Can we still win the title?September 15 2016 at 7:59 AM
|Peter (Login Blackpooltyke)|
from IP address 188.8.131.52
Provided Middx do not win today, I think we have an excellent chance still.
We must get middx into a position where they have to win to take the title.
This means that if somerset beat notts (likely) then we simply have to restrict their bonus points to no more than 1 more than somerset get.
If we can achieve that then middx can only win the title by beating us.
Therefore we must put them in and prevent them from getting max batting points.
If we can achieve that and avoid being asked to follow on, then middx would be obliged to declare and give us a chance of beating them and winning the title, just so long as we match whatever bonus points somerset achieve.
Lyth and Lees, and even Andrew Gale could become the heroes this time next week.
|September 15 2016, 8:30 AM |
it will be a very interesting game next week and watching the game unfold with all its twists and turns , and someone will come out a hero or villain .
|September 15 2016, 10:14 AM |
If we do not win it, I hope Somerset don`t. They have got away with two or three dodgy wickets with no points deduction. At least Middlesex and Yorkshire have fair wickets that favour both bat and ball which leads to better cricket.
Whatever happens today at OT
If Middlesex win next week, it is their title.
If we win next week, it is ours.
If we draw next week, it is probably Somersets.
Somerset have a bit of a quandary. Prepare a "result" wicket again to ensure a win, and they will not get enough batting bonus points to take the title. Prepare a road, as normal at Taunton before this season, to make sure of maximum bonus points, and they probably end up drawing.
|September 15 2016, 10:26 AM |
Stu - "if we win next week it is ours"
Am, I understanding you correctly, because that is not the case is it?
for eg, a 24 point win for Somerset would mean Yorkshire would need a 24 point win to take the title, not just any win.
Also, worth noting YCCC are not going to be Champions if we tie on points with Somerset - as they'll have fewer losses than us.
21.2.8 The side which has the highest aggregate of points
gained at the end of the season shall be the Champion
County of their respective Division. Should any sides in
the Championship table be equal on points, the
following tie-breakers will be applied in the order stated:
most wins, fewest losses, team achieving most points in
contests between teams level on points, most wickets
taken, most runs scored.
|September 15 2016, 10:41 AM |
That is true. Not as cut and dried as my statement. Should have said "if we win and get 24 points next week, it is ours" Probably more wishful thinking on my part and speculation.
But I can not see, Somerset winning and getting 24 points. They will either produce a "result" wicket, win and not get many batting points, or produce a road and get maximum batting points and 13 points from a draw.
|September 15 2016, 10:46 AM |
I think there is a difference between a drawn match v Middlesex today and a win for Yorkshire's chances. If Middlesex win they will be 20 points ahead of us so we would realistically need to get a 24 pointer and then concede no more than a three bonus points which seems unlikely.
How many times this season have Somerset got a full set of batting bonus points at home I wonder?
|September 15 2016, 12:54 PM |
Middlesex don't win today they have to assume that Somerset will win their last game so our game becomes must win for both sides giving equal chance (maybe us with slight edge as we can choose to bowl first)
|September 15 2016, 1:04 PM |
Great news in todays "Press", both from a personal level and the playing side. Pattos father`s illness has improved, so should be back next week.
Patto for Brooks, Leaning for Lehmann??
Move everyone up from Bresnan down to Plunkett and play Patto & Brooks. We do HAVE to win, which will need 20 wickets, so why not have as many wicket takers in the team as possible.
|September 15 2016, 1:08 PM |
Patto for Brooks? How do you come up with that?
|September 15 2016, 1:10 PM |
That's great news for Patto and his family. He should certainly play at Lord's if his head is in the right place. I'm not sure Leaning is worth a spot just now. I'd be be tempted to go with:
Plunkett or Willey
|September 15 2016, 1:18 PM |
I am not sure we need 5 seamers ? If we have to bowl so many overs as to need so many bowlers then Middlesex would have a big score on the board in any case .
We also need to make enough runs to ensure that even if we win Somerset don't pip us .
|September 15 2016, 1:20 PM |
I agree but I'm regarding Bresnan as a batsman in that line up. Plunkett is in decent nick as shown yesterday. Would Leaning or Rhodes provide more runs on current form?
|September 15 2016, 1:23 PM |
EYT --- Did you see the bowling figures from the last match, not to mention the runs that Plunkett scored. Brooks had a shocker.
Who else do you suggest we take out of the side to bring Patto in, or is just a case of fiercely attack every posting I make.
|This message has been edited by StuartRA from IP address 184.108.40.206 on Sep 15, 2016 1:23 PM|
|September 15 2016, 1:31 PM |
First things first, Middlesex deserve to win the title, they've been the best side, but hey if we can win then try to win we must
One of the reasons why they deserve to win is they are unbeaten, so they mustn't get bowled out very often, we'll need more bowlers, a draw is no use.
I'd go with
Balance (or Overseas player???)
Patterson or Plunkett
Win a good toss, go for the win, not worry about the points, hope for the best
|September 15 2016, 1:45 PM |
Rhodes is on loan at Essex for rest of season.Unsure if we could recall him even if we wanted to.Shaw came back earlier in the season though.
|September 15 2016, 1:46 PM |
Seadog , point taken , yes .
|September 15 2016, 1:56 PM |
Agree, we have to win so we need to get 20 wickets and have as many bowlers in the side as feasable. Realistically if the replacement for Lehmann is Leaning, is he going to get any more runs than the extra bowler if that is Plunkett, Willey or Rafiq.
If we don`t win, I would prefer a loss than a draw, as the draw would hand Somerset the title, if they win, which they do not deserve with their dodgy pitches and no points deductions.
A draw probably sees us third, a loss also sees us third, so it`s win or bust!! 20 wickets or third, so why not pick the extra bowler.
|This message has been edited by StuartRA from IP address 220.127.116.11 on Sep 15, 2016 1:57 PM|
|September 15 2016, 1:58 PM |
Hmm. We are a batsman down (Lehmann). Not sure we then go even further and leave out Ballance for an unidentified overseas player? Ballance clearly had a poor game at Headingley but his six previous innings in the championship are 71,20,10,72,1,101. Not bad.
If we can magic someone for this final game to replace Lehmann, then we would presumably leave the batting line up as is, with the only decision being who to leave out for Patto
For what it is worth, I am with Stu on this one. I thought Plunkett bowled well at Headingley with aggression and was reasonably accurate (there were a couple of edges that made his figures look worse than they are). Plus he played a good hand with the bat. We can't afford a Brooks off day in that final game. We sorely missed Patto - so for me he has to play
|September 15 2016, 2:08 PM |
Is it really a case of you're only as good as your last match?
Dropping our leading wicket taker for the past 3 seasons.
Let's not forget he took 7 wickets in both the recent wins against Durham and Notts. Also 8 of the 14 wickets we took against Hants.
Brooks underrated on this forum because he goes for a few runs.
If Patterson comes back on and we want Plunkett in too, then don't enterain Leaning who has offered zero this season.
|September 15 2016, 2:08 PM |
Middlesex playing cautiously with only 50 overs remaining and still batting. We need to play aggressively at Lords. Unless conditions suggest otherwise, I would take advantage of the ECB rule and put them in and then try to bowl them out cheaply. Like at Scarborough, I would make Ballance captain (Gale had bad back!) and if we cannot get Bairstow (who would replace Hodd) I would play Lyth, Lees, Ballance, Leaning, Bresnan, Rashid, Plunkett, Hodd, Patterson, Brooks and Sidebottom. We will need to win the match, so an extra bowler playing Bresnan mainly for batting would be useful.