<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Return to Index  
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Middlesex

September 20 2016, 7:53 PM 

Yes he was lucky and yes he may have walked, but I doubt any of our team would have done either. To get s century and bat all day you need the odd bit of luck so I'm not going to get bitter at the lads expense.

I wish we had picked Plunkett for his raw pace once we decided not to pick Leaning. The bowlers bowled well today bar Willeys first over but it needed someone to get them jumping around now and again.

I'm hoping to see some of the game tomorrow. By close of play we should know a lot more about what we need to achieve.

 
 
JG
(Login _JG_)

Re: Middlesex

September 20 2016, 8:21 PM 

Strangely I'm not sure we're much nearer to finding out the destination of the title than we were at the start of day: no side is really out of it yet but equally none has advanced their claims massively.

Our game is pretty even I think; we didn't get the flying start that the advantage of bowling first could have given us, due in no small part to dropped catches (particular Rafiq's drop of Gubbins, which wasn't a particularly difficult chance), but equally they haven't got away from us. 200/5 overnight with the new ball due in the morning could lead to 250ao or 400- the first session will be key.

In the other match, Somerset looked like they were setting up a commanding position but theie massive late collapse has pegged them back. I suspect that they still have enough to beat Notts but they look like missing out on 1 if not 2 bonus points, which could be crucial.

Re: selection, they went with the team I would have gone for bar Willey ahead of Plunkett. I too would have liked Plunkett's pace to change things up, but Lord's is generally a very slow wicket so I assume that they thought this would neutralise Plunkett's threat somewhat. It's a judgement call.

 
 
Peter
(Login Blackpooltyke)

Re: Middlesex

September 20 2016, 9:21 PM 

I suspect willey was preferred to help in a 4th innings run chase, although plunkett is pretty useful in that area too.

 
 
Geoff B
(Login Coastalview)

Re: Middlesex

September 20 2016, 9:41 PM 

Bit of a stalemate due to good bowling and very cautious batting, which I hope the 10:30 start with a virtually new ball in the morning will break to our advantage.

Pity about the dropped catches and decision not given but still all to play for. Just hope we are batting before lunch.

 
 
WS55
(Login WibseySimon55)

Re: Middlesex

September 20 2016, 11:35 PM 

All that needs to be said about today has been said. We bowled well, made mistakes in the field, got the rub of one decision for us (a high LBW) and one against us (Gubbins' faint snick). Honours even at lunch, Middlesex edging it in the last one and a half sessions, with just the slow run rate to our credit.
The cricket was solid, absorbing, but I found it oddly less enjoyable than much of the season. Odd since it's such a key game, and it's Lord's, and there was the added interest of the background of news from Taunton. Maybe it was just the dull weather. Or knowing the season is nearly all over.
Because it's Middlesex, there were echoes of Scarborough earlier this year, and of last year's post-climactic defeat, and of 2014's extraordinary Rogers-led 4th innings chase.
And, blow me, there was Rogers galloping away to a century once more, for a different opponent this time, and out of sight in the west country -- making it look as if he was going to lead a team from behind to overtake us again.

And then bad light and anticlimax for us, and the startling news of 322 for 4 to 322 for 9 from Taunton.

Leaving us, as has been said, none the wiser at the end of today. All permutations still intact. All the pressure still there.
I spent the last hour hoping for the light and the umpires. Tedium relieved with the company of some very friendly, unstuffy Middlesex fans, most of whom thought we had been treated disgracefully by ECB on the Bairstow question. They also had some good recollections of Bairstow senior. I liked them so much I hadn't the heart to say that if we don't win this year, I'd rather Somerset than them ...
So here's hoping our bowlers can mop them up in the morning, get these wickets before the 110 overs, and that the batsmen come good in the (forecast) sunshine.

 
 
Guest
(Login ThirdUmpire)

Re: Middlesex

September 21 2016, 6:58 AM 

I'm not sure what middlesexs approach will be today. They need to look for a win if Sometsets spinners reap havoc later today so they need more runs and quicker than they did yesterday. But they played yesterday as if not sure whether to stick or twist and it could force thir hand tomorrow or Friday and open up a door for us. They may need to set us a generous target with one eye on our batting order revealing Bresnan at 5 and think they can run through us in two sessions.

 
 
 
< 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