Further thoughts on the new batsman

I have had a bumper post bag since my  last post on a new batsman. So much so, that I have given it further thought.

I don't think, to answer one question, that it will be Calum Macleod. He may come under consideration for the T20, but not for a full season contract. His strength is in scoring runs quickly, so I see that format as one where he will be in demand, less so for four-day cricket.

I have also largely discounted a Kolpak signing, because of our budgetary constraints. Such players cost serious money and having last night announced a loss for last year, I don't think we would go down that path again, in a hurry.

Such players must be internationals and by extension, command appropriate salaries, money we just don't have.

More likely, for me, is that we pick up a young player from Australia or New Zealand, one with a reputation to make and crucially with a British passport.

It makes sense from a budgetary perspective, while fitting well with the rationale behind the signing of Logan van Beek. With John Wright down there scouting for us, the likelihood gains even greater credence. But with our South African contacts, don't discount the Cape, just yet.

It is, I think, the way forward for us, as a county, especially at a time when the game is clearly fragmenting into the have and have nots.

That is why I was pleased to see yesterday that there are plans for counties to be remunerated when their best players are signed by bigger clubs.

It is hardly a level playing field when, for example, a club at one end of the A52 can register a million pound profit and pick up the best young talent from its neighbours, while others scratch around trying hard to break even. Warwickshire did the same to Gloucestershire, signing their best two bowlers. It is only right that the clubs that nurture talent and spend a lot of money doing so are compensated for their loss.

Anyway, the season proper will soon be upon us. I will be back tomorrow with a preview of our game against Durham.