I am not a fatalist, more a realist. I disagree with some comments that certain named players are not good enough. I think we have a core of around it dozen players who can compete at this level, but all of them will have days when they succeed, others when they flop. It is the way of professional sport, no one succeeds all the time.
Mark Watt got hammered last night, much as Mattie McKiernan did at Taunton last year. Yet I have seen that happen to better bowlers than both of them. One night doesn't make them bad. bowlers, any more than a five wicket haul would make them world beaters. For that kind of status, sustained performance is essential.
I think we are light in batting with the eleven that has taken the field, but also, as I have written before and said on radio, need to factor in that we have played the two best teams in the group in our opening fixtures.
For what it is worth, I would like to see an extra batter accommodated, when we have bowling options elsewhere in the eleven that are not being utilised. I don't think Haider Ali is an opening bat and would prefer to see him come in down the order, where his ability to clear the boundary would be an asset.
Likewise, I disagree that George Scrimshaw has become a bad bowler. At his pace, any variant on line and length will be punished, while even good balls that take the edge are likely to go for four. You don't get selection for England Lions without talent, but last night was the antithesis of his performance at Taunton, a small ground where he got it right.
For what it is worth, I would be inclined to go with this side in the next game:
Wood/Came
Reece
Madsen
du Plooy
Ali
Donald
Dal (if fit to bowl)
Chappell
Watt
Scrimshaw
Khan
If Dal is fit to bowl, he could share the fifth bowler duties with Reece and Madsen. If he isn't, then McKiernan should play. But for me that is the strongest side for this format that we have at the moment.
Ali and Donald are powerful players who can clear the boundaries and have proven track records to show this. Logically, you would want them coming in when the fielders are out. When the field is in, during the opening overs, both Wood and Came can fulfil requirements.
But outside of this group there aren't many options. You could leave out Ali and play Lakmal, but that lengthens a tail that is already too long and also leaves the field less athletic.
There is no need to panic. I would agree with the comment that outside of the two teams we have played so far, Durham and Birmingham look the strongest in the group. Our games against them, besides the necessity of winning against perceived weaker sides, will determine whether we progress from the group stage.
For me, this is still a squad in transition. I suspect we will see a number of departures at the end of the season, because after the euphoria of last year and the impact of his personality and coaching nous on a new staff, Mickey Arthur will now see that several players have reached the ceiling of their ability.
For all of them, the rest of the competition - indeed the rest of the season - is an opportunity to show that they can go further.
Otherwise, the close season will see considerable change and 2024 will be when supporters can give the Roman-style thumbs up or thumbs down to progress.
I agree, Steve, opening with Wood or Came, and dropping Ali to five, makes good sense. Ali might prosper better coming in later, and we would have, theoretically, some power hitting in the middle order. If Dal bats at seven, then we we look pretty solid with our batting. Chappell has scored two forties in the CC this season, so, hopefully, he can find runs when required in the T20. If he can do this regularly, then we bat down to eight. If he can't, then the tail begins at eight, which is not good.
ReplyDeleteIf one of our top four scored 80, and another 40, two of our middle order scored 30 each, and the others mustered 30 between them, that's 210, plus any extras. I know a game isn't as simple as this, but when you break it down, it's not that difficult to get beyond 200, if everyone performs.
ReplyDeleteGeorge Scrimshaw doesn't bowl enough he needs to play more cricket Derbyshire obviously consider him too fragile to play four day cricket the coaching staff need to find a balance for him
ReplyDeleteI think the question for the end of this season is whether we can justify the cost of a single format player on the staff.
DeleteThat will depend on his returns over the season and if anyone else comes in with an offer, he cannot refuse.
One of many decisions to be taken this September...
Look at his Twitter bio - he is a professional cricketer for Welsh Fire. No mention of Derbyshire.
DeleteNo one knows what goes in the dressing room but I believe there have been some strange selections so far. For instance if Dal is unfit to bowl there is no way he should get in the team as a batsman ahead of Tom Wood in the T20 format. Wood is a devastating hitter at his best and may have been able to carry on the momentum once Madsen and Reece were dismissed. As you say PF 180 is no longer a par score so you have to have batters who can clear the ropes in the middle order.
ReplyDeleteIf the potential of this present team could be maximised by going out with no-fear and an attitude of self-belief, I do believe that it is capable of winning the next 2 games. MA got things slightly wrong in his planning by over-rating several players but he is capable of rectifying things and reviving our hopes.
ReplyDeleteAgree when you say Lancashire will win the t20 trophy Peakfan, they look a class apart
ReplyDeleteYeah when you look who is outside this side - Balderson, Bohannon, Jennings, Gleeson, Jones, Lamb - their depth is crazy
DeleteNot even considering Anderson and Buttler! You can tell where the money is..
Interesting remark by the Notts head of cricket tonight during the BBC commentary of Lancs v Notts about our defeat last night. He basically said that when Notts got our top four out, last night there wasn't any powerful hitting to come. Spot on,
ReplyDeleteYes, he's spot on with that comment
DeleteFor me the issue in our lineup is that we don't have a genuine all rounder.
ReplyDeleteIn t20 you need to bat down to about 8 at a minimum. You also need 5 genuine bowling options plus at least a couple backup options.
The two all rounders in the current side are Reece and Dal but neither bowled against Lancs. McKiernan can bat to be fair but even if we exclude him we've got four out and out bowlers in the side, too many. Notts in contrast had Samit Patel in at 8.
I think Khan was the wrong signing, we needed an all rounder - someone who could both bowl 4 overs and add significantly to the batting because we don't have a non overseas one on the books.
For me this means we need to drop one of Scrimshaw or Chappell and trust Reece more. Difficult because Chappell has bowled well and Scrimshaw should be our best bowler in this format.
Outside of signing Khan I don't blame Arthur for his selections really, Dal hasn't added anything in the last two games but he's been batting very powerfully for the seconds (s/r of 180) so was worth a go.
For the next game I'd pick:
Reece
Wood
Madsen
Ali
Du Plooy
Came
Donald
McKiernan
Chappell
Watt
Khan
Bats down to 8 with Chappell also able to swing the bat with 2 spinners (which you need in this format and these are two good ones), 2 pace bowlers + Reece with Wood or Madsen able to provide a couple overs if needed.
Wood and Came can both hit a long ball so should add to the batting. Wood doesn't play CC so really is just as much of a single format player as Scrimshaw (ignoring the ODC for now) so should play and I'd back to provide quick runs at the top.