2016 Hampshire Thread

[st_brendy]

Warks have declared with a lead of 346. Thought they may bat on a bit to be honest.

The risk of us winning, coupled with there being no incentive for Lancs to chase whatever Warks set them, I think has somewhat forced them into the declaration.

It's good news for us, even if only by a very small amount (realistically, Warks will still avoid defeat from here).

[st_brendy]

Big, big, big blow losing Ervine. The in-form batsman. The man who can score quickly.

Net 158-5 is not great. Still need another 50 minimum, but ideally another 120 or so. And with Crane coming in for Andrew, we're back to having a bit of a tail again (as shown in the first innings, if Berg doesn't chip in, then they disappear quite quickly).

[st_brendy]

Net 158-6. Quite simply, our survival relies on Dawson and Crane.

[Hampshireboi]

Well we are really buggering this up aren't we. Making the wicket seem worse than it is. Need another 50 at the very minimum

[st_brendy]

Warks suddenly regret their declaration

[Hampshireboi]

If Lancs win we still go down though don't we? Let's be honest unless we get another 150 this match isn't going to be a draw!

[haggishants]

If Lancs win we still go down though don't we? Let's be honest unless we get another 150 this match isn't going to be a draw!

Lancs win and Hants draw then Hants stay up.` (But Lancs win highly unlikely).

[budgetmeansbudget]

Well we are really buggering this up aren't we. Making the wicket seem worse than it is. Need another 50 at the very minimum

It's been a terrible example of how to make quick runs and set up a target so far.

In keeping with the day overall.

[budgetmeansbudget]

One positive about McManus, he looks like he's got a good head on his shoulders.

[budgetmeansbudget]

Looks like we've pulled this back a bit as the day comes to an end.

If we do get the chance to declare what will we look for? Surely got to set Durham a decent target, say 270/280 from 80 overs?

[st_brendy]

Looks like we've pulled this back a bit as the day comes to an end.

If we do get the chance to declare what will we look for? Surely got to set Durham a decent target, say 270/280 from 80 overs?

I think 80 overs is probably about the right. It's not like we've got Vince and Ervine at the crease, and a bunch of wickets in hand, and smashing 60 off 5 overs therefore becomes a real possibility. There might be a slight increase in run-rate tomorrow morning, but probably not too much. So I'd expect a good 10 - 15 overs of batting still, hence the 40 overs.

NOOO! Dawson out. Joins Adams and Ervine in getting himself out trying to smash spin.

[captaincolly]

Looks like we've pulled this back a bit as the day comes to an end.

If we do get the chance to declare what will we look for? Surely got to set Durham a decent target, say 270/280 from 80 overs?

I guess it all depends on how long you think you need to get 10 wickets. That sort of equation sounds a good one and I reckon you will have a great chance. There's no point in Durham trying to batten down the hatches at any stage of a run chase. Could go two ways for us - either the lack of pressure on batsmen who know the result doesn't matter will free them up and someone will play a blinder or it'll be the opposite and they'll get themselves out with daft shots - they are good at that!
Perhaps the third possibility is the favourite - our incompetent batting against spin bowlers will lead to a clatter of wickets.

[st_brendy]

Not sure I agree with the need for a nightwatchman here. Firstly, it's Berg he's protecting, hardly a frontline batsman. Secondly, we're not exactly in a position to block out overs. Thirdly, dropping down to 10 potentially decreasing what damage he could do with the bat.

[budgetmeansbudget]

Big wicket that, changes things again, we probably won't need to declare now.

[budgetmeansbudget]

Looks like we've pulled this back a bit as the day comes to an end.

If we do get the chance to declare what will we look for? Surely got to set Durham a decent target, say 270/280 from 80 overs?

I guess it all depends on how long you think you need to get 10 wickets. That sort of equation sounds a good one and I reckon you will have a great chance. There's no point in Durham trying to batten down the hatches at any stage of a run chase. Could go two ways for us - either the lack of pressure on batsmen who know the result doesn't matter will free them up and someone will play a blinder or it'll be the opposite and they'll get themselves out with daft shots - they are good at that!
Perhaps the third possibility is the favourite - our incompetent batting against spin bowlers will lead to a clatter of wickets.

I think you'll probably chase any target down comfortably with our limited attack.

If you hadn't won your last game, maybe things would have been different.