Derbyshire 368
Glamorgan 240-4 (Lloyd 84, Labuschagne 53*
Derbyshire lead by 128 runs
Derbyshire lost wickets steadily to seam and spin, but sufficient runs were scored in between times to take the score past a healthy 350.
Dal and Du Plooy both batted pleasantly after the early dismissal of McKiernan, but the continued movement suggested that the home side would be quite happy with proceedings. The increasingly impressive Thomson opened his account with a hefty blow for six over mid on and batted sensibly thereafter.
Lunch was taken at 360-8 and it appeared that an interesting afternoon was in store.
It was less so in reality. I think Glamorgan bowlers, a yard or two quicker than ours, got a little more help accordingly. Perhaps, with the sun out and no clouds it was easier, but the only wicket came when Salter was run out after a mix up with his captain, Lloyd.
The skipper continued on his merry way after tea, until he assayed a drive at Dal and was well caught by Madsen at slip. Northeast was soon edging Conners to the same fielder, who put down an easier, though not easy chance.
But in fairness I don't think we bowled especially well, with the exception of Lakmal, who ran in hard. Most overs contained a 'four ball' and though there was plenty of encouragement from the field, which remained chipper, I couldn't see where a wicket was coming from. There was no consistency of line and length, essential on such a pitch.
In the end it was from a somewhat unlikely source. Madsen's gentle off spin trapping Northeast leg before as he went to sweep. When Carlson fell to a poor shot off Lakmal and was caught behind, Derbyshire were back in the game.
It could go either way tomorrow, but we need to bowl much better.
Draw all over it now this game which is a tad disappointing, considering our first innings total. Looks like our bowling needs a couple of stronger options, as we'll struggle to bowl the better sides out twice
ReplyDeleteApparently a Tory MP witnessed more penetration than our bowlers managed today 😉
ReplyDeleteI was at Derby watching the match today. I thought that Glamorgan's Aussie bowling attack looked very impressive and pinned down Dal and du Plooy and although they battled hard and put on 50 it was never easy and slow going. When both were dismissed only a few blows from Thomson pushed our score to 368. As you have said Peakfan our bowling was a bit erratic. I thought Lloyd played very well, punishing anything loose with impressive back foot drives and it was a surprise when he departed 16 short of a century. Conners then produced his best spell to beat the edge of Labushagne's bat with 3 successive deliveries but the talented Aussie was still there at the close and if we are to get anything put if this match we will need to dismissed him soon tomorrow.
ReplyDeleteMy first visit to a championship game for 30 years as, fueled by your excellent blog, it seemed good to try a taster, with retirement now not so far on the horizon!
ReplyDeleteSo when I was last on the scene we would have seen perhaps Holding, Kirsten, Miandad and Moseley in this fixture, it is unsurprising that the overall standard is lower. Certainly the attack appeared blunt and it seemed tricky to see where wickets would come from. It interested me how Labuschagne went about his work although he looked well out of touch he remains a significant threat tomorrow and will be kicking himself if he fails to capitalise.
Not sure what to make of the spin options especially Mckiernan with but one over but it offered neither threat nor containment.
I missed the last two late wickets which just like yesterday has left the game with a different feel and which is well balanced. As I left I looked at the board on ground development with an aerial shot of 1987 how it would have been when I last watched a championship game. A nice memory to end the day.
Great to see you back with us! Please do keep in touch!
DeleteApologies for the typos at the end of my earlier report! I have another observation to make. I have to wonder why Ryan Sidebottom was considered worth signing on loan. He never looked like taking a wicket today and I see that he failed to take a single wicket for Warwks last season.
ReplyDeleteI agree. I can only assume the Sidebottom signing was on the recommendation of Ian Bell? Note to MA, let Belly concentrate on the batting side of things and ignore any of his missives on the merits of signing any bowlers deemed surplus to requirement by his mates at Warwickshire! Of course I'm now expecting Sidebottom to collect a 5 fer in the second innings!!
DeleteI think Ryan a decent bowler but perhaps got away with some balls in 2nd team that got punished here.
DeleteI think a few first team games, would hone his skills and would reserve judgement till I had seen him another time or two. He bowled some good balls, as well as the loose stuff
Even Stevens, I guess today.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I've noticed this season, so far, is that we get off to a good start batting and then collapse. We need to be able to push on. I felt that, this morning, du Plooy should have gone for it, but he played so cautiously, like he's done in the three previous games. With 280 runs on the board from yesterday, we needed to attack much more.
Last two seasons, we were all out regularly around and below 200.
ReplyDeleteMA said the first thing he needed to do was make DCCC hard to beat.
Job done so far I'd say. This is a work in progress that needs time and patience.
Billy will come good - so wishing him well.
Andy
100% Andy. And the competitive edge is clear to see
DeleteThe exceptionally dry spring has enabled better pitches to be prepared this April this has helped batsmen to find some early season form
Delete