Tuesday 1 August 2023

Gloucestershire v. Derbyshire one day cup

Derbyshire 298 (Ali 82, Reece 50, Guest 43, Came 40 van Meekeren 4-66)

Gloucestershire 299-4 (Price 116*, Tector 86, Taylor 51* Conners 2-43) in 43.2 overs

Gloucestershire won by 6 wickets

Long before this game ended - in fact, before the Derbyshire innings ended - I had a good idea about the conclusion here.

Derbyshire mounted a score that was OK, but nothing more than that, on a relatively small ground with a quick outfield. At one stage, when Guest and Ali were batting together in a century stand, a score around 350 looked possible and was really needed with a weakened Derbyshire attack.

Came and Reece led off well, the former looking in especially good touch as befits a man with a century in each of his last two innings. When Harry departed, David Lloyd came in for his debut but never really got going. Reece made a good fifty but then holed out at deep square, when we could have done with him going on.

It didn't appear to matter, as Guest and Ali added 104 and at 205-4 in the 34th over Derbyshire were set for a really good score. Guest then got out, giving a catch to mid wicket and Dal soon followed, upper cutting casually to third man.

It brought in Wood and he never really got going. He only made five from his first 22 balls faced and the innings lost momentum. He upped the tempo later, but looks a far better player when he goes for it and there appears too great a discrepancy between his best and worst game. Although Mark Watt played some lusty blows, Derbyshire fell short of 300 and it was disappointing.

Ali played the best innings today. At the risk of going all Cardus on you, an innings by him is like a summer's day. Gorgeous, hugely enjoyable and disappointing when it comes to an end, which it did today when he had made 82 from 65 balls. He batted so well, but a more experienced player, with twelve overs to go and the last recognised bat with him, might have reined it in a little. His timing and power are quite special and I suspect he will be a really top player for his country in time.

Zafar Gohar bowled beautifully for the hosts, the best controlled spell of spin I have seen this summer. It was something Derbyshire cried out for, as our own bowling was really poor today.

Sam Conners aside, there was too much width, too great a variation in length and the home batters capitalised. Tector, signed at such short notice they couldn't even get his name on a shirt, batted really well, but was helped on his way by some very poor stuff.  By the time he was out in the 23rd over, for a classy 86 from 69 balls, Gloucestershire already had 158 on the board and were cruising.

Price, who had lent good support until that stage, then took control, put his foot down and the home side, with good support from Bracey and Taylor, eased to victory with more than six overs in hand. Price played sensibly, eschewed flamboyance but did what he had to do. Truth be told, the way we bowled and they batted, a score closer to 400 would have been needed to challenge them.

Watt doesn't seem to have his usual rhythm at present - I thought the same when he was bowling for Scotland last week - and took hefty punishment today. So did Potts and it seemed that Reece, the seventh bowler used, was something of an afterthought. It was good to see Lloyd bowl some overs and claim his first Derbyshire wicket, but the attack was treated with little respect and, to be fair, didn't bowl a great deal that deserved it.

Played one, lost one. 

They have to get much better than this or it will be a long competition.  Truth is we don't have many alternatives to this side.

But well done Gloucestershire. They slaughtered us today.

27 comments:

  1. The sad thing is Derbyshire lost with 40 balls to spare . But that's the best bowling attack Derbyshire got .So I don't think many victories are coming anytime soon.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Chesterfield blue1 August 2023 at 18:41

    Well one things for certain and that is that bowling attack isn't frightening anybody, so lacklustre it's untrue. Potts and Watt absolutely shocking, Conners the only one to come out of it with any credit. Even scoring 350 wouldn't have been enough and that is a big worry for upcoming matches

    ReplyDelete
  3. I thought any chance of us doing well in this competition disappeared when Chappell was snapped up in the last draft. With Aitchison injured, I just didn't see enough experience or numbers in the pace bowling. In fact, an early deal for Pat Brown would have been better. Kris

    ReplyDelete
  4. We needed to have posted 330-350 - and we should have done, but our batting fell away once Haider Ali was out. Tom Wood puzzles me. On the one hand, he holds two records for the fastest hundreds in T 20 and the One Day Cup. Yet, on the other hand, he isn't someone you'd put your money on to smash it to all parts, as was the case today when he was pretty sluggish.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chesterfield blue2 August 2023 at 07:28

      As Peakfan stated, 400 runs wouldn't have been enough, never mind 320-350

      Delete
  5. I think Wood was in a difficult situation. His game is to attack but batting at 7 and then being 7 down quickly with just the tail for company, he gets out early and we quickly slide to 260 all out. I’d say the plan was to get to the last couple of overs and mount a charge but sadly got out just at the time when he could have given us an extra 20 runs which is unfortunate. I’m not sure our bowling could have defended 320 anyway so it’s a bit of a mute point

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I get that, but he looked uncomfortable at the crease and 5 from 22 balls at that stage of the innings doesn't work. Strike rotation would have helped. But it isn't just Tom. We added 93 in the last 16 overs and that was poor game management. The scoring rate shouldn't drop at the end of an innings

      Delete
    2. Perhaps the question should be asked as to why our most potentially destructive batter is at 7 in the first place?

      Delete
    3. Name please, Anon. Won't publish further comments without. For his potential to score quickly at the death, I assume. I thought he might have come in at 6, but not higher in that line up. Had we lost an early wicket he may have gone in 3 for the Powerplay, but we didn't.

      But our 'potentially most destructive bat' has to manage the game better than 5 off 22 at this level. I am a big fan of Tom, but collectively the later innings has to be better. If he is in at that stage, he has to take charge

      Delete
    4. Agree PF, but if Tom gets out "taking charge", then he gets the blame for not seeing the innings through for the full 50 overs. It was a tough situation, which realistically the team were put in after 4 of the top 5 got in and got out! Kev Spondon

      Delete
  6. Is Ajmal Shahzad still involved? didn’t see him with the team at Cheltenham. Either he is at The Hundred or has been let go.
    Luke

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am sure he is. There would have otherwise been an announcement, I would think

      Delete
    2. Confirmed today by the club he is with Trent Rockets

      Delete
  7. We've played 25 games in all competitions, so far - and we've won just six! It feels like we've gone backwards since last season.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The important thing is to not panic after 1 game but aaaaaaaaaaaaaagghhhhhhhhhhhh.

    Seriously the concern is that all three tournements this season we seem to have started under prepared.

    Observations from yesterday are :-
    Why is the batter who has scored two of the fastest 100s in our history batting at 7 ? Tom Wood's strength is at the top of the order in white ball cricket when the fielders are in. Brooke Guest is our best white ball finisher and besides Worcestershire away Anuj Dal has not had his best season.

    Why did Mark Watt bowl in the powerplay on a small ground ?

    Yes we are short of seamers. Surely there are some playing in league cricket we can offer a summer contract to who are economical. Is this the format of cricket they usually play so who are the best economical bowlers in Derbys League ?

    The only games I can see us winning is when we bat second when we know the target as it hard to see us defend a total

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well we have a coach juggling preparing Pakistan for a world cup and Derbyshire for what is, in effect, a 2nd XI 1 day tournament.... Who's surprised we're not prepared ?

      Delete
    2. Agree David. We played around with Wood down the order in the T20 comp and then realised for the last couple of games he was better higher up the order, which by then was too late!

      I would also find a way to get McKiernan into the side, as although he may not provide the control or consistent economy rate that Thomson does, he is certainly a better batsman/finisher and is definitely a wicket taker, which is very much needed in our attack!

      My team would be:

      Came
      Reece
      Wood
      Lloyd
      Ali
      Guest
      Dal
      McKiernan
      Watt
      Conners
      Potts (or ideally a loan seamer)

      Interested to hear others thoughts on this. Kev Spondon

      Delete
    3. No issue with that team, Kev. For me, Tom's place on the staff is in the balance. He can't make a case for it batting six or seven. But he looks three times the player going for his shots and being the master blaster.

      So yes, he plays, bats three he goes for it and stands or falls on his ability to dominate an attack.

      He could also have bowled yesterday. Could have done no worse than most..

      Delete
  9. Reece's comments at the end of the game were spot on, of our top order who got in, none of them tool responsibility and got 100+ score. This would have pushed us easily over 300, gave more freedom to push on in the final 10 overs and also give our weak bowling attack something to defend.

    Came, Reece, Ali and Guest all batted well without going on to make a match winning innings. I felt sorry for Wood who for some reason was batting at 7 and got a lot of stick on the Gloucestershire live stream for batting slowly, when it was clear for those who know the game, that he was trying to shepherd the side to the final 5 overs and up as close to 300 as possible without getting bowled out!

    Pointless bringing in Lloyd for this comp, as he is no better than what we have in this format. Yet again another example of imports being given opportunities over our own!

    I think we actually have a decent squad and can definitely compete in this 50 over comp (although a seamer on loan is needed), but as with the T20 campaign, we need to get a settled side and batting line up early, instead of chopping and changing only to discover our best team in the last few games when its too late! Kev Spondon

    ReplyDelete
  10. Ok we have what we have. We could strengthen slightly by bringing a fit enough Lakmal back in for Potts, but with Aitchinson injured, that's our best. I'm not sure if I would bring Macca in as he is also a very handy batsman and better fielder than Watt. Mark Watts physical conditioning for a professional athlete baffles me. Did anyone else think his knees were about to collapse each time he set off for a run? Lakmal in for Potts and look at Macca as a better alround option.

    So considering what we have what can we do?

    Well if we win the toss we must chase, simple as that. It may cause some teams to over stretch and we play our strong suit to pursue victory. We could look at giving Reece a few more overs if conditions suit, but that's about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lloyd is effectivly one of our own as he's signing next season! made perfect sense for him to come for this comp. Facet.

      Delete
  11. Chesterfield blue2 August 2023 at 12:45

    What is it saying about Lakmal's form/condition if he can't get a game ahead of Nick Potts in this competition. I'm really fearful after this first game that we could finish bottom of another table this summer. My prediction of top 3 has evaporated after the first game

    ReplyDelete
  12. While I agree that we didn't score enough runs, surely a half decent bowling attack would have made Glos fight harder for victory. To let them cruise home with almost seven overs to spare is just not good enough. It's difficult to see us winning anything with this attack. We need to beg, borrow or steal a bowler or two before our interest in this competition collapses as in the CC and T20.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With everyone away at the 100, counties are hanging on to what they have. Most of them carry bigger staffs than we do but we cannot engage players just for this competition. Although many more injuries and Harry Moore might get an early promotion!

      Delete
  13. Think the team picks itself for Sunday. Lackmal got to come in for Potts if fit. Can’t believe Glamorgan will let Lloyd play so Wood upto 4 and mckeirnan in at 7 and that’s as good as it gets. 2 right arm seamers. 1 left arm seamer , 1 leggy, 1 offy and a left arm orthodox. Good variations if nothing else. Fingers crossed
    Sarah G

    ReplyDelete
  14. Ref drafting in fast bowlers from local cricket I'm afraid there isn't much to pick from this season imo. The best 2 are Hutchinson at Swarkestone (who I believe is already on Derbys books as a coach and can also bat) and Dan Wheeldon from Sandiacre (who was tried a few years back with little success). At this stage they are both better bowlers than Potts though.

    ReplyDelete
  15. May I just point out, a propos Tom Wood, that our former player Tom Taylor, batting at number 8 , scored 112 off 88 balls for Northants yesterday.

    ReplyDelete

Please remember to add your name. Avoid personal comment at all times. Thanks!