Sunday, 7 August 2011

Good comments!

I'm always pleased to see your comments and yesterday brought a rich crop. To clarify what I said earlier in the week, and what most people are now doing, please put your name on posts if you don't have a Google ID. I'll not delete those that are making a positive comment, but I'll only allow negative ones if the person is big enough to to add their name and it isn't personal. Blogger allows me to block all comments that aren't from people signed up to the blog or Google members, but that seems a tad draconian at this stage. Hopefully I don't need to go down that path...

John made an excellent point yesterday that we need to replace Steffan Jones and really need two T20 players from overseas next season, as well as replacing Greg Smith. What we do in these areas comes down to budget, of course, and how Karl Krikken sees the development of young players. On the face of it, Smith would need replaced, but I would still like to see Dan Redfern given greater bowling opportunities and we don't know how well Peter Burgoyne will kick on next year. We cannot say, for example, that Jon Clare might not continue to improve and perhaps become the all-rounder at number six. Maybe greater responsibility could be the making of him.

I agree we may well need to replace Jones as we have only Palladino, Groenewald, Clare, Footitt and Turner. Foottitt has rarely played this summer with injury, Turner has been erratic and young hopes Atif Sheikh and Matt Higginbottom have also, somewhat worryingly, missed most of the campaign. Where we go for that replacement is anyone's guess, though Chris Wright at Essex is out of contract this summer and is sure to attract interest from a few places.

If Burgoyne is going to need a year or couple of years, Jake Needham doesn't recover his lost form and Tom Knight goes to university, a spin option might also be required, but again, we have to realise that players can and will develop over the winter and only the coaching staff have the answers. Again, an all-rounder like David Wainwright might be an option, but we don't want to block the paths of Burgoyne and Knight as Venkat did years ago the career of Bob Swindell. Not that I'm suggesting that the able Wainwright is a spinner in the same bracket as the Indian, you understand...

I don't expect a winter of frenzied activity as the club will primarily go down the youth route, but if there are opportunities for the right players at the right price, our finances are in good hands and the structure is as strong as it has ever been.

The overseas role and the T20 player(s) will take a lot of time though. With the IPL having skewed the market, finding the right player at an affordable price post-IPL must be a nightmare. After six weeks in India at 750K-plus, few of the big names will commit to another month in England for 100K or less, even if their international commitments allowed it.

I am a big fan of Chris Grant and he has shown himself a real leader by accepting the chairman's role post-Amott and in not shying away from awkward issues. His only mistake so far, for me, was in referring to a landmark signing, something I think even this genial and astute businessman will struggle to attract due to circumstances beyond his control.

It won't stop a lot of work in the winter though and I look forward to seeing what he eventually comes up with.

11 comments:

  1. I don't think that Chris Grant had realised the enormity of the task he had set himself when he stated that he was looking for a "landmark" signing - for all the reasons you've mentioned Peakfan. However, as the saying goes, the man who never made a mistake never made anything but come the winter we may be pleasantly surprised (fingers crossed).

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think the problem for Chris Grant is he tried Paul Collingwood and that failed and there is no landmark domestic signing that I can think of. So he has to look overseas but the problem is finding the player that is willing to come for the whole and with demands of international cricket and the fixture that really hard to pull off but I do have utmost respect for him to deliver this landmark signing.

    John

    ReplyDelete
  3. Doubt he'd have any interest but how about Marcus Trescothick as a potential landmark signing.
    Super opening batsman, and the best English opener in one day cricket and probably T20 in his generation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'll grant you that Dave, but doubt he'd leave family and a successful side for us.We don't even have the captaincy carrot to dangle in front of him
    We can dream though!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I just wish Chris Grant would stay out of cricketing matters full stop. We have got a Director of Cricket to sort out Cricketing matters thanks Chris!
    Ben

    ReplyDelete
  6. i do think that we need a key stand out signing just to keep us moving forwards. Hughes, Knight, Whiteley, Poynton, Pally, Wes, Clare should be the nucleus of our team going forwards - would really like an experienced overseas player to come here for a season or two - not sure where to look but maybe someone will suddenly come on the scene.
    Creweblade

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'm not sure a "landmark" overseas was ever part of the thinking. In an interview with Krikken a couple of months ago, he was asked about which "overseas player" was being considered as a landmark signing - he very carefully added "or English" and this seems to be consistent with the attempt to sign Collingwood.

    I risk sounding like a scratched record on this, but it was interesting that in the commentary on Hants v Durham today, Tim Tremlett was asked about Dominic Cork's future - he said that it was something that Giles White and DC were discussing and he wasn't sure about the position. It seems unlikely that the head of cricket isn't aware of his captain's future planning in the last year of his contract, and suggests that one side or another is planning a parting of the ways.

    DC may plan to retire, but he would want a major send-off and I can't believe that he wouldn't already be cranking up the emotional send-off if this was what he planned.

    He's still doing the business in Division 1 and could fill the bowling gap that we're all identifying for next year, and showed again today his ability to coax and inspire. Whether or not he's a landmark (I think he is, if only of hatchets being buried) why would we not want him here next year?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ben Chris Grant is involved in cricket matters for one reason - sorting out the contracts and the money side. If we want a player or want to keep one, Krikk will tell the chairman and he will do the necessary.
    Whatever overseas player(s) or English players we sign this winter will have been identified by Krikk as ones HE wants as the head of cricket. However Krikk doesn't want the distraction of the money side, something that is obviously Grant's forte.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Corky? That's got to be worth a blog or a poll!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Corky... hmmm. He'd be worth a shot as a stop gap, surely. Just think in terms of the confidence boost he give some of the younger lads.

    Providing past issues are left in the past.

    I also think if Jake made a renaissance then he would be like a new signing for the club.

    ReplyDelete

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