2016 Hampshire Thread

[captaincolly]

Got to be pretty happy with that day overall.

Closer to survival than at the start but still a long way to go.

I think you'll win and the only thing to be decided is the final tally of batting points. I'm sure Durham will be trying hard but I suspect they're done for this season. Only way I can see for us to get back into it is if Stokes does something special with the bat and that's always a possibility.

[st_brendy]

If we get maximum bonus points and end up drawing the game then if Warwickshire lose from here we survive.

One of a million and one scenarios!

Assuming that Warks don't pick up two more bowling points than us.

Our bowling attack isn't great. Unless there really is something there for the spinners - and you'd like to think we've been sensible enough to ensure there is - then it's not unthinkable that we might only take five wickets in 110 overs. So if Warks get 9 wickets, they retake the advantage - forcing us to win, even if they lose.

It's why getting these final 30 runs is so important. Setting us a target of six wickets in 110 overs (clearly Warks can't get two more bowling points than us if we get two ourselves) will be a whole lot better than a target of nine wickets in 110 overs.

[st_brendy]

Durham captain Paul Collingwood:
“It was a disappointing day, the amount it is turning on day one you would expect to take more wickets.
“I knew it was going to turn for day one, there is a lot of sand on that wicket which is the same tactic Somerset seem to be using as well.
“But we didn’t quite get it right and to only get six wickets on day one is pretty disappointing.
“So today with the overhead conditions we might get a bit out of the seam bowling but as I thought it would turn and we didn’t get it right.
“Whether we were batting first tonight or batting last on it, it is going to be difficult against a couple of Hampshire spinners.
“It is a pretty firm wicket. The foot holes haven’t got too much bigger and as long as they don’t put anymore sand on, it shouldn’t disintegrate anymore.

[captaincolly]

Durham captain Paul Collingwood:
“It was a disappointing day, the amount it is turning on day one you would expect to take more wickets.
“I knew it was going to turn for day one, there is a lot of sand on that wicket which is the same tactic Somerset seem to be using as well.
“But we didn’t quite get it right and to only get six wickets on day one is pretty disappointing.
“So today with the overhead conditions we might get a bit out of the seam bowling but as I thought it would turn and we didn’t get it right.
“Whether we were batting first tonight or batting last on it, it is going to be difficult against a couple of Hampshire spinners.
“It is a pretty firm wicket. The foot holes haven’t got too much bigger and as long as they don’t put anymore sand on, it shouldn’t disintegrate anymore.

Sounds as if the bowlers have had a shocker and the score is already above par going by his comments. Those two spinners are hopeless!

[captaincolly]

Durham captain Paul Collingwood:
“It was a disappointing day, the amount it is turning on day one you would expect to take more wickets.
“I knew it was going to turn for day one, there is a lot of sand on that wicket which is the same tactic Somerset seem to be using as well.
“But we didn’t quite get it right and to only get six wickets on day one is pretty disappointing.
“So today with the overhead conditions we might get a bit out of the seam bowling but as I thought it would turn and we didn’t get it right.
“Whether we were batting first tonight or batting last on it, it is going to be difficult against a couple of Hampshire spinners.
“It is a pretty firm wicket. The foot holes haven’t got too much bigger and as long as they don’t put anymore sand on, it shouldn’t disintegrate anymore.

Sounds as if the bowlers have had a shocker and the score is already above par going by his comments. Those two spinners are hopeless!

I was referring to our two spinners not yours!

[budgetmeansbudget]

If we get maximum bonus points and end up drawing the game then if Warwickshire lose from here we survive.

One of a million and one scenarios!

Assuming that Warks don't pick up two more bowling points than us.

Our bowling attack isn't great. Unless there really is something there for the spinners - and you'd like to think we've been sensible enough to ensure there is - then it's not unthinkable that we might only take five wickets in 110 overs. So if Warks get 9 wickets, they retake the advantage - forcing us to win, even if they lose.

It's why getting these final 30 runs is so important. Setting us a target of six wickets in 110 overs (clearly Warks can't get two more bowling points than us if we get two ourselves) will be a whole lot better than a target of nine wickets in 110 overs.

My scenario was assuming 5 batting points and 3 bowling points i.e. maximum bonus points. What Warwickshire then do from now, bonus points wise, is irrelevant if they go on to lose. Obviously we haven't got maximum bonus points yet, but it was only ever an assumption in another scenario.

I wasn't sure of the scenario if we finish on level points, I haven't looked at the tie breakers. Probably number of wins first which would be the same, losses next?

[st_brendy]

If we get maximum bonus points and end up drawing the game then if Warwickshire lose from here we survive.

One of a million and one scenarios!

Assuming that Warks don't pick up two more bowling points than us.

Our bowling attack isn't great. Unless there really is something there for the spinners - and you'd like to think we've been sensible enough to ensure there is - then it's not unthinkable that we might only take five wickets in 110 overs. So if Warks get 9 wickets, they retake the advantage - forcing us to win, even if they lose.

It's why getting these final 30 runs is so important. Setting us a target of six wickets in 110 overs (clearly Warks can't get two more bowling points than us if we get two ourselves) will be a whole lot better than a target of nine wickets in 110 overs.

My scenario was assuming 5 batting points and 3 bowling points i.e. maximum bonus points. What Warwickshire then do from now, bonus points wise, is irrelevant if they go on to lose. Obviously we haven't got maximum bonus points yet, but it was only ever an assumption in another scenario.

I wasn't sure of the scenario if we finish on level points, I haven't looked at the tie breakers. Probably number of wins first which would be the same, losses next?

Sorry, I read maximum bonus points as maximum batting points.

[st_brendy]

But yes, the first tie-breaker is most wins. The next tie-breaker is fewest loses.

If we were to finish level with either Warks or Lancs, it would be impossible for us to lose in the tie-breaker regardless of what results occur to lead us into a tie-breaker.

[budgetmeansbudget]

Dawson lbw Onions.

397/7.

3 lbws now in the innings, I will be expecting a similar return in the Durham innings!

[budgetmeansbudget]

Maximum batting points achieved. Now to bat as long as we can to minimise time needed to bat second time around.

Attritional stuff at Edgbaston.

[budgetmeansbudget]

Berg doesn't trouble the scorers.

[budgetmeansbudget]

Our innings is going down the pan pretty quickly this morning and Lancs have just lost two quick wickets.

[captaincolly]

Don't worry about this game - there'll almost certainly be a clatter of wickets when we bat! I'll be amazed if we don't lose.

[Hampshireboi]

411 all out. Not exactly the score I'd have been hoping for 30 minutes ago but hopefully it suggests there is life in the pitch. Now for early (and constant) in roads please chaps

[budgetmeansbudget]

The consolation is that we got the five batting points and batting is still tricky/trickier compared to yesterday.

Sun is out for the first time in the match!