did Bracegirdle's book say (nicked from a TV show) Points Make Prizes - so it could be asked, why give points that you have already have (as good as) in the bag, away?

      Delete
    2. Captain Scarlet never died.

      Delete

Please share your thoughts...