Monday, 25 May 2015

Lancashire v Derbyshire day 2

Derbyshire 370
Lancashire 348-4 (Prince 156 not, Petersen 113, Taylor 3-87

Lancashire trail by 22 runs

'Much will depend on Messrs Prince and Petersen' I wrote last night, though claim no mystic talents in their each scoring a century today.

Let's face it, they had things in their favour: a fairly young attack, a short boundary, a wicket that is a long way from spiteful and the presence of the current South African Test captain in the opposition. Lots of incentives, in fact, to prove a point.

They are both fine players and have proved it at the highest level, not just against the attack that we perforce have to field at present. That same attack has done well in recent weeks, but ran into a couple of batsmen in form, especially Prince, who is just short of a hundred in average so far. To think he was going to retire at the end of last season...

A man with eleven Test centuries to his name was always likely to cash in today and did so. It was a tough gig for Billy Godleman on his first stint as captain, but by all accounts he kept trying things and waited to see if anything would happen.

It didn't today, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.

This will be a tough game to save now, but there can be no complaints tonight.

5 comments:

Mutn said...

They say that the truth is often halfway between two extremes!

I continue to read your blog Peaky ( informal I know , sorry! ) and you do always speak well of any positives, whereas one such poster on the Falcon's Forum might as well don his hanging wig before the day's play commences !

I'm at Southport for days three and four, so I'll try to keep any comments short of proclaiming a Second Coming, but at the same time not demand that the guillotine be brought back !

Hope to speak with you on match day . I'll look for the corner of the ground where the sun always shines ! :-)

Peakfan said...

Sun doesnt always shine Mutn as you will recall from my T20 comments...but I take into account the standard of opposition and it was men v boys for a large part..
Dont know about the other site mate...long time since I looked...sorry.

Marc said...

Shouldn,t we have our own incentive to prove a point by bowling these sort of players out ?. If we are going to accept that every time we come up against a good batsman or bowler we will either cave in or fail to get them out,we may as well forget it here and now. This is not the mentality of a team supposedly aiming for promotion. Yes,we had a couple of young bowlers out there but we also had some with considerable experience and could have added to that had Palladino not been inexplicably left out.

I,m by no means convinced any of our other bowlers (White, Hughes, Cotton etc) would have made much difference to yesterday,s outcome which once again proves how much we depend on Footitt to consistently come up trumps. If he fails we struggle. Such was his form last season the other bowlers were dragged along in his slipstream,making their own job that much easier. I,m not confident that without him we have players who are capable of taking 20 wickets which has to be worrying. Even the win over Gloucestershire was an epic struggle which could easily have ended in similar fashion to the Northamptonshire game.

Anything other than a loss will be a bonus in this game,a big bonus given the current state of play but just how confident can we be of coming out on top against some of the weaker sides?. As the summer progresses we may find ourselves more reliant on the slow bowlers which is not a source of comfort. Wainwright looks a pale shadow of his former self and Critchley is clearly out of his depths at this level,despite looking as if he could be a useful batsman. I hope i,m proved wrong but unless Footitt produces another second half to the season similar to last year,I don,t see us bowling sides out.

Peakfan said...

I think you're being harsh on an attack of two 20 year olds and a lad of 18 who was playing academy cricket a couple of weeks ago with little expectation of an early elevation to the senior side.

Pitting such lads against Test batsmen of recent vintage in prime form is like me going to play against a local primary school attack...I would fancy my chances. Try all you like, it is a tough gig on a decent track with short boundaries.

Given Dino has been unfit, I am assuming he was omitted because he is still not deemed fit enough for a four-day game. We are bare in the spin dept but Critchley took three today which will help his confidence. It is our weaker suit, beyond doubt and I share your concerns on Wainers. Again though, an ankle injury causes doubt and maybe he needs time and a lot more overs. Spinners need lots and lots of bowling and I understand he had little pre-season - and didn't tour.

Horizons may need adjusted - but I would defy any side to cope with the injuries we have had

Anonymous said...

We can't continue to use the same excuse of injuries. There comes a point where people need deliver.