Nottinghamshire 198-5 (Duckett 64, Hales 63, Critchley 2-43)
Derbyshire 171-8 (Reece 61, Gurney 5-30)
Nottinghamshire won by 27 runs
Derbyshire were soundly beaten at the Pattonair County Ground tonight.
Our East Midlands rivals are just too strong for us at present and a result that most predicted came to pass without any real risk of an upset.
The task in hand wasn't simplified by missed catches, as well as some excellent ones, while what looks like a shoulder injury sustained by Logan van Beek looks like limiting his involvement in the near future.
An attack with no real menace is unlikely to go for less than 180 in most games. Compared to last year, when we had Ferguson, Riaz and Viljoen, besides Rampaul, we had genuine hopes of keeping the opposition within range.
The batting is probably stronger this year, but the order isn't right. Billy batting through is a laudable concept, but chasing nine or ten an over it is no use when he is only scoring a run a ball.The best batsman in the side, on form, is du Plooy, yet he doesn't get in until 14 overs are gone and we need 87 from six overs.
Desperate times - and we now look to be shorn of an overseas player, whatever your opinion on van Beek - need desperate, or at least improvised measures. I firmly subscribe to the rationale that you want your best batsmen at the crease for the longest time, so du Plooy should either open or go in at three, with Madsen doing the other position, alongside Reece. I also think we are asking too much of Fynn Hudson-Prentice, making his way in the county game, to go in and be the pinch-hitter, when we have players of greater experience who could simply go and play their natural game. Not sure why Fynn only got the one over tonight either, after getting the breakthrough. It seemed an oversight to me.
Billy can still play and come in for the last slog, but if we are likely to be chasing ten an over, we simply must have the batsmen most likely to score quickly at the crease for the maximum time.
Hales and Clarke, then Duckett put this game out of reach for the visitors, which is a depressingly familiar tale in these matches.
There is more work to be done before the visit of Lancashire on Sunday.
Discussion on the batting order, first and foremost.
I suppose the difference can be summed up between the players signed to bolster each squad. They get Wasim and we get Stevens.
ReplyDeleteAs mentioned previously I don't see this batting line up being able to go much north of 170. But I think you're bang on with the batting order Peakfan. For Billy to bat more than half the overs with Madsen and duPlooy waiting in the hutch seems madness. These two would be much more adept for the anchor role and Godleman should be the pinch hitter if needed or a finisher further down the order.
ReplyDeleteCalling the bowling unit ordinary is about as good as it could possibly get unfortunately.
Hopelessly outclassed, we just can't compete against the likes of Notts, Lance etc, we might get the odd freak result like that against Yorkshire but they're going to be few and far between. If a county gets 170 plus it's too much for Derbyshire to chase, we have no destructive batsmen, most are plodders like Billy, not good enough in this format. I think we'll probably finish in the bottom two this season, which simply won't be good enough.
ReplyDeleteWill reply more detailed in the morning bit chasing isn’t our best bet either. Has we scored those runs we might have been able to defend with scoreboard pressure. Twice in a row we’ve basically been out of the game at halfway. Bowling is nowhere near good enough.
ReplyDeleteDu plooy to open for me alongside Godleman with Madsen three and Reece four.
ReplyDeleteWe dont have a bowling plan apart from 'Ravi you bowl 2 at beginning and then 2 at end.' Rest of the time it seems to be a case of 'who fancies an over'? and if you get splattered 'who else fancies one? ' do we then quickly set a field for the bowler? Do we have plans for their batsman? We lose control in the middle overs and bring ravi back on once the horse has bolted. Batting I'm okay with billy and apprentice but as silly as it seems as soon as the power play is over we need billy OUT or to retire as with the spinners on and field spread he grinds to a halt and when chasing 200 just 2 overs of that will signal the death knell. Du ploy at 3 or 4 for me. No good him coming in with 6-7 overs left if we are behind the 8 ball. We are lacking spin control too in middle overs as critch and watt I dont think can stop a train that's gathering pace.
ReplyDeleteI'm fully in agreement with the idea that du Plooy should be opening to maximise his time in the middle but I'm finding the continual complaints about Godleman, here, around the ground and elsewhere, wearing. The bigger question about our selection and batting order is Wayne Madsen. Compare and contrast the records this season of Godleman and Madsen. This season, the former is averaging 36 at a rate of 111, while Madsen is averaging 12 at 103. In the longer term, since Godleman came back into the side last year, he's scored 416 runs at an average of 46, with half centuries in more than a third of his innings at a strike rate of 121. In the same time, Madsen has scored 248 runs at an average of 25, with half-centuries in less than a fifth of his innings, with a strike rate of 138. In the same number of innings, Godleman has been out for 20 or less 3 times, Madsen 7 times. So Madsen scores faster overall but scores many fewer runs at a much lower average, plays fewer big innings, and fails much more often. Nonetheless, no-one ever questions his value to the side, or his position in it in the way that Godleman's is. I've seen and heard plenty of comments about Godleman getting bogged down after the 8th over against Notts (up to which point we were ahead of the Notts rate) but none about the fact that Madsen was equally bogged down in a painful stay as the required rate mounted to an unachievable level.
ReplyDeleteApart from the direct effect of his lack of runs, the regular failure of Madsen at 3 raises the spirits of the opposition and, you suspect, has a disheartening effect on the team, such is his talismanic quality. He remains, on his day, one of our most destructive batsman, but those days are becoming rarer and the length of his innings shorter, and this makes him more suited to dropping down the order to 5 or 6. du Plooy, as a naturally fast scorer is the opener expected to bat through and Godleman freed to play in his most expansive style with Reece to follow at 3. One of the things that has been noticeable in the games so far has been how pedestrian the running has been (on at least two occasions against Notts, Reece refused easy second runs) and I'd look to have some combination of Lace, Dal, Critchley and Hudson-Prentice at 4, 5 and 7, with Hughes or Stevens at 8. The other thing I'd look for in the batting is greater flexibility to ensure that people get in when they can have maximum effect, so Critchley, fo example would always be coming in if a wicket fell around the 15th over, much as Worcs use Whiteley.
Of course, no amount of tweaking the batting will make much of a difference if we continue to bowl and field as poorly as we have at times in the last two matches. Watt's missed two return catches, Hudson-Prentice a steepler, Godleman and Critchley both let a ball go through their hands, Smit's missed a stumping and a difficult shoulder high catch, and much of the ground fielding has been pedestrian at best. It needs the injection of energy and pace from the likes of Lace and Dal, and it was obvious how the presence of the latter seemed to galvanise our fielding after he replaced van Beek. I know there's an argument that playing lace and Dal reduced the bowling options, but there's really nothing to be gained by having 9 bowling options when only 2 of them are actually good options.
Given the amount of rain that's fallen here in the last few hours and an increasingly bleak forecast for tomorrow, these thought are likely to be academic for the game against Lancs, but a pause for reappraisal will be welcome before the campaign drifts too far. One win in four isn't a disaster given the strength of the teams we've played, but the manner of the last two defeats has been an issue, as more of the same will risk defeat in games we know we should be winning.
It hasn't been a vintage season of Wayne, since his double hundred at Bristol, which suggested otherwise.
DeleteGiven the size of the staff no one is suggesting dropping senior batsmen and I know what a fine job Billy does for the side.
But if he is going to open it must be in his gung ho style as you say. Billy has got a lot of runs, but he gets bogged down by spin and we run into problems now other sides are aware of that.
There are plenty of sides coming up who are beatable, but only if we get tactics right.
And I take your point on bowling. If we had five really good options we wouldn't bother about the other four..