Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

well , Quite the most pathetic display i've seen from Hants in years , it weas almost as though we didn't want a home q/f.

we will have to improve by miles to give Derby a game on tuesday.

agree with Brendy , once our top three have gone its almost as though we are into the tail , personally I think that Lewis McManus is a bigger miss than Rilee , nothing to do with their ability its just that we semm to bat deeper with him in the team.

did anyone else notice that James Vince appeared to be ready to run for Chris Wood , he seemed to be struggling in the heroic last wicket stand ?

if he is injured again surely that gives Brad Wheal a chance plus an other for Jake Lintott , who I mean no disrespect , but looked like a club cricketer who had won the chance to play in a county game , surely Ian Holland would have been a better bet.

mark the hawk wrote:well , Quite the most pathetic display i've seen from Hants in years , it weas almost as though we didn't want a home q/f.

we will have to improve by miles to give Derby a game on tuesday.

agree with Brendy , once our top three have gone its almost as though we are into the tail , personally I think that Lewis McManus is a bigger miss than Rilee , nothing to do with their ability its just that we semm to bat deeper with him in the team.

did anyone else notice that James Vince appeared to be ready to run for Chris Wood , he seemed to be struggling in the heroic last wicket stand ?

if he is injured again surely that gives Brad Wheal a chance plus an other for Jake Lintott , who I mean no disrespect , but looked like a club cricketer who had won the chance to play in a county game , surely Ian Holland would have been a better bet.

But that's because Dickinson is being asked not just to fill in for McManus, but Rilee too. We're playing the extra bowler now without Rilee and Carberry (our three wins in a row at the start were achieved with just a five man bowling attack; six bowlers is an unnecessarily luxury, when only one of them is good enough to bat in the top seven). That's why we don't seem to bat as deep now. It's a coincidence that it's happened at the same time as McManus' injury.

If Carberry isn't back for the QF (I really have no idea how long he's meant to be out for - at least we know that Rilee and McManus are out for the season), then I would do what I'd have all along when he first got injured, and select Jimmy. Bowling attack of Dawson, Afridi, Abbott, plus two others. Wood's fitness and Crane's availability are both an issue anyway, so we may not even need to "drop" someone. Problem though if both are missing. That leaves Berg and one other. Wheal or Holland, I guess, I wouldn't really care.

budgetmeansbudget wrote:I think we've been very fortunate to qualify and we'll need some more luck in the quarter finals, ie our opponents performing badly, to make it through to Finals day.

Mind you our first T20 triumph I seem to remember came off the back of an indifferent group stage.

Just don't think we've got the batting power to prevail this year and that was with Roussoux in the side.

It's another reason why I compare it to 2015. Get through the south group in less than convincing style. Get an away QF as a result. But an opponent who has made it through somewhat against the odds, who I think we can beat. Only to be followed by being absolutely thrashed at finals day, because our batters can hardly make it past 100.

It's how 2015 went and I see it how 2017 will go. Barring a James Vince masterclass or two.

It's been a few years since I've visited this forum - great to see it's thriving and the familiar contributors still posting!
Very disappointed in the performance last night. Easy to have an off day (and good to get it out of the way) but the lack of energy in the field, suggested the team wasn't really up for it from quite early on.
Looking ahead, Derby away is a great draw. Given our home record, Birmingham at home feels as if it would have been a much harder tie. Of course depends which Hampshire team turn up! We have had some pretty memorable quarter final wins on the road - two Notts games spring to mind.
Being on Tuesday, one would home Crane could play. The next test isn't until Friday and it's in Yorkshire! Having Carbs back would be a big boost too. Don't know how that is looking?

Good to see you back BBJ, you should tarry a while.

I remember our trips down memory lane back to the great days of the seventies!

Good indeed to see you back BBJ.

Just think, if Wood and Crane both do miss out on Tuesday, we could almost put together an entire first XI of missing players.

Rilee, Carberry, McManus, Taylor, Wood, Crane, Topley

When you throw in Ervine and Afridi's horrendous time with the bat (Bailey is past it too, but at least he has made a few scores - included his personal t20 highest), I really can't justify us not selecting Jimmy on Tuesday. It's not like he's played no t20 cricket this season - he helped lead the 2nd to 2nd XI Finals Day recently (we won the SF, but I never actually saw if we won the final or not).

ECB have made Crane available for Tuesday. Thank god.

More good news. Carberry is back in the squad.

Wood has also made it, so that gives us four options I think:

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Bailey, Ervine, Dawson, Afridi, Berg, Abbott, Wood, Crane

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Adams, Bailey, Dawson, Afridi, Berg, Abbott, Wood, Crane

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Adams, Bailey, Ervine, Dawson, Afridi, Abbott, Wood, Crane

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Adams, Bailey, Ervine, Dawson, Afridi, Berg, Abbott, Crane

I suspect we'll go with option one. But I personally would prefer two or three.

st_brendy wrote:More good news. Carberry is back in the squad.

Wood has also made it, so that gives us four options I think:

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Bailey, Ervine, Dawson, Afridi, Berg, Abbott, Wood, Crane

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Adams, Bailey, Dawson, Afridi, Berg, Abbott, Wood, Crane

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Adams, Bailey, Ervine, Dawson, Afridi, Abbott, Wood, Crane

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Adams, Bailey, Ervine, Dawson, Afridi, Berg, Abbott, Crane

I suspect we'll go with option one. But I personally would prefer two or three.

Oh hang on, I forgot Alsop!

So I reckon it will either be:

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Alsop, Bailey, Dawson, Afridi, Berg, Abbott, Wood, Crane

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Alsop, Bailey, Ervine, Dawson, Afridi, Abbott, Wood, Crane

Vince, Dickinson, Carberry, Alsop, Bailey, Ervine, Dawson, Afridi, Berg, Abbott, Crane

Given the problem we've had at times with a lack of power hitting down the order would we perhaps be better opening with Carberry as moving Dickinson down to a 'finisher' role?

Hampshire wrote:Given the problem we've had at times with a lack of power hitting down the order would we perhaps be better opening with Carberry as moving Dickinson down to a 'finisher' role?

He's only played three innings. Far too early to judge if his knock against Kent was a one-off (similar to McManus' against Glamorgan, who has little before or since that), or if he is a cracking little talent.

Anyway, we're ready to go and he's again opening.

Not quite Vince or bust, but pretty close. Thankfully he has an excellent QF record. In particular I'm thinking Warks, Notts and Worcs - all away.

Hang on. Afridi is opening!

st_brendy wrote:Hang on. Afridi is opening!

I was expecting 6 then out but it seems to have really rattled Derbyshire. All over the place with the bowling in the first few overs.

Cracking start from Boom Boom. Turn that clock back.

Where on earth has this innings come from?