Saturday, 4 September 2010

The case for Jake

There was an air of end of season around today's Pro 40 matches, with James Benning making a good 62 in what will presumably be his last game for Leicestershire, then taking the key wicket of Sean Ervine.

At Lords there was no Robin Peterson and no Chris Rogers. Derbyshire's batting had an air of finality about it too, with only Chesney Hughes and Wayne Madsen (comme toujours) scoring anything of consequence before Graham Wagg and Ian Hunter's late rally took us to a reasonable score.

Middlesex always looked like getting them, although it was good to see Hunter get through his first overs of the season at the death. The most telling bowling again was from Jake Needham, who got two good wickets in an eight over spell that only cost 25 runs.

I rate Jake Needham and always have since I first saw him. On each occasion he has bowled this year he has done well and has made a strong case for being the lead spinner next year. 'Anon' in response to the last article I wrote asked why he has not bowled more this year, while Jon Clare has without the same degree of success.

The answer is, to me, simple. We had Robin Peterson as a first choice spinner of international experience, plus Greg Smith able to bowl spin as back up. The balance of the side would have been wrong with Needham also included. As for Clare, he has played primarily because our seam bowlers have been less fit than him. He needs to work hard over the winter to build up strength in his back and shoulders again and be ready to resume, firing on all cylinders with bat and ball, next summer.

Having said that, I expect Needham to play in our last game against Glamorgan where his pairing with Peterson should match that of the home side. They will probably field any two from Dalymple, Croft and Cosker and the toss may well be a factor.

At 23, Jake Needham isn't remotely close to his peak. He has shown himself capable of taking good wickets and has a List A economy rate of only five runs per over. He fields well and is a useful batsman who should get better. He has opened in an emergency and a first class batting average of 20 is pretty good for a relative novice in the first class game.

For what its worth, if we had a young seamer of Needham's age and talent we would be looking for him to be a fixture in next season's side. Assuming he works hard over the winter, maintains that impressive loop and keeps giving the ball a good rip, I expect Needham to be given the opportunity he deserves next year. If John Morris has an international spinner lined up, I'd suggest we should get some spinning tracks prepared and play both, as Needham is the best YOUNG bowler we have after Mark Footitt.

Anyway, that's it for tonight. I'll be back soon.

4 comments:

  1. WE could have played jake and robin peterson together alot more than we have,it worked at colchester.

    john clare not good enough for the 1st team but he still gets picked all the time recently. jake has one bad game game like at (canturbury last season) and gets dropped, while players like clare redfern etc get loads of chances. its a unfair world we live in.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Re the bowling I would release Lungley which would allow us to offer Wagg more money in a bid to keep him and put the rest in the kitty for a new batsman.
    If Wagg stays the seam bowling would be OK as it is as Footitt, Sheikh and Higginbottom seem to be progressing nicely.
    I don't want us to lose Wagg over a few pounds and then see us offer a lot more money to secure Lungley for another season.
    DCCCFOREVER

    ReplyDelete
  3. I would like an update from the guy on IMWT website who says Wagg is staying.
    morris4good

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why would wagg stay at derbyshire when he can play 1st division cricket next season.and on more money as well. Derbyshire im afraid will be favourites to finish bottom again, next season.

    ReplyDelete

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