We've named an unchanged squad of 14.
I mean, why change a losing formula?
https://www.middlesexccc.com/news/20...tality-blast-2
Printable View
We've named an unchanged squad of 14.
I mean, why change a losing formula?
https://www.middlesexccc.com/news/20...tality-blast-2
What changes are you suggesting or are you just being sarcastic as usual?Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul W
Well, it was kevan James the other night who said, 'You can't pick the same side a third time', and it remains to be seen if we do, or if a couple of others in the squad, like Jack Davies, or Thilan Walallawita get an outing. Max Harris (not in squad) might be worth a go, but we've been here before. We can't just forget about T20 on the grounds our squad isn't suited to it, because a campaign that sees us lose 10-12 games out of 14 attracts so much criticism from fans, and demoralises the players so much, that it inevitably spills over in to the next championship match, so our form in that competition suffers too (so we can't just exchange a poor T20 season for a good 4 day season).
Richard Johnson in his most recent interview seemed to be suggesting we might not get a second overseas at all this season. Maybe we will push the boat out and sign someone for the last four championship games in September (if it looks like it might help us avoid relegation). It does feel like we are running on empty. Partly because of bad weather no-one in the 2's is bashing the door down to be promoted, so those struggling in the firsts are likely to keep their places for now.
I would have been surprised had Middlesex’s squad been different to that of our first two matches, partly because most of the players who played in our first two matches have done something in the past to deserve to be included, and partly because we don’t have many players in the 2nd XI crying out for selection. However, the three members of our squad to have not made it into our XI so far must have a chance of coming in, as Toby Roland-Jones has been a key player in this format in previous years, Thilan Walallawita had a decent campaign in 2022, and Jack Davies has done OK for us in limited-overs matches.
Even if we keep on losing, I would be surprised if our line-up begins to look greatly different to that of our first two matches, as I know that we are keen to build our players’ levels of experience. However, it would be ideal if the players selected could accompany the increase in their ‘matches played’ statistics with an increase in ‘wins played in’, ‘runs scored’, ‘wickets taken’ and other statistics which should be high (ideally without any increase in statistics which should be low, such as 'defeats played in', 'ducks', 'economy', 'bowling average' etc.!).
It is very tempting to expect that Middlesex will suffer a third defeat from three matches tomorrow. However, Gloucestershire’s record is identical to ours, as they lost heavily to Kent at Canterbury and narrowly to Glamorgan at Bristol, so they can’t be feeling much more positive than Middlesex. Then again, Glos tend to beat us in this format more often than not, and they still have plenty of handy limited-overs players available despite Ryan Higgins now being on our side.
Gloucestershire have named a 14-man squad for this match consisting of Jack Taylor, James Bracey, Ben Charlesworth, Chris Dent, Marchant de Lange, Zafar Gohar, Miles Hammond, David Payne, Ollie Price, Grant Roelofsen, Josh Shaw, Tom Smith, Matt Taylor and Graeme van Buuren.
Still no sign of Tom Lace then.
He started off last year batting at 5, but after a few matches dropped to 7 in the order (in the championship) which is low for someone who doesn't bowl, then sometime around mid-season was dropped to the second XI and hasn't made a single first team appearance since.
In the final year of his contract.
Wonder where he'll go next.
We've selected the same eleven a third time.
Third time lucky?
Yes no changes and with our best there bowlers Murtagh Roland Jones and Bamber on the sidelines
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erskine
Being held back and kept fit for red ball cricket again in - is it? - November, perhaps?
I don't know if it's better to be thrashed, and lose by a lot, or to lose a really close game.
The frustrating thing is this time we up with the rate, with wickets in hand, right up to the final over, and from where we where at the end of the 18th (even 19th) over we really should have been favourites to win.
Eski apologises to supporters.
On the one hand he says he always has the players backs- but he's also quite blunt in his disappointment two senior players couldn't muster 12 runs off 12 balls to win the game.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ox_b4h5X3ig
Considering Middlesex’s previous two Twenty20 matches saw us slow down after wickets began to fall, I was worried that once one or both of Stevie Eskinazi and Joe Cracknell were out, our remaining batters either would fail to maintain our run rate or would fold quickly. My concerns were realised considering only two of our next five batters reached double figures, and only Luke Hollman scored at a decent strike rate. Therefore, there was no point when I felt certain that we would win, despite the fact that there were a few points in our reply when I felt that we were in a position from which we ought to have won.
It wasn’t the greatest of matches for Ryan Higgins, as he was our most expensive bowler, and the 22 balls he faced should have yielded more than two boundaries and 24 runs (although had he scored quicker, it would have probably not been a 22-ball innings). Maybe a factor in this was that Gloucestershire have an intricate knowledge of how he plays.
We will never know how much difference it would have made had we bowled more overs of spin instead of once again leaving Nathan Fernandes with overs unbowled, which is something which Hollman has experienced in previous matches, although he bowled his allocation today. All of the bowlers across the two sides seemed to have bowled a mixture of cheap overs and expensive overs, so maybe Fernandes would have bowled better than our seamers, or maybe not.
Glos bowled those last two overs well (which by the by fully justified Luke Hollman taking on Price in over 18) and there was a boundary-saving effort by Hammond but if I was going to back anyone to get us over the line from there it would have been Simmo. Not this time. I did think the choice of a reverse scoop on the final ball was strange, as the player has no idea where the ball is going to be bowled. No doubt third man was up and there was a tasty gap behind him but I would have thought that trusting your normal game and hoping to find the gap would have been a better option.