Derbyshire 318
Warwickshire 375-6 (Lamb 79 not, Trott 76, Wright 72 Critchley 3-63)
Warwickshire lead by 57 runs
What a difference a day makes.
Most of us, after yesterday, had some expectation of a first innings lead by the end of today. Instead, we are looking quite clearly at a first defeat of the summer, unless we bowl a lot better tomorrow morning.
I will absolve our two young spinners from blame, as they both offered control beyond their years. Luis Reece also bowled tidily, but the mystery was why Matt Critchley had to wait till mid-afternoon to turn his arm over, when he had quite clearly troubled the batsmen last night.
He bowled well again today and fully deserved his three wickets, but I'd have to say that our two South Africans were very, very ordinary, slipping into the 'poor' category at times, and Mark Footitt looked very rusty. There were some hideous balls from all three of them and the overnight batsmen got in quite easily today and were soon playing shots. I could have stayed in, because even at my age I have a good leave outside off stump. There was plenty - way too much - opportunity for that today.
32 extras tells its own story and it was a sorry effort. I take nothing away from Warwickshire, who batted sensibly and well, but we should have had Critchley on well before he was. If a tail-ender gets in, they generally find it easier to score runs when there is pace on the ball, and Wright did this admirably. Sometimes, all you need is the change of pace, let alone spin, and it took our senior players way too long to fathom that. Once they did, they got him.
I know we have two very good South African bowlers. I know we have a scattergun left armer who can be devastating and disappointing in the same over, but I think we should have thought more out of the box today. Yes, Viljoen and Olivier wanted a relatively new ball, but neither used it well and we judge such things against very good benchmarks at Derbyshire. For what it's worth, we missed Ravi Rampaul's ability to pitch it on the cut strip today. Badly.
For me, giving Critchley a harder ball with a little bounce at one end, even for three or four overs, to make Wright think and mix things up would have been better. It worked for Warwickshire and it's their ground, so you'd reckon there was some merit in it. Then you would have had Bell in earlier and things could have been different.
It's too late now and they have, I think, batted us out of this game. I suspect Patel will, as he has been so often, be the game changer in the third innings, so it is imperative that we take quick wickets tomorrow and restrict the lead to under three figures.
They simply have to make them play. There were some ridiculous, embarrassing wides today, the sort you might see in a beer match, and it made for awkward watching.
I've been quick to praise on my time on the blog, but I will always be honest and I will be critical when we become unprofessional.
Some of today's bowling was, sadly, just that.
And suddenly the concerns about this squad have come back with a bang. Like you say Peakfan, Viljoen and Olivier were shocking, Viljoen I'm still very uncertain of, zero consistency from him will be his undoing. When he's good he's good, when he's bad he's bloody awful. Looks like a poor defeat here, when I was very optimistic after the first days play.
ReplyDeleteI think the summary you gave tonight sound pretty accurate. This wicket looks like 400 par score. I should imagine it will 150-200 lead and we start batting 3pm onwards unless a huge change in discipline of bowlers change. I have noticed the NB in extras in 3/4 bowling innings this season we have had have been in double figures. I think team we selected in this match would be a brilliant team to play at county ground but not Edgebaston. I think with hignsight Paladino or Rampual instead of Footit or Viljeon in this game.
ReplyDeleteI expect Patel will enjoy the last innings and see him playing a big part in final stages of this game. I think playing Qudri should be applauded. I am still baffled why he didn't bowl more and Critchley. I read that he has been working lot on his bowling in winter. It shows hard works pay off and really happy to see him being bowled more again
what do you think Billy Godleman batting position? I would prefer to see him opening the batting with Slater and have Reece at 3. I can't why he is batting himself at 5 as far to good of batsman to be starting at 5. I think Billy is also a batsman who can benefit from playing himself in. If he bats at 5 he doesn't have that luxury as he could run out of partners.
What a frustrating performance in the field after all the hard work on day one. The wheels haven’t come off but a few cracks appearing already in early May. After that wonderful innings by Wayne Madsen put us in a relatively strong position, we find ourselves struggling to stay in the game with some wayward bowling. I think Dino or Ravi would have made better use of the wicket. Obviously, Mark Footitt was rusty with, l presume, little cricket under his belt but our overseas contingent don’t have that excuse. Only bright spot was the bowling of our young spinners along with a tidy spell from Luis Reece. Like PF, l cannot understand why Matt Critchley didn’t get a look in till mid afternoon. Very strange decision.
ReplyDeleteWe have an uphill task to get anything out of this match.
Stuart, York
I wouldn't be surprised if it is all over today
ReplyDeleteThis Godleman thigh wound me up on day one of the season and now it’s really grating. I don’t get it I really don’t. Such a good opener. Plays the balls on merit. He can dig in well. Reece would be perfect for 3 like in T20s or 4 if Madsen wants 3. Especially with Reece bowling more and more.
ReplyDelete