<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Gary Watton
(Login GaryFulford)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 5:22 PM 

You can be as disappointed as you like.

 
 
Guest
(Login Roundhegian)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 5:44 PM 

In the Somerset match, in both innings Adil got himself out with terrible shots owing to lapses of concentration. Could be many reasons for that but mental tiredness is one of them. I thought Adil bowled OK after the usual shaky start and he finished with three wickets. Still a strange decision to withdraw but might be best for the team, as we have a very capable substitute in Rafiq, who will doubtless be highly motivated.

 
 
Guest
(Login WhiteroseDave)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 6:19 PM 

Yes, Rashid is an obvious loss but I think of Rafiq as someone who will play well when he has something to prove or our backs are against the wall, let's hope he makes his claim to be our number one spinner next season.

 
 
Guest
(Login GaryFulford)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 6:50 PM 

There is no way that Rafiq can be our number one spinner. He doesn't take any wickets in the CC for a start. How many wickets do you think he will manage this week? If he gets as many as four in the match, I would be amazed. He's a brilliant Twenty20 operator, less good in the RL cup and definitely not first choice spinner for a CC campaign. A good spinner can find success on most wickets so don't give me any old Mother Hubbard about Lords is not a turning wicket. No excuses please. We can't afford to carry any passengers against Middlesex.

 
 
Guest
(Login WhiteroseDave)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 7:12 PM 

What I'm saying is I hope he sees what's happened with Rashid as an opportunity and he takes it with both hands.

 
 
Lewis
(Login Lewis_116)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 7:13 PM 

Rashid has let us down bizarrely here.

How tiring is it to spin a ball in Limited over cricket?

He's barely batted too.

Having said that let's remember he travelled to Wales at very short notice to help us beat Glamorgan's.

Regarding the Bairstow situation. I am so so angry at this. Not just how the decision hampers us but the blatent "don't give a sh!t" attitude towards both the counties and Championship tournament.

When we face a full strength Middlesex, as we did an uninterrupted Somerset, we will be minus Root and Bairstow. The ECB have already had Plunkett Rashid and Willey half the summer.

Do they not feel this completely belittles the competition? How can Middlesex celebrate if they win?

I honestly cannot remember a match I have wanted us to win so much.

Use it to will you on boys. Pack the team with big game winners. Changing my team from earlier I would go as follows:

Lyth
Lees
Leaning
Balance
Gale c
Bresnan
Hodd wk
Plunkett
Brooks
Patterson
Sidebottom

I was tempted to go with Willey but who for? I would risk no Rafiq. Use our pace and Lyth as spin cover.

Bizarre maybe to play Leaning from 3 but I cannot abide Balance there and would just see if it gives him a boost.


    
This message has been edited by Lewis_116 on Sep 18, 2016 7:15 PM


 
 
Thomas
(Login YorkshireAllOver)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 7:18 PM 

There are so many variables it's nearly impossible to work out which result is best in the Somerset game. In some ways we need them to win so that Middlesex need to win this they may take risks which might benefit us. But we want them to win with enough bonus points to make sure Middlesex need to win, but few enough so that we don't need maximum bonus points. It's so complicated

But one thing's for sure, assuming we put them in, we need to take advantage of the first morning when it'll be cloudy. Restrict Middlesex to under 250 or even under 200 if possible, which will then mean Somerset need fewer bonus points to make sure they'd be out of reach if they won and Middlesex drew, and in turn mean we wouldn't be relying on them to get a lot of bonus points and make our job harder

If that makes any sense?!

Ideally if we get to day 4, Middlesex will be in a situation that they don't lead by many, say 50, and would need to give themselves enough times to get 10 Yorkshire wickets, therefore would be more likely to give us a gettable run chase

But I think it's best just to let the action unfold as it's so difficult to work out!

 
 
Guest
(Login GaryFulford)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 7:27 PM 

Leaning at three is a rabbit caught in headlights. No point in playing him because he is a specialist batsman. We need runs and wickets. He won't score more runs than a Rafiq or a Willey, and they might chip in with a wicket or two while Leaning does not. Besides, his batting at three means he will get bogged down yet again in his determination to dig in. He tries that approach and it hasn't paid off.

 
 
Idle man
(Login Idle_man)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 8:22 PM 

Interested in the comment on Lyth's bowling.. His earliest incarnation was as a pie-throwing declaration bowler. Then he became a useful partnership breaker. Quite often now he takes an over before lunch. He did this in the Somerset game and the batsman played and missed a couple of times and one or two turned significantly. This is not uncommon. Yet there appeared to be no question of a longer spell. Given the issues over spin I think he needs encouragement and further bowling. I'm really not sure how much better Rafiq is than Adam these days.

 
 
Peter (Don)
(Login Yfactor)

Re: CHAMPIONSHIP | Middlesex vs Yorkshire (Pre-match thread)

September 18 2016, 9:09 PM 

If Adil doesn`t want to play against Middlesex we`re better off without him - Yorkshire can sort his future out later...

Meanwhile...the ECB has given us the perfect motivation to beat Middlesex at Lords by refusing to let Jonny B play.

Strange that Cricket Ireland have allowed Murtagh to play for Middlesex when the Ireland team play their first game against South Africa on Sept 25th!

 
 
Geoff B
(Login Coastalview)

The slope

September 18 2016, 9:12 PM 

From the 13 named I would go for:
Lyth
Lees
Ballance
Gale
Bresnan
Plunkett
Willey
Hodd
Sidebottom
Brooks
Patterson.

Without a recognised spinner we need to put them in obviously and hope it doesn't turn into a raging bunsen. With 6 bowlers plus Lyth we should have the ammo to keep going hard at them for however long it takes.

I can't imagine Rafiq has played at Lords more than once and he doesn't convince as a spinner in CC cricket so I wouldn't risk him. He's also likely to get over excited and we need cool heads.

I know the batting looks a bit thin but it's too big a game to risk bringing Leaning back.

 
 
JG
(Login _JG_)

Re: The slope

September 18 2016, 9:20 PM 

I'd still pick Rafiq. I don't think his batting is that much worse than Willey's in red ball cricket and a genuine spin option is surely more useful than a 6th(!) seamer.

 
 

Dave Morton
(Login DaveMorton)

Re: The slope

September 18 2016, 9:40 PM 

Unfortunately Jack made only 10 and 0 in the 2nd XI just finished at Scarborough, but he is a good player and a capped player at that.

I think Rafiq will play if selection is to be consistent. He bowled quite well in the last two games, but Gale is reluctant to use him.

Weren't we told that Patto was finished for the season?

There are so many problems, not least Gale's lack of runs and Ballance's return to out-of-form. Bad Brooks was on show against Somerset, but his twin Good Brooks can be expected to turn up at Lord's.

Lyth
Lees
Leaning
Gale
Ballance
Bresnan
Hodd
Rafiq
Plunkett
Brooks
Sidebottom

I think they'll do that, though not in my batting order. I really would like to see a right-hander at 3. Bresnan or even Hodd might fit that bill, and I agree there's merit in having an extra pace option, Patto (if available would play), Willey or perhaps Fisher.

It's not full strength, whatever they do, but it's not bad, either. Every single player mentioned is a good cricketer.

 
 
Guest
(Login Fozzie1973)

Re: The slope

September 18 2016, 9:56 PM 

I cannot see Leaning suddenly finding form so think we have better options without him, other player to miss out is either Willey or Patto for me, Ideally would not leave out Patto but batting looks very thin if he does play, Hood potentially batting at 6 is far from ideal but not much we can do

Hopefully we put them in & with helpful bowling conditions skittle them for less than 200 & take it from there

Think we are capable of winning with that team but not of picking up 24 points so got to hope Somerset miss out on some batting bonus points



 
 
Gary Watton
(Login GaryFulford)

Re: The slope

September 18 2016, 10:06 PM 

Choosing Leaning just because he is a batsman is futile. Unless he chips in with fifty or sixty runs, his selection is pointless. Five seamers plus Rafiq is a balanced attack. Bresnan and Plunkett are decent all rounders while the others can produce runs too.

 
 
Ball-Sup (Phil)
(Login ball_sup)

Re: The slope

September 18 2016, 10:07 PM 

Look. I know it was four years ago. I know it was before his blip. I know it was Division 2. But, I was at Chelmsford in 2012.

Rafiq scored 53 out of 312 all out.
Took 3 for 65.
Scored 75 out of 252-8 declared
And then wrapped Essex up with 5 for 50.

I know. I know. I know.

But, the fella has got match winner in him. Shoe in for me

 
 
Gary Watton
(Login GaryFulford)

Re: The slope

September 18 2016, 10:24 PM 

Rafiq will play. It's a no brainer. Lyth is not a specialist spinner. End of.
Ultimately it might be Somerset who prove to be the joker in the pack. We could defeat Middlesex (say with about twenty points) and still come second to Somerset. Last week's first innings fiasco may come back to haunt us.

 
 
East Coast Type
(Login EastCoastType)

Re: The slope

September 18 2016, 10:31 PM 

I am as disappointed as anyone with the ECB situation, but feeling more philosophical six or seven hours on from the kerfuffle. Fortune shined on us last year (we got the better of a few close shaves), but it seems this year it is just not meant to be. That is sport.

Also, if we had sorted the batting out last winter we would have won the title some time ago, JB or no JB.

 
 
marsker
(Login marskeman)

Re: The slope

September 19 2016, 12:25 AM 

well i am going to support jack leaning. yes he has been out of form , but plenty of other players have been in the same boat. only recently he was voted the cricket writers young player of the year. over 40 matches he has scored 3 hundreds and 8 fifties with an average of 31 so he can obviously bat. i remember watching him hold our innings together at arundel before he was out to a world class catch for 99. even a player out of form does not deserve the over the top vitriol some posters have given him. we are supposed to be supporters , show some support.

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: The slope

September 19 2016, 7:16 AM 

Agreed marsker.

I can understand some heat of the moment posts when someone is out or drops a catch and I can tolerate a balanced cricket based argument for selection that goes against my views. But we are seeing personal insults and ignorant comments being made when there is plenty of thinking time to be less spiteful or insulting.

We tend to hammer our own players more than our opponents. We have plenty of people we could aim our anger st in our current plight including the ECB Strauss Fraser South Australia Bayliss Graves etc without having to lambast our own players who are preparing for the biggest game of our season.

Given the choice, I wouldn't pick Leaning Rafiq Hodd or Gale for the game tomorrow but as Root Bairstow Lehmann and Rashid are unavailable then they are the next best four players we have in like for like positions. If bairstow had been allowed to play I could see why leaving out Leaning may be an option but we must have some top order batsmen to get the runs and a poor run of form does not guarantee failure this week any more than a century last week guarantees another at lords.

One post said five seamers and a spinner should do the job. The old adage used to be if three seamers could not do it then four wouldn't either and that was to play two spinners in a balanced attack. We are now talking about five seamers!

We are not in a great place due to a variety of reasons but the day before the game we now need to focus on the job in hand of beating Middlesex. Whinging, slagging off players and talking about next season has to stop til Friday as none of that helps anyone.

I'm off to put a bet on a Gale ton. I bet he would love to stick the proverbial two fingers up to the ecb who stopped him from justifiably collecting the trophy two years ago so their poster boy could do it. Last game for Dizzy would be a fitting time for his right hand man to thank him in the best way possible.

 
 
 
< Previous Page 13 4 5 6 7 Next >
  Respond to this message   
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
 Copyright © 1999-2017 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  
All IP addresses are recorded. We reserve the right to remove personal attacks, sexist, racist, homophobic, defamatory or abusive comments, comments likely to incite religious hatred, those disposed to wind others up, and unapproved advertising.

Email us: Whiterosecricket@hotmail.co.uk