Thursday, 7 September 2017

Derbyshire v Glamorgan day 3

Derbyshire 236-9 (Reece 53, Wilson 45, Hughes 44)

v Glamorgan

Another day, another slightly disappointing batting display by Derbyshire.

After the wicket had been under covers for two days, it was a foregone conclusion that the visitors would opt to bowl first. They made regular inroads into a Derbyshire batting side that has hiccuped its way through the season and had removed all but the final wicket by the end of the day's play.

Luis Reece was the only batsman to reach fifty, although most got a start.  Although, on paper, the batting looks decent enough the sum of the parts aren't adding up right now and the area needs looked at in the close season. With the current four-day trough of form continuing for Wayne Madsen and Billy Godleman, previously our two most reliable batsmen in the format, no one else is coming forward to make up the deficit of runs. For us to move forward another year, the batting needs to be more reliable than has been the case in 2017.

And yet the game could still end in a win, if the weather allows play tomorrow. Logically, we will declare, they will forfeit their first innings and we will bat for an agreed time to set an agreed target. That's my summation of things and we can only hope that we bowl to greater effect.

It was, to be fair, never going to be easy to bat today and we can only hope that this continues into the final sessions of play at county headquarters this season. Perhaps then the value of today's runs might be better appreciated.

I'll be back tomorrow.

13 comments:

Mark said...

Par for the course for Derbyshire's season Peakfan. We're a mess all over the field, zero squad depth, players hopelessly out of form and quite honestly a totally rudderless ship. I still think we'll finish with the wooden spoon which would be atrocious considering Durham and Leicestershire were docked points. Godleman needs dropping asap, Wayne must be getting close to be, but who replaces them?. No, I've no idea either.

David Woolley said...

I don't mind the captains getting together to try to set up a match/result. I just hope we don't do something silly like we did against Northants earlier this year.
If we are going to avoid the wooden spoon, (let's be honest, it's us or Leicestershire), every point will be invaluable!! It looks like Leicestershire are going to get next to nothing from their current game, so even 5 points for a draw, plus bonus points could be good for us.

notoveryet said...

You're probably a trifle harsh on this performance from Derbyshire, Peakfan. With the ball moving around and some uneven bounce, I thought this was a reasonable score, and if Glamorgan had held their catches, it could have been a lot worse. It was slightly disappointing from 95-2 before lunch and particularly from 185-4 before tea, when 300 looked possible, but it was far the worst this season. You have to credit the bowlers for most of the wickets, although Madsen's and Hughes' were terribly wasteful, Madsen slashing a short, wide ball straight at point a couple of overs before lunch having fought well through a difficult hour, and Hughes an edged attempted cut. He clearly thought he hadn't touched it on its way to the wicket-keeper, but can hardly claim bad luck with the decision for such an injudicious shot. Wilson had a couple of let-offs, and it looked as if he was going to capitalise on it until he was LBW to one that looked as if it kept low to trigger the collapse of our extended tail. It's disappointing, though, that so many got starts without making a substantial score, and it seems to be a pattern this season. No-one should ever expect praise for a 40 - whether it's pretty or gritty, it's always a missed opportunity and there's been far too many this season.

I think this will probably end up as a bonus points battle tomorrow. Although the forecast seems to be improving, and a target could probably be set without too much contrivance besides a forfeiture and a declaration, I struggle to see the captains reaching an agreement here. Derbyshire will probably want to have at least 70 overs to be sure of having enough time to bowl out Glamorgan, whilst I don't think Glamorgan will want to chase much more than 275 on this wicket. There's no problem getting to this situation, but I can't see Godleman accepting 4 an over, even if it would be stiff challenge. Then again with our bowling at times this year.....

Peakfan said...

I think we are in agreement, notoveryet. With the ball moving around, as I said, it was always likely to be lively, but we can never be happy with such a score and the squandering of starts.
It could go as you say, but that would make for a day of tedium for the long- suffering faithful. I agree that the 'target' would have to be generous, as our attack, on paper, could roll them over.
As you say though, life is rarely that easy for us...

Paul said...

Robert Croft / Glamorgan seem to be alluding to commerce coming before cricket at Derby.

"Derby run their business as they see fit, but the out-field has been the problem. It's taken a lot of wear and tear throughout the season and it doesn't drain very well, so that's the reason we haven't got on."

Thoughts ?

Peakfan said...

Well, either we need better drainage or less events.
And since the event side finances the cricket side...and 100k plus from 2 gigs cannot be ignored...we may need to play a few more games at Chesterfield to give it a breather.

David Woolley said...

I think it's got to be the drainage Peakfan. We all know that the two nearby counties both played to a result over the same period of days. I struggle to understand how one concert nearly two months ago could be responsible for the problems. All the pictures we saw on the BBC website showed standing water. This indicates drainage to me.
If the commercial side is successful in raising money, then the club will have more to spend on players, facilities, drainage etc.

Ash said...

I wouldn't go by the pictures on the BBC website, not sure these would be new, it would be a case of 'I need a picture of a puddle at Derbyshire CCC' they'd pull any out that they have historically. Better off following David Griffin on Twitter and look at his pics as they would be 'live'

Peakfan said...

Ash is right. The Beeb tend to use indiscriminate stock pix and last year showed a pic of the 3aaa over a piece on county financial issues around the game that had nothing to do with us...

notoveryet said...

I was commenting on photos tweeted by DCCC by David Griffin, Dave Fletcher, and Nick Webb, all of them as live. Knack commented the other day that there are only 3 groundstaff, but one of the photos shows 5 moving covers, so presumably lack of manpower isn't a factor. What's clear though is that Derby has a problem - whether it's equipment, resources, ground management or structural - that needs to be addressed if we are to maintain the reputation we're building for delivering national cricket events like the Women's World Cup or the Club T20 finals being played today. I don't see this as an issue related to the use of the ground for concerts - other similar grounds do it without resulting in waterlogging, and if it was the major factor, would surely have resulted in the same happening after much heavier rain during the Notts match. I'm amused by the suggestion that the solution to the problem is to move to the arid, desert wastes of Chesterfield. I connect Chesterfield with two things, losing time and losing matches, so checked back to see if my feeling was supported by the facts. Since moving back to play at Chesterfield in 2006, there have been 15 matches, of which we've lost 7 and won just 1. Two of the matches were wholly or effectively washed out, and 10 complete days have been lost, with the equivalent of 3 days time lost through shorter stoppages. Lovely though Chesterfield is in good weather, it attracts worse weather and recovers more slowly than Derby, and when it doesn't rain, we lose, often very heavily. Next week will be interesting, with wet weather around in the run up, low September light, tree-lined ground and no floodlights. Even in good weather, I doubt whether any day will go past 5ish, and any cloud after mid-afternoon will have us off. I'm sure I'll be very much in the minority, but it's Derby for me every time. Just get the problem sorted out.

Peakfan said...

Amused or not, notoveryet, if there is a need to do major work and part of it requires a lesser load...or if we get a chance for 2 or 3 big money-raising concerts a season...then we don't have many options with the requisite infrastructure.
Weather we can't do much about, I am afraid...

notoveryet said...

I've not seen anything to suggest that major work is planned, but if it is, fine, we have to work around it. Otherwise, it rather spoils the point of hosting concerts to earn money to improve the playing strength if those players are sitting with their feet up in the dressing room watching a swamp draining.

Snapper said...

In spite of not over yet pessimism about playing at Chesterfield, I suspect there will be twice as many paying customers than would have been in Derby.