Derbyshire 184 and 157
Gloucestershire 163 and 179-8 (Howell 58, Ferguson 4-59)
Gloucestershire won by two wickets
The final day of the county cricket season, as day three was always going to be after the cascade of wickets on day one, dawned sunny and cold. On my approach to the ground, a lengthy queue on Sir Frank Whittle Road suggested a large crowd to witness the closing sessions of cricket for another summer.
Alas, 'twas not so but a reasonable smattering of hardy souls were scattered around the ground in a mixture of summer and (more commonly) winter jackets, most of them hoping to see a home win to rival that of Derby County at Old Trafford last night.
Yet when Tony Palladino and Lockie Ferguson opened the bowling this morning, there appeared to be less movement than yesterday. The work of the roller, to some extent, plus the wicket having dried out, but the bowlers didn't help themselves with too much loose bowling, overpitched and on the batsman's legs.
Both Hammond and Howell batted well, as you had to do to stay in on this wicket. Palladino looked the most likely to get the breakthrough and eventually did, but an earlier opportunity to remove Hammond than was eventually taken was put down. Ferguson put down a hard and fast chance that was straight at him, Palladino's frustration both visible and audible.
At lunch the result looked like going the way of the visitors and afterwards they progressed towards victory with a haste somewhat unseemly in the context of the match. Benny Howell continued to play some splendid shots and the fastest balls that Ferguson could muster came to naught.
Hosein moved up to the stumps for Palladino, in an attempt to disturb the batting equilibrium, but nothing happened until the belated introduction of Matt Critchley to the attack. Howell's attempt to hit him into the middle distance resulted in an outside edge, well caught by Hughes at backward point. Charlesworth was then leg before and Ferguson, bowling at great pace, removed Higgins and Taylor, the latter brilliantly caught by the diving Godleman.
Ten were needed from the last two wickets and Critchley was kept on to bowl to Miles. A long hop went down to fine leg for four and then a powerful straight drive went through his outstretched hands for the winning boundary.
It was a fine game of cricket, played on the best kind of track you could wish for. Batsmen could make runs with sound technique and due diligence, while bowlers felt that they could get something out of it by bending their backs.
At the end of it all, another twenty runs might have made a difference. Those first innings extras were unnecessarily generous and came back to bite us today.
It was the third game this summer - after the away games at Durham and Glamorgan - where we had eased ourselves into a position of strength, only to blow it when it mattered.
Something to work on over the winter.
I'll be back with an end of season report over the weekend.
Disappointing to lose but we seemed to be involved in a great number of close finishes and interesting games this year. As you say we could easily have had three more wins or on the flip side a couple more losses but they have all been intriguing games. I do think we are making progress. A number four batsman would be a priority for me unless Wayne bats at four and we bring in someone at three. Also another reliable seamer would add to the squad. Hardus and Ferguson in the same team doesn’t give you that reliability especially with Critchley as the main spinner. Onto next year!
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteHaving started the morning with a lot of optimism about Derbyshire's chances of a decent win, it evaporated on stepping out of the car at the County Ground to find not a drop of moisture on the grass and seats that were as dry as a bone, having needed a supersopper before you sat down on the first and second days. I don't understand either the meteorology of dew or the mechanics of swing, but it was obvious that the ball wasn't going to move in the air as much as it had on the previous two days. Once play started, there wasn't a lot of movement off the pitch either, and little sign of the variable bounce that had so troubled Derbyshire the previous day. Consequently, the Gloucs batsman were able to go back or forward positively, without any fear of the ball popping or keeping low. In the conditions, Derbyshire probably did well to push them as close as they did in easily the best batting conditions of the match, but could hardly claim bad luck, and to his credit, Godleman didn't try.
ReplyDeleteLike most people around the ground, I thought Critchley should have been given an earlier opportunity when it was obvious the quick bowlers weren't going to be as effective as in the rest of the match, and he would have been able to bowl with more runs in hand. Even if not Critchley, Palladino was persisted with for too long, and as in the last couple of matches, did little to stem the early flow of runs, and there was no rotation of ends that might have found new opportunities. It looked very much like a preconceived plan, which is fine as long as the assumptions on which the plan is based are true. In this case, you suspect the conditions changed but the plan didn't. So I don't think Derbyshire's inflexibility helped them as in so many games, the seeds were sown in one session on the first day, when the Gloucs innings was allowed to get a solid start.
Although the extras were irritating, they didn't really make a difference across the whole match, but the failure to bowl at the stumps did. Where the Gloucs bowlers were constantly at our batsmen, theirs were able to choose whether or not to play at a majority of the balls they received. It's the third match in succession that bowling at the stumps has been at a premium, the third time we've watched the opposition bowlers deliver a seminar on how to bowl stump to stump on a length to hit the top of the stumps, and most of ours have bowled too short and too wide even when they haven't been spraying it about. It's cost us the three wins that you mention (though I'd add the home game against Durham as well) but it's also made the games we've won harder and closer than they needed to be.
Derbyshire have played a lot of enjoyable and encouraging cricket this year, have shown a lot more resilience and consistency than you would expect from a side finishing seventh, and haven't really been outclassed in any of the games they've played. But we know they should have finished much higher in the table than they have, and the reason for this has been profligate and erratic spells of bowling. A large part of the reason for this is still going to be with us next year, unless other plans are afoot for Viljoen and Rampaul, and, particularly with the news about the departure of Davis, we have precious few alternatives available to make things any different next year.
Good summary notoveryet. I agree with you and the bowling needs an overhaul for next year
DeleteDisappointing end to the season. Some awful bowling again. Extras. First job of new bowling coach.
ReplyDeleteAnyway lots of promise and potential. Will report back soon with more thoughts.