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

Jones for Dickson(hamstring) only change v Middlesex. Potts available.

westoelad wrote:Jones for Dickson(hamstring) only change v Middlesex. Potts available.

Excellent. Either The Times got it wrong or I misinterpreted the article.

Oh dear - Potts is resting ( presumably at the request of the ECB?) and Bedingham is out with a back injury. Trevaskis and Salisbury are in.
Looks a very iffy lineup with Dickson also absent - and Middlesex won the toss and are bowling.
Could be a short but not particularly sweet innings.

Although if it was an ECB request to rest Potts then wouldn't it have come before the squad was named? Maybe he has a stiff back or something and is resting as a precaution

Bad news that Pottsy isn't playing, but at least we get the chance to find out how we'll get on without him

I hadn't spotted that Bedders was out too

After a good start we lose our customary wicket just before lunch 81-1. Lees the man out

marginal decision at best. Hit high on the knee roll with a big pace forward. It might have been hitting, but the umpire would have to be guessing, couldn't have been sure, really. One of 'those' decisions. Lees probably unlucky. Even the Middlesex commentator was surprised that it had been given.

Capt Beaky makes his usual telling 15 runs

125-3

this is going the way of the last game, with a decent start followed by a string of 20 or 30 run partnerships

lets hope it ends the same way

the morning commo's were saying, at the time of the Lees dismissal, that there was nothing in the pitch for the bowlers, so perhaps we're going to be hell bent on helping them out.... again

although 2 out bowled suggests that either we are missing straight ones or there is a bit more there for the bowlers than they suggested

making hard work of this. 192-5 Mr Ned and Treva at the crease

thank goodness we have a history of lower order revivals

A good time for Eckersley to remember how to bat ! Pretty slow going so probably honours even after day 1.

well, it was good not to lose a clutch of wickets and secure the second batting point. Mr Ned and Treva seem to have negotiated the new ball well. Having done the hard work, lets hope they can go on and get themselves a pair of big scores.

Durhamfootman wrote:well, it was good not to lose a clutch of wickets and secure the second batting point. Mr Ned and Treva seem to have negotiated the new ball well. Having done the hard work, lets hope they can go on and get themselves a pair of big scores.

I didn't see any of the stream so am wondering if - as you mentioned earlier ,after so many batsmen getting out after getting themselves in, it's a case of the pitch keeping bowlers interested or careless batting. Sounds as if Stokes falls imto the careless category!
If I was Handscomb I'd have given Rocky an over or two!

the match reports mention Jones starting off nicely and then getting becalmed. This seems to be where he has work to do, because getting becalmed seems to be a bit of a feature of his game. The Leicester game saw him becalmed for ages before eventually moving on to his hundred. There was a long period where he just seemed to lose the middle of his bat and he could not for the life of him get the ball away for runs. Then from nowhere he clobbered the ball to the boundary and he was away again.

crapinfo reports that Potts is indeed having the match off to recover a bit from being the seamer with by far the most number of overs under his belt this season. Instead, they say, he's been 'sensibly' soaking up the atmosphere at Lords, having only ever played there before in a Hundredth game. Not so sure about that, really..... if he's never played red ball cricket there before, then surely the 'sensible' thing to do would be to find out what it's like to bowl there competitively, not work through a few things with Killer. The test match is 2 weeks away yet and I'm as sure as I can be that Potts will get the nod over Overton for the first test.

It feels like a missed opportunity to me......... unless they feel that he is at risk of injury, and they would surely only feel that if he was carrying some kind of niggle

Durhamfootman wrote:crapinfo reports that Potts is indeed having the match off to recover a bit from being the seamer with by far the most number of overs under his belt this season. Instead, they say, he's been 'sensibly' soaking up the atmosphere at Lords, having only ever played there before in a Hundredth game. Not so sure about that, really..... if he's never played red ball cricket there before, then surely the 'sensible' thing to do would be to find out what it's like to bowl there competitively, not work through a few things with Killer. The test match is 2 weeks away yet and I'm as sure as I can be that Potts will get the nod over Overton for the first test.

It feels like a missed opportunity to me......... unless they feel that he is at risk of injury, and they would surely only feel that if he was carrying some kind of niggle

Yes, it's a strange one. Test squad was announced in advance of ours so it seems unlikely that the decision to rest him was taken as late as this morning.