Wednesday, 20 August 2025

Leicestershire v Derbyshire One Day Cup

Leicestershire 312-5 (Patel 94, Hill 93)

Derbyshire 312 (Came 67, Chappell 49, Montgomery 47, Dal 45, Green 5-64)

Tie

A pulsating day's cricket at Leicester saw a fine game end in a tie, a result that was probably no use to either side in the grand scheme of things.

Leicestershire batted well, although during the second wicket stand between Patel and Hill their tally looked likely to be closer to 350. At 180-1 in the 33rd over they would have hoped for more than 312, but the pitch seemed to get slower and the Derbyshire fielding was very good in the latter stages. Ross Whiteley was especially good in the deep, although that is taken for granted these days.

The bowling was handicapped by the early loss through injury of Rory Haydon, who was only able to bowl three overs. With Amrit Basra ruled out of the game through illness, it wasn't the best of days for the short term contract players. The wickets were shared around, with Ben Aitchison the pick of the attack today.

For a while Derbyshire looked comfortable, with Jewell and Came leading off well, the latter playing some lovely strokes before being dismissed very tamely, spooning a catch to mid off. Montgomery also batted well, though clearly inconvenienced by a hand injury that he repeatedly flexed. When he was dismissed by a quick bouncer from Mike, the balance of the game began to change and boundaries began to dry up. Guest, Andersson and Whiteley were dismissed by the giant Green, who looks an excellent prospect, the latter's (also tame) dismissal seemingly ending the hopes of the visiting side.

Dal and Chappell revived Derbyshire hopes with a stand of 64, both playing some fine strokes and running hard. Fifty were needed from the last six, then 40 from 5, 34 from 4, 22 from 3, as Chappell hit Mike for a remarkable one-handed straight six. Then fifteen were needed from the last two, after Dal was run out, backing up.  

Aitchison's dismissal to an excellent catch by Trevaskis, who earlier had bowled well, gave the prolific Green his fourth wicket , quickly followed by his fifth, with Morley held at point by Budinger.  Green ended with 5-64 and looks the latest excellent prospect from a long assembly line.

A six, two and four from the first three balls of the final over left it at two from three, but Scriven held his nerve (after a wide) and Chappell was run out from the final ball to leave the game as a tie. 

It was a terrific effort from Zak, but he couldn't quite take us over the line. Again though, questions need to be asked of those higher in the order, who should have handled the situation better than they did.

Again, that was a run chase that should have been comfortable. 108 from the last fifteen overs with seven wickets in hand is an equation most sides would fancy.

Sadly, not Derbyshire. They need to win their last three matches now and keep their fingers crossed. They should beat a much-weakened Surrey, but Hampshire and Essex will be much tougher matches.

The thinking money is not in our favour, I'm afraid.

PS Mickey Arthur wasn't there again today. Presumably he is at Lord's...

21 comments:

  1. Tim, Chesterfield20 August 2025 at 20:55

    A game we'd got won, then lost, won again and finally did neither. Arthur's absence isn't acceptable to me, I'm sorry. As a member I feel an explanation is required from the club.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps he’s on a secret mission while acting as a consultant for the chargers he’s tapping up players for next season for Derbyshire

      Delete
    2. I wrote as much last week that I could just about understand that. But it doesn't change the fact that he should have been with Derbyshire and that the 100 was mentioned as his 'arms length' project. Not Derbyshire

      Delete
  2. I felt for Chappell at the end, so incredibly well and then got himself in a muddle at the final moment.

    There 2 main issues stopping us winning games. Not enough runs from the middle order and not enough wickets out side of the first few and last few overs.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Ian from Suffolk20 August 2025 at 21:19

    A brilliant game of cricket and improved performance by us against a very good side. However if we don’t make the top 3 questions do need to be asked about how dedicated to Derbyshire M Arthur really is and for how much longer he can get away with calling us a project whilst not getting near success in anything. The 50 tournament has thrown up some excellent games and if the weather holds the semi finals and final could be great matches too involving some very good teams

    ReplyDelete
  4. What can I add. Our fielding in the first half of their innings cost us big time. We must have gifted at least 25 runs. We bowled well, but frequent poor bits of fielding took the pressure off and allowed them to be patient. The wicket looked tricky at the start, and some low carry through troubled Guest numerous times. It was also cloudy, and a good toss to win. I felt the Foxes total was about 30 high. As is often we got into a flyer and looked well on course. As. Is also often the pressure of an above par total started to tell. There was no collapse, and we scored fluently. The issue was a steady fall of wickets. It looked like we would either get bowled out and lose, or scrape home with little batting to come.

    It was a game that teetered both ways several times. Ultimately a tie was a fair outcome.

    Nick

    ReplyDelete
  5. Ian from suffolk20 August 2025 at 22:03

    Also is it part of the project to say a player is really progressing but then only give them a one year contract and hardly pick them for any games in any format as in Nick Potts

    ReplyDelete
  6. Your last line sums everything up. Our head coach wasn't there. I would be so so happy if he's never there again.

    Just go Micky. You're clueless anyway

    ReplyDelete
  7. I assume there is a financial incentive for the club to have Donald, Madsen, Brown and Arthur at the hundred, otherwise we would just recall them. Brilliant game yesterday. Kris

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It 't, we all know wh oas a fine game, Chris, that will live long in the memory. And there is a financial incentive, but MA should be with his team OR supporters and members should have been told who is running the show in his absence. Either way, MA is the loser here. If we win our last three games and qualify they get the credit. If we don't, it's his fault...such is human nature and sport!

      Delete
  8. It's very clear that MA is doing as he pleases and the hierarchy of the club are complicit in that. Harsh, but the evidence is in front of us now.

    He says one thing and does the opposite. He is clearly NOT 100% committed to us.

    I hope he isn't here next season. We need consistency and commitment from our coach. Presence and visibilty matter more than a Teams link and warm, insincere, words

    Morning all

    Andy

    ReplyDelete
  9. Intolerable and frankly unehical situation with Arthur. What are the Board playing at. Present him with his cards now and appoint someone who at least is physically with the side all the time. Its an absolute scandal, itreally is and it cannot continue. Tribunal time.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Fantastic game of cricket though ultimately frustrating that we couldn't get over the line.
    50 over cricket is brilliant and it's such a pity that this competition isn't higher profile.
    As for MA, it's all been said already.
    Please go!

    ReplyDelete
  11. It's highly unlikely to head to a tribunal IF MA is acting with the agreement of the board or is in line with his contract conditions.

    Looking at the Sun Group investors in the Northern Superchargers, they have divested interests in both the IPL and SA20 cricket.

    He's hardly likely to relinquish international work and status for us, I wouldn't imagine.

    And all eminently forseeable.

    Andy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You’re absolutely right Andy. We can only assume MA has been ALLOWED to disappear off so whilst it is a poor decision by him the REAL villains are the people running the show namely Duckett and the chair.
      Don’t know about anyone else but it almost feels as though they are in awe of MA and are afraid to reign him in. Unless of course his contract extension was signed on the basis he could join the Hundred. In which case that’s even worse. What are our club officials playing at? As usual no communication from Duckett & Co. Some way to run a business NOT!
      Paul

      Delete
  12. It makes one wonder who actually runs the club on a day to day basis, the board or MA.
    Seems obvious to me that MA just does as he wishes with seemingly no consequences.
    About time the management "grew a pair" and dispensed with his services imo.
    Unless of course they are happy with the situation? In which case they are equally culpable.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I watched the game on stream. Very entertaining and exciting. It seemed to me that Foxes probably got too many in their final few overs - I presume that wasn’t helped by the injury to Haydon but Derbys had kept the lid on the Foxes all afternoon, but then they got away. It looked at one stage that they might get 280. Some superb batting from Derbys put them in a good position, but then they faltered due to the pressure of those extra runs. Brilliant comeback by Dal and Chappell at the end (the commentators actually said Foxes had won before the final over…) What an excellent player Dal is, and every time I get chance to follow Derbys games Chappell seems to bludgeon a 50 whilst everyone else struggles. I think Derbys were very unlucky with Dal’s run out at a crucial time in the game. Chappell also so nearly got us over the line too. I get the impression Derbys are a side that struggle to win under pressure. If the coach had been at the game would his vast experience have helped them get that extra run whilst batting, or saved that extra run when fielding? Just saying…

    ReplyDelete
  14. My 7 questions raised after the Repton game still apply; some of them - on the comms of the club - have seemingly intensified with the comms saying Mickey is '"fully committed" etc.' to Derbyshire, but now it appears not so to attending all of the games. For years we have been an amateur operation, save for a few years with Chris Grant at the helm (and even he made errors in implementing a coaching structure and making Krikk apply for his job), and we remain so. I suppose at least it is an audition for when Ben Smith and/or Daryn Smit take charge.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Great game yesterday and pity we couldn’t get over the line.

    Mickey Arthur is THE senior manager of our team. A senior manager has the responsibility, in whatever area of activity, to accompany the team and to get the best out of it. This means being present and being able to give immediate encouragement and feedback to indivduals and the team as a whole. He is clearly not doing that and the board and himself have put him in that position. One can legitmately ask how feedback is being given to those youngsters starting out in the team by the one making all the decisions on contracts if he is not even at the games to see how they are performing. It is frankly unbelievable and this has to stop for the good of the team.

    Adrian, Nice

    ReplyDelete
  16. We really need a wicket taking strike bowler. Apart from the Notts game Whiteley has been a disappointment as our experienced finisher. Morley came off second compared to Trevaskis. I think that these are the 3 roles where we need to improve in white ball cricket.

    MarkB

    ReplyDelete

Please remember to add your name. Avoid personal comment at all times. Thanks!