Hampshire v Derbyshire day 3

Derbyshire fought back well on day three, ending the day on 31-0 and requiring a further 315 to win the game. The latter seems largely irrelevant in the light of tomorrow's weather forecast, one that suggests any play before late afternoon, at the earliest, is unlikely.

I referred to needing a 'special' performance to lift the mood and it came today from Tony Palladino, one of the most admirable of cricketers. I like Tony, as he will always give a hundred per cent, even if the conditions aren't in his favour. With good support from the lion-hearted Tim Groenewald, the two took their side past the follow-on mark, albeit one that was unlikely to be enforced.

Hampshire's reply was lively, as might have been expected, but there were two wickets for Scott Elstone to reinforce his positive impression, before Paul Borrington and Stephen Moore took us through to the close with a degree of confidence that was encouraging.

Finally tonight, closing comments on the "To bat or not to bat" piece that caused an interesting level of discussion over recent days.

In today's Derby Evening Telegraph I read:

Stephen Moore acknowledged that Hampshire should not have been allowed such a position of strength as they went on to score 388 in their first innings.

“If we had taken our catches they would probably have been 240 and this game would have been wide open then,” he added.

Which was my point exactly, nicely emphasised by someone who had played on the wicket, rather than following the game from a distance. We didn't bowl as well as we might, but the decision was fine.

Such is the nature of the game.