Gloucestershire 341-8 (Price 103, Bracey 83, Taylor 67, Charlesworth 60, Potts 3-72, Aitchison 2-88)
Derbyshire 282 (Guest 86, Montgomery 42, Basra 40, Jewell 35, Akhter 4-47)
Gloucestershire won by 59 runs
Their bowling was a bit of a curate's egg. There were plenty of reasons to be cheerful with the debut of Rory Haydon, especially after he removed the prolific Cameron Bancroft. He bowled with great control and looked a player with a future, taking 1-34 in nine overs. Joe Hawkins wasn't overawed by the big stage, nor was Amrit Basra, who probably didn't expect to bowl today.
Ben Aitchison had an off day and his figures reflect that, while the others had their moments but also took stick, from a strong batting side on a small ground.
Fair play to Nick Potts. I didn't think that we would see him again today when he had bowled three overs for 42 runs. His third over was awful, almost demanding to be hit and it was a bold move by Brooke Guest to bring him back later.
Yet he took 3-30 in his next five over spell and produced some excellent yorkers. There is a bowler in there, but this is an important competition for him. It is clear that we need bowlers for next season and that money largely has to come from savings on the playing budget this year. It is up to Nick to make a strong case for his retention. I really wish him well, but he cannot afford many spells like his first one today.
It was always going to be tough against a strong batting side and with an inexperienced attack. Only Miles Hammond is missing from their batting lineup and Price, Bracey, Charlesworth and Taylor all played fine knocks.
342 was always going to be a demanding target and it needed someone to go big. Came never got going, while Jewell neither suggested top form nor permanence. Montgomery, who looks a fine player, batted well with Guest, but his dismissal left much to be done.
The main problem was that we were were rarely close to the required rate, which climbed to seven, then eight.
Then came Amrit Basra. An innings of 40 on debut accelerated the scoring in a partnership of 76 with his captain. His bat speed and timing make him a joy to watch and on this evidence a contract for 2026 should surely follow. There were three big sixes and a delightful reverse sweep in a debut that supporters will have enjoyed.
When he unluckily played on, 114 were needed from thirteen overs. The stage was set for a vintage Ross Whiteley display, but his dismissal was tame and his innings short, coming soon after Guest was caught at long on for an excellent 86. It signalled the end of Derbyshire hopes, though the tail struck some lusty blows. The returning Zaman Akhter, who will join Essex for next season, made a big difference for the home side. Bowling fast and straight, he ripped through the late order and although the Derbyshire chase showed promise, the target was simply too many.
It was a chastening start to the competition. Although there were fresh shoots of encouragement, we have to bowl better than this or there will be few ticks in the win column by the end of it.
Can someone please explain why, in limited over cricket, Derbyshire always seem to bowl first if they win the toss... to me this adds an extra 'pressure' that could have been avoided. Further, if you keep doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result, I am told this is the definition of madness. Well, how many times in T20 did we win the toss, put the opposition in to bat, and then successfully chase the score for a win. It's a strategy that baffles me and yet first game of the limited overs, what do they do? Madness! Asking for a very disgruntled friend [PJS]
ReplyDeleteThey presumably feel bowling is the weaker suit and hope opponents will overstretch themselves. Which is fine if they do, but it hasn't really worked, has it?
DeleteI agree entirely. Derbyshire's most successful 50 over chase was 312. No chance today needing 342.
DeleteIt is a ridiculous obsession in county cricket led by Ben Stokes to bat 2nd when you win the toss.
When I saw the squad I suggested Potts and Whiteley should be the two to miss out….I take no satisfaction in being proved right. I don’t think Potts is up to playing at this level, far too expensive. Also disappointing that Aitchison had such a poor day. Haydon though looks a real find, one of the few bowlers to show any kind of control. Hawkins and Basra bowled ok too. It was always going to be difficult chasing that target, but we were in with a shout when Guest and Basra were together. Basra was another positive from today. Montgomery had a solid debut too, slightly odd bowling style. Never mind, on to Thursday. Grant from Telford
ReplyDeleteIt is very noticeable that 2/3 of our best performers were the young guys just signed on short term deals, the other being Guest.
ReplyDeleteIs this due to their greater hunger to prove themselves, or have standards slipped? Probably a bit of both.
MarkB
Derbyshire are better setting a total than chasing one.We've conceded huge totals in limited overs all summer and it was only amazing hitting from Donald that won us a few games I agree it's crazy not to bat first in 50 over cricket if you win the toss.Look how many teams failed to chase down big scores today Ross Whitely isn't contributing any more he doesn't even bowl Topspinner.
ReplyDeleteI keep hoping that Jewell will make the difference in a limited overs game. Too many starts not built upon.
ReplyDeleteMark D, Buxton.
It was a pleasure to welcome our friends from Derbyshire to Cheltenham today. I am sorry they could not give a better account of themselves, but I will admit as a Gloucestershire fan I enjoyed watching the match.
ReplyDeleteIf I were Mickey Arthur before worrying about the bowling I would be asking some very serious questions about the fielding. Quite a number of balls that should have been stopped went for four, which on a careful count cost about 28 runs. That would have made quite a difference. Also, twice there were drops - OK, one would have been a blinder almost as good as the one that was actually taken, but the other off a snow-gathering top edge was pretty routine for this level.
I really think Gloucestershire showed much more energy and commitment in the field even though it wasn't without blemish (four overthrows?) and if Derbyshire want to do well that would be a good place to start.
Like you mentioned some very positive signs with the new players and our 50 kit is quite tasteful. Hopefully we will give a good account of ourselves in future games and not write this off as another competition we are in just to make the numbers up. Also I’ve noticed today we had Whiteley batting at 7 and not bowling. Essex had Nick Browne who never bowls batting at 7 in there game. Also Hampshire have done that in the championship with Toby Albert at 7 a couple of times. It seems like village cricket where you think someone shouldn’t be in the side but you give them a little something to do so they don’t go home feeling sad
ReplyDeleteI just don’t see how Ross Whiteley fits into this young dynamic team that Mickey Arthur has been talking about 🤔
ReplyDeleteIf that is the the plan then let’s see it done properly. The young lads acquited themselves well today and I’m not so worried about immediate results if we are giving these lads a proper go.
A reasonable batting performance with Basra looking a real find. The bowling weak as predicted but ironically let down by the more experienced players.
ReplyDeletePluses today Basra, Haydon, Montgomery and Guest.
Minuses Whiteley, Came, Aitchison, Andersson and Potts.
Didn’t think I’d be saying this but our experienced players need to start delivering otherwise they’ll find themselves out the team as it does appear we have some young guns ready to step up.
Paul
Whiteley’s class is still required imo but great to see Basra take his opportunity. Let’s bat first if we win the toss in future. What has happened to Lloyd ? 🤔
DeleteAndy
Injured, apparently
DeleteI'm not too bothered about results this year. We look significantly weaker than 2024, without Patel, Moore, Chappell, Reece, Thomson and Dal. We seem to be using it as a development comp and that's fine by me. The new lads looked good actually. Potts has that nightmare over in him, that goes for around 30, but he recovered quite well. Kris
ReplyDeleteMy question for MA would be with Basra looking so good and scoring fast , and I presume has done so for the second XI , why did he not get selected for the 20-20 (assuming a contract could have been sorted out earlier) ? Martin
ReplyDeletejasper
ReplyDeleteI didn't see any of the game, but encouraging returns from the new lads, and like Kris says, the important thing is seeing how they shape up, and today we played a strong Gloucestershire team. I notice Haydon only bowled 9 overs? seems an oversight given his figures.
ReplyDeleteI thought it an oversight too, although Potts did very well in his last spell which likely changed the game plan
DeleteThat's fair enough Steve. I imagine Potts going for 42 from his first 3, also changed the game plan somewhat! Guest asking Basra to get loose, for a start 😆
DeleteWe might have made a decent fist of this game but that attack isn't winning many games at all. The young lads all performed admirably let down by the senior members ( bowlers). The bowling overs were just a mess, only Aitchison the worst bowler of the lot got to bowl a full spell, the rest got 9, 8, 6 etc, really poor captaincy.
ReplyDeleteAny idea why Dal was left out Steve because he was needed today?
Personal issues and injury ruled him out. They said last week he wouldn't be fit until the end of this competition. I was surprised to see him in the squad today. Maybe they just want to keep him around?
DeleteDisappointing the way we collapsed (yet again). But Haydon, Hawkins and Basra (three sixes) showed promise. And Montgomery did well. Also, Guest played a captain's innings.
ReplyDeleteThis was a match made for Whiteley (some short boundaries), but he failed. I'm pleased Jewell has signed for another season, but since his 232, he seems to have gone off the boil, posting some okay scores, but nothing that was a match winner.
Downthewicket
Absolutely, that's what we signed Ross for. To finish games off from that type of position. Sadly, he couldn't manage it..
DeleteI was at the game. Broadly Haydon bowled really well and I thought Hawkins could have been given more overs. Potts came back really well and I think needs to be given immense credit, especially as Taylor was going like a steam train at the end of the innings.
ReplyDeletePrice had a few moments of luck early on. Another day could have seen a far smaller score being chased.
Tough total to chase and we probably were always slightly playing catch up. Came looked a bit rusty. Jewell looked great then smashed a cut straight to point. Either side of the fielder was 4 runs.
Montgomery looked a tad rusty to start but was finding greater fluency just as he got out.
Honestly, I think this was a game of fine margins even though the margin of victory looked relatively large. Stick with the younger players and give them some experience.
Nathan, Bristol
Agree about Potts. He's been treated poorly in the past and after taking some tap early a young player would have been somewhat forgiven if his head had gone. Credit to Guest though who chucked the ball back to him and was repaid with some very good death bowling (one of the hardest skills in the game) including a great ball for Taylor's wicket which probably saved us conceding another 10+ runs off the last 4 balls the way he was smashing everything.
ReplyDeleteMixed feelings on this tournament, how to balance the blooding of talent but remain competitive to keep some semblance of dressing room confidence .
ReplyDeleteWould help if Dal , Chappell and Reece were in the mix
As it stands we could perhaps see 4 wins as a reasonable outcome .
Will watch with interest
Four wins would likely put us in the mix, Paul. But it is hard to see where they come from, if we don't bowl and field better than was the case at times yesterday
Delete