Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

captaincolly wrote:I wonder why , out of the likely batting lineup against Northants , only Steel and Richardson started this second X1 friendly?
Further questions might be asked if there's another collapse at the County Ground.

There were five changes from the team published yesterday. That suggests that there has been some objection to our fielding a team that was not representative of a 2nd XI.

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:I wonder why , out of the likely batting lineup against Northants , only Steel and Richardson started this second X1 friendly?
Further questions might be asked if there's another collapse at the County Ground.

There were five changes from the team published yesterday. That suggests that there has been some objection to our fielding a team that was not representative of a 2nd XI.

That's probably it. FTECB probably vetoed the original team list.
I think we'd be much better off with Richardson as keeper and playing the extra batsman. Can't make judgements after one game but I suspect Weighell and Rimmington are at least as capable with the bat as Poynter.

captaincolly wrote:

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:I wonder why , out of the likely batting lineup against Northants , only Steel and Richardson started this second X1 friendly?
Further questions might be asked if there's another collapse at the County Ground.

There were five changes from the team published yesterday. That suggests that there has been some objection to our fielding a team that was not representative of a 2nd XI.

That's probably it. FTECB probably vetoed the original team list.
I think we'd be much better off with Richardson as keeper and playing the extra batsman. Can't make judgements after one game but I suspect Weighell and Rimmington are at least as capable with the bat as Poynter.

That'll be the Poytner who we've just given a 2 year contact to.
In which case why are we trialling another w/k. I wonder who makes these decisions?

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:I wonder why , out of the likely batting lineup against Northants , only Steel and Richardson started this second X1 friendly?
Further questions might be asked if there's another collapse at the County Ground.

There were five changes from the team published yesterday. That suggests that there has been some objection to our fielding a team that was not representative of a 2nd XI.

That's probably it. FTECB probably vetoed the original team list.
I think we'd be much better off with Richardson as keeper and playing the extra batsman. Can't make judgements after one game but I suspect Weighell and Rimmington are at least as capable with the bat as Poynter.

That'll be the Poytner who we've just given a 2 year contact to.
In which case why are we trialling another w/k. I wonder who makes these decisions?

Well pre-season there was a comment from Lewis seeming to wonder why Gareth Harte didn't play for the first X1 last season after starring for the seconds! He should have asked the head coach.

No- he knows you never get a straight answer from the head coach

westoelad wrote:No- he knows you never get a straight answer from the head coach

Indeed!

Josh Coughlin and Steel in the squad for Northants with Harte and Potts out - the latter described as having " tightness in his back." So presumably McCarthy will replace Potts in the starting X1.

Leicestershire seconds 176/3. Can't imagine they're strong opposition so it doesn't bode well for our back up bowlers - and our team yesterday didn't seem to have many batsmen either.

258/6 now. 4 catches for the keeper.

And there is is - the trademark failure to bowl out the lower order. Leicestershire seconds were 257/6 and are now 457/8 with the 9th wicket partnership currently 117!

captaincolly wrote:And there is is - the trademark failure to bowl out the lower order. Leicestershire seconds were 257/6 and are now 457/8 with the 9th wicket partnership currently 117!

And then 2 wickets in 2 balls. 457 all out.

captaincolly wrote:

captaincolly wrote:And there is is - the trademark failure to bowl out the lower order. Leicestershire seconds were 257/6 and are now 457/8 with the 9th wicket partnership currently 117!

And then 2 wickets in 2 balls. 457 all out.

but too late!

tomorrow's forecast looks even worse than it did before

Durhamfootman wrote:

captaincolly wrote:

captaincolly wrote:And there is is - the trademark failure to bowl out the lower order. Leicestershire seconds were 257/6 and are now 457/8 with the 9th wicket partnership currently 117!

And then 2 wickets in 2 balls. 457 all out.

but too late!

tomorrow's forecast looks even worse than it did before

Yep. Suggests there will be no play. I think the forecast around parts of the country must be poor because someone was tweeting about another game a few days ago and had it a nailed in draw.

This second X1 lineup looks dodgy to me - Carse has some sort of injury and his comments suggested it'll be a long recovery so we only really have one decent spare bowler - McCarthy coming in for Potts. What will happen when the inevitable further injuries occur and/or when McCarthy is not available?
And there's not much batting cover either - Harte and Jones have one FC appearance between them and Pringle has struggled at FC level. There's virtually no depth to the squad.

no depth at all

thank goodness we can't be relegated

or can we?

if we can have 10 ball overs, then anything may be possible if there is the will to do it