Derbyshire 390 and 312-5 Dec (Hosein 55*)
Worcestershire 305 and 193-8 (Cox 60*, Aitchison 3-18, Critchley 3-76
Match drawn
Chasing 350-plus was going to be a challenge but the time taken out of the day became a factor as we batted on for around 40 minutes to set a winning target of 398.
A little more haste yesterday evening would perhaps have made a difference too, but the win points were not to be, despite a brave effort.
It does not detract from an impressive performance in this game, with Matt Critchley the undoubted star, of course. Yet Ben Aitchison bowled splendidly today for three wickets and Fynn Hudson-Prentice bowled some fine spells. Wayne Madsen, skippering in place of the injured Billy Godleman, switched his bowlers regularly, but ultimately to no avail.
In the end it was a battling knock from Ben Cox, one of the most underrated players on the circuit, that saved the game for Worcestershire. His stand with Ed Barnard was gritty and determined, fair play to them both. It took time from the game and made for a pulsating finish.
In short it was a terrific game of cricket, the result in doubt to the final over.
Apart from a win, could you ask for more?
Oh, and Nottinghamshire lost..
Hi PF lots and lots of positives but if we seriously want to win anything we have to play aggressive cricket and not be scared to lose matches. We should have declared last night and backed ourselves to win!! Just thinking if Dean Jones was the Captain today he would have declared and put them in late last night giving our bowlers two bites at the cherry !!
ReplyDeleteAnyway still a very good performance and Matt Critchley..... Wow just Wow !!!
I don’t think the increased points for a draw has helped. Teams are more likely to ensure that they can’t lose as the difference between winning and drawing is so small whereas they want to guarantee not to lose. Positive performance all the same with most players contributing at certain points in the game
ReplyDeleteI haven't heard any explanation for the declaration but I can see the reasoning for it which seems to have eluded the broadcast and print media, and some of the supporters too. It certainly shouldn't detract from another polished performance that sustains our "there or therabouts" status in this competition.
ReplyDeleteCompared with a few years ago, targets of 300 plus are routinely chased unless the pitch is deteriorating. Many pitches at Derby get easier and this looked to be the case here. Although there was still deviation, it was much slower than on the first couple of days so batsmen had a chance to adjust. Derbyshire knew this from the third day, so any target needed to be in excess of the scoring rates that had been managed earlier in the match. An overnight declaration would have left a rate of 3.6 per over, below what Derbyshire managed in both innings and not that much above what Worcs managed in their innings.
Add in the fact that wickets were going to be harder to come by so Derbyshire would need to keep attacking fields to maximise opportunities, an inexperienced set of bowlers lacking a reliable defensive bowler capable of lengthy spells restricting the scoring rate, and the presence of a really destructive batsman capable of making a fool out of a generous declaration, and Derbyshire needed to take some overs out of the day.
Of course, Worcs finishing up 200 short with only 2 wickets left makes it look as if the target was misjudged. But imagine that Fell and D'Oliveira didn't self destruct but went on to score brisk 30's or 40's, Wessels might have been coming in at 150-4 after 45 overs with good players to follow. Translate that to an overnight declaration, and 200 from 50 overs would have been well within Worcs scope. I might have declared a few overs earlier, but I think the general approach wasn't over-cautious, particularly with 8 points on offer for the draw, which does change the risk equation. I feel the challenge isn't for Godleman to become less risk-averse in his captaincy, but for Derbyshire to work out how to get pitches that don't flatten off on the final day and make getting results at home so difficult.
I think the issue was the third afternoon, personally. Had we got to 375 lead then (as we should have from where Madsen and Critchley got us) we could have had all day at them.
ReplyDeleteFor me, to win you sometimes have to gamble, but then I am not skipper and having outplayed them for 3 days we couldn't give them an easy chase.
But 375 on the last day has rarely been chased at Derby. The issue is the points system and 2 draws from 2 matches against good teams is no bad thing
Couldn't agree more with notoveryet. Worcestershire 's powerful batting lineup could have made light of 350 in a day especially against our inexperienced attack. They could have been left scarred for the season if they'd thrown it away. Nobody's mentioned Worcester's negative tactics on the third evening. If they had shown a little more adventure with our numbers 7-11 contributing very little and Godleman injured they could have been chasing 280 instead of gifting us a 350 lead.
ReplyDeleteWe were 319 ahead after 59 overs of our innings when Critchley was out, but added 'only' 74 more from the next 21 overs. I maintain a little more adventure, be it in running or placement, would have helped the cause.
DeleteOnly Essex (twice) had made 350 in the final innings to win at Derby in 150 years. Inexperienced attack or not, the odds were stacked against them!