I thought I should add a few additional thoughts to those already penned on the T20
I don't think we are too far from having a very good side in this format. What I think we need are a couple of quality additions, together with a coach who can get the best out of them.
My thoughts on the current coaching set up are clear and have already been voiced: good men, great players, articulate analysts but not especially good coaches. Certainly not from the motivational perspective.
We should have beaten Nottinghamshire twice this season and both games were there for the taking. Yet we didn't do it, couldn't cross the line and take the points. On paper, they are a much stronger side than us, but each time we shook them up, took them to the last over, but fell short.
How can we get that extra ten per cent?
The right coach, for sure, but that is an article for if and when we decide that a change is due. I dearly hope that we have a board that is not content to be 'just' competitive, but wants to win. I share the thoughts of a couple of people who have emailed me recently, in that another former cricketer would be useful on the board, someone from more recent vintage than Colin Tunnicliffe. He does a terrific job and is one of the nicest men you could wish to meet, but the board of a CRICKET club should have more than one former player on it, in my opinion. Each of its members are there for their specific skills, but those are not cricket-related. Someone like Adrian Rollins would be perfect, a highly-regarded head teacher and former player, but there are other options out there.
We also need to secure the personnel who can make us competitive. George Scrimshaw has been a revelation, but is only contracted to the end of the summer. Alex Hughes is another, key in this format but out of contract this year. Is Mattie McKiernan another realistic option, again, out of contract as well as under-utilised?
Oh, and let's pick the right people. Whether you agree that Wood and McKiernan are good, long-term T20 options, they are better than we were playing and sit top of the batting and bowling averages on limited opportunities. Why have they been limited? I would have Billy Godleman in my four-day and RLODC side every time, but not in a T20 side, as he takes too long to get going. Just as Sam Robson doesn't play T20 at Middlesex, Ross Whiteley plays little four-day cricket at Worcestershire, they are picked for the formats that their skill set enhances.
Overseas recruitment needs to be better too. Would George Scrimshaw have played as much if Billy Stanlake had been here? For that matter, would the excellent and impressive Brooke Guest? He is busy and business-like with the bat, increasingly impressive with the gloves. I wouldn't expect less from a man recommended to the club by Karl Krikken, but if Ben McDermott had played as wicket-keeper batsman, we might not have 'found' another very good player.
We are only fielding one overseas player and while Logan Van Beek has done better than many expected and has taken early wickets in a lot of matches, he is expensive. If we could find a genuine all-rounder, or a player who offers a bit of both, it would make a world of difference. Two overseas players of match-winning calibre will add a few per cent.
Yes, we likely would have won last night with Madsen, Hughes and McDermott, but we need to find a way to do so without missing players. Winning ugly is just the same as winning with the big shots, We know the players are good enough, but sometimes just reining in the ambition to entertain may bring better dividends in terms of results.
Luis Reece has played four brilliant innings this year, is scoring at a rate of 177 and has entertained royally. He has also got out soon after making fifty each time, when with a little more circumspection could have gone on to match-winning scores.
It doesn't make me less of a supporter to say that the run chase, from the eight over mark last night, was amateurish. The players will know this themselves. Waking up today, they will doubtless have sat eating their cornflakes, picked up the paper and wondered how the heck we didn't make 70 runs from 73 balls with some very good players to come. The 29-ball stand between Guest and Critchley added 33 with nary a risk - just pushing ones to long-off and long-on for the most part. Had the rest done the same, we would have strolled it.
They didn't, so the search for the formula goes on. I am not sure that a club with our resources can seriously compete in both four and one-day cricket, so it may mean that we need to prioritise.
We can, however, be savvy, game smart, professional. With the game won, get 'em in leg byes if that's going to do it and leave the ramps, reverse sweeps and percentage shots for when we need to get ahead.
Last night we played the occasion, rather than the game.
Next time, hopefully, we will have learned from it.
I think the players must get excited when we get in a strong position and mistake it being all about expansive shots rather than win at all cost. Surely after 10 overs of our innings when less than 6 an over were required, cork or loye were going around the pod saying 'keep pushing the singles and rotate the strike, then the odd boundary will come' we were all taught that at school and club cricket when in such a dominant position. Hopefully the payers will learn from this, and understand like the good players, that when you have taken 7/8 off an over take the safe option and push it round for 2/3 more and get 10/12 off the over, but still have a wicket intact to have a go at the next over, not try the risky reverse sweep or ramp that we have seen so many Derbyshire players get out to when well set. Having said all that if you had offered us 3 points from two of the top teams, what DCCC supporter wouldn't have snatched their hand off. Let's not be too critical of Critch and his young team, some of whom weren't even at derbyshire a few months ago. If they learn we have a basis of a team, but as PF says we need to tie up these contracts otherwise it will be a continual revolving door of new players and we will be back to square one...whenever that was!
ReplyDeleteI have to smile when I see comments about not playing risky shots and just play good sensible cricket. If a guy gets out playing a normal sweep that’s ok. A reverse sweep is bad. Ramps are great when they work but foolish when they don’t off? t20 is high risk cricket. It’s about aiming the ball where no fielders are. Players practice these shots so for me it’s a viable option . Sometimes it fails like all shots do. Some times it’s a better calculated risk than some more conventional over the top shots. Notts bowl very few bad balls to hit. Sometimes you have to take a calculated risk. Sometimes those shots offer a better reward and are a lower risk statistically than some more conventional shots. Especially when trying to score boundaries . I would not tell our young players to stop playing these shots. Just get better at them. Jos Butler, the best exponent of these shots often gets out to them, He also scores a lot of runs from them. Some people may say Wood and Came aren’t Jos Butler but they can play the shot. I’ve seen them both do it on several occasions. Let’s not forget a lot of our players very inexperienced at this level. Players like Wood, Came, mckeirnan, Scrimshaw all need time to grow into their roles. All have shown they have the skill to succeed . Mckeirnan was our best bowler on Friday . Wood got double the runs in one innings on Thursday than our previous number 3 could manage in 8 ! He also was the key reason we won that game. These performances don’t make them Butler and Rashid, nor does it make them bad player either when it doesn’t come off. What they are are good yet inexperienced players who need time and opportunity to develop and grow into their rolls. I remember watching Yozza when he first broke into the team. I was very much underwhelmed with both bat and ball. I assumed he was in for his fielding. Now he’s would be the first name on my sheet and my captain if fit, we are EVENTUALLY on the correct path regarding selection. Let’s not get too down over 10 overs of poor cricket
ReplyDeleteIt is a percentage thing, John. Herbert Sutcliffe was challenged at one time that he got out a few times hooking. His reply was 'Yes, but I get a lot of runs from it too'.
DeleteNo issue with people playing shots, but also being street smart. Unveil them in all their majesty if required, but let's just get a job done when there's no need.
It's behind us now. Let's try and win from here!