Surrey news/articles

First topic message reminder :

Hi guys

Just a quick one to let you know that I have spoken with All Out Cricket regarding the amount of Surrey fans we have here at 606v2, and they're going to look to provide any Surrey related blogs/news/articles that they have to this section. Given that their office is located near to the Oval, they often chat with the Surrey guys and as such get some good interviews, so hopefully they can get some of those across here for you fellas to get your teeth into.

Cheers

NickisBHAFC wrote:CF please leave.

Its quite simple Nick, if you don't like CF then you can either ignore his posts or if this is too hard for you then foe him and you won't even see his posts.

Back to cricket matters.

Surrey 2nd XI are playing their final match of the season - a three day friendly away against Notts.

Notts declared their first innings on 343-9. Some things never change - the last wicket pair put on almost 80 in an unbroken partnership!

4 wickets for the Viscount and a couple for seamer Jordan Rollings, a triallist from MCC Young Cricketers. One each for van den Bergh, Clive and Jewell (possibly a final chance to shine?).

In reply, we're 13-1. Third Degree has already been put out although the Baron is still there along with van den Bergh (I suspect even the Corporal might struggle for a nickname there ).

In addition to Rollings, this game is being used to give a trial to batsman Billy Root, brother of Yorkshire's Joe and another Young MCC Cricketer. In contrast and as well as Jewell, I wonder if this game might be a swansong for Lancefield and Jordan.

guildfordbat wrote:Back to cricket matters.

.... along with van den Bergh (I suspect even the Corporal might struggle for a nickname there ).

True, Guildford, tho I do have visions of Freddie manning a Burger Van!

Got a bit of potential? "The Berger Van drives out into the offside..."

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Back to cricket matters.

.... along with van den Bergh (I suspect even the Corporal might struggle for a nickname there ).

True, Guildford, tho I do have visions of Freddie manning a Burger Van!

Follow the reasoning, Corporal. However, I don't think it's too appropriate. I don't know if you've ever seen Freddie but to me he always looks in need of a good square meal - a male version of Twiggy at the same age!

guildfordbat wrote: I don't know if you've ever seen Freddie but to me he always looks in need of a good square meal - a male version of Twiggy at the same age!

But Guildford, there is plenty of precedent for a spot of irony in these matters. I call upon my first witness, none other than Robin Hood, who gave a giant of man the nickname "Little John"

Corporal - fair enough. Allowing for irony, The Berger Van it is.

However, if young Freddie's mum hears about it and complains you're taking the rap!

Did you guys hear about the face off between Batty and katich on Sunday? Was hilarious! Batty had to be held back by the umpire, then Kartik got involved and had a word. Carberry looked interested (you wouldnt mess with him haha) . Then Dernbach got a wicket ran straight to the batsmen to celebrate, i think he thinks he is better than he actually is, was going for a 6 an over comfortably

Hi JimBob - didn't know that.

Think the Surrey players need to calm down a bit. There's a suggestion on the wallpaper site (official website of Surrey supporters - Oval World on the Net) that there was a spot of fistycuffs between two of their own players last week.

Corporal and all - I don't know if you are aware but a county cap was posthumously awarded to Tom Maynard today. It was handed to his father Matt by Club Chairman Richard Thompson shortly before the start of today's match. As far as I'm aware, there's been no mention of this on the Club website.

I'm genuinely uncertain either way about this award.

I remain highly appreciative of the entertainment and success that stemmed from Maynard's batting. I also have no wish to be vindictive towards a highly talented young man or his family for whom I feel great sympathy. I realise we all do stupid things, especially when we are young.

However, if he had not died that morning there would be no question of a cap being awarded this season. Instead, police action and disciplinary measures by the Club would have seemed more likely. As an aside, the Surrey message boards would not have been slow in condemning his behaviour.

Is it appropriate to overlook any such concerns? Perhaps it is. I'm just not sure. I think I would feel more comfortable if the award had been deferred until after the coroner's inquest when matters might be clearer.

Apologies if this post gives any offence. Certainly not the intention. Simply interested in other views which might enable me to reach a clear conclusion.

I can see where you are coming from, guildford, but I believe in this instance the right thing has been done. The fact that this tragic event did occur changes everything and there is absolutely no point in vilifying him for what was, in essence, a mistake. I agree that he wouldn't have been awarded a cap this season but I firmly believe he would have been at Surrey for a long time and fully earned his cap over the coming seasons. I feel that this was a lovely gesture from the club for Tom and his family

Thanks, Carrot.

I'm honestly not saying the wrong thing has been done (and I realise you appreciate that). Simply that I find it difficult to know what is the right thing here. Possibly a generational issue in part.

I do understand and value your comment about it being 'a lovely gesture from the club for Tom and his family'.

sensitive issue i can see both sides of the argument here...

I dont agree with him getting a cap on pure cricketing terms just yet as for example Rory had to wait a while for his..

however

Like i have said ever since the news broke, the circumstances arent overly important to me in this case, very sad news and a young man's life was ended prematurely and cruely, and in which case it was a touching thing to do and very nice from surrey CCC..

also good to see the game played in the right spirit and no booing for KP like the other night...players seemed fine until Matt Maynard arrived and then the reality kicked in, however credit to the players they played in the right spirit and would have made Tom very proud of both sides...

yet again

R.I.P Tom

Middlesex fan here! First of all,

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:Not sure where to post this. But I have to say that I'm disappointed that my proposal that Vic Marks should be the first President of the UK (off topic - thread on what to do about the monarchy) has fallen on completely deaf ears.... Posters seem much keener on re enacting the English Civil War... Rather than looking at constructive suggestions....

did I mention that I swept Vic Marks for 4 the day before the corporal posted this? This has no other relevance beyond my boasting about hitting an ex-test bowler to the square-leg boundary.

On the much more serious topic of Maynard's cap:

I was going to come here and argue that it was wrong to award him one; that had his career been cut short by injury say, there would have been no thought of it; that he hadn't earned it on the field, and that is surely the only way you can earn a cap.

But you know what, I've changed my mind. I don't think you can make these decisions purely on a rational basis. Tom Maynard was an incredibly talented cricketer, with the world at his feet, and his death was tragic. Sure, he made a mistake (although I suspect disciplinary proceedings would have yielded a slap on the wrist, maybe a fine, but not much beyond that), but we all make mistakes. It doesn't make his death any less tragic, or his talent any less worth celebrating. Sometimes it is right to let emotions take over, let the heart dominate. This feels like one of those times. Tom Maynard may not have earned his cap on the field; but he earned it in our hearts, and for that the decision to give him one was the right one.

Interesting comments, and something I hadn't really though of.

My overriding thought would be that you are right in saying that things would be very different had he not died that morning. But as Carrot says in some ways that changes everything.

In terms of awarding a cap that isn't something that bothers me too much. Different counties have a range of different capping systems - at some you just have to play for them, at others you have to be a senior first team player. Therefore, without knowing exactly what Surrey's system is, I assume that there would be some flexibility in how caps are awarded - using that flexibility here was a way of recognising Tom and the esteem in which he was held at the club.

Thanks for the post, Mike.

Yes, I did pick up your post the other day about sweeping Vic Marks to the boundary. Believe you said at the time that he couldn't stop laughing!

I'll respond as best I can. I believe this is now the third time I've mentioned here about batting out the last over from Ashley Giles to earn my side - with 9 wickets down - a draw. Mind you, the future King of Spain and Ashes winner was about fifteen at the time whilst I was almost thirty!

As for Tom Maynard, I'll jump firstly to the bottom line and say that on balance you and others are probably right although I still find it a complex matter.

I agree with you that the circumstances of his death make it no less tragic. However, does tragedy itself justify a cap and mean that those circumstances should be ignored? Commendable circumstances have certainly and very rightly played a part in the past when awarding a cap posthumously.

Back in 2002, the Sussex player Umer Rashid died heroically in unsuccessfully trying to save his younger brother from drowning whilst on a pre-season tour. He was posthumously awarded a county cap. I think all would say that the manner of his death made his award all the more appropriate. That being so, shouldn't it cut both ways?

Picking up a point made last night by Carrot, I'm too very keen not to vilify Maynard. However, would not awarding a cap vilify him? I don't believe it should. The award of a cap is an honour. Not honouring someone is not the same as vilifying him (or perhaps it is?).

To throw in another aspect. Tim Linley was the Club's, supporters' and fellow players' player of the season last year. He took 73 first class wickets. Due in part to our signing of Jon Lewis (don't get me started!), he's not often played this season but has remained a fully supportive and committed member of the squad, never letting anyone down on or off the pitch. He remains uncapped.

This probably all sounds like I believe Maynard should not have been capped now. That's actually not the case - his batting talent and nous (as someone far me astute than me has pointed out, he was so good at batting with the tail) totally won over Surrey supporters and brought us great joy. In addition, he played a massive part in Surrey gaining promotion and winning CB 40 silverware in his only full season. I do though feel there's quite a lot to a difficult situation.

It's also disappointing - not least for Maynard's family and memory - that the coroner's inquest hasn't delivered its verdict yet with the result that doubts and uncertainties remain. The coroner may not be able to dispell all of those but he should give us a better understanding.

Shelsey - just seen your post.

Fully accept that different counties have different approaches to the capping of players.

Surrey's is very traditional with the award being seen as a highly considerable honour - I should have emphasised that before as it explains why I've particularly raised the matter.

By way of background and to show that a Surrey cap is not a common thing, at the start of the 2011 season Surrey had only one capped player (Ramps) on their books. During the season, Dernbach, Hamilton-Brown, Davies and Batty were also capped. It was said at a members' forum meeting that a player needed to have played two seasons for the Club before being considered for a cap although clearly no one was thinking about the implications of premature death at the time of that announcement.

Guilford, thanks for your considered response.

For me the key is your question "shouldn't it cut both ways?" Of course rationally it should. Emotionally I don't think so. As I said, any death is tragic, and when you're faced with tragedy you don't have to react rationally. In fact, my point is really that you can't, and shouldn't do so. We are all 'guilty' of it , and it is certainly true that we may even remember the dead more fondly than when they were living (have you ever heard of a student dying in an accident and NOT being remembered as a model student?). The whole of my point really is that this is not only understandable, it is right, it is this kind of emotional behaviour which actually reflects the best of human nature: it should therefore be treasured and not fought.

I'm not sure if I'm arguing at all clearly. A gentleman on the other thread related it to his experience of one of his fellow students receiving a posthumous degree. I suppose my whole point is really "it is right because it feels right".

I make it sound as if I have no time for rational reasoning, which couldn't be further from the truth (I am a mathematician by trade after all). But emotions are a powerful tool (and as a coach, if you can harness a player's emotions, be it happy, angry, nerves, fear, you have a powerful weapon to work with) and are to be welcomed. At the risk of finishing on a corny note, it is after all what makes us human.

Thanks, Mike.

You do argue clearly although I understand your uncertainty. I've felt just the same. I think the conflct between rational and emotional thinking together with the desire not to give offence on a clearly very delicate matter makes it hard to be confident with what is being written and posted.

I really hope that Tom Maynard's family can find some peace in the months and years ahead. I think that the posthumous award of the cap may prove of at least some comfort, especially to his father given his own background. That alone seems a good reason for its award.

As people have been good enough to apparently appreciate although I should have emphasised it at outset, I certainly don't regard myself as being fit to judge or rule on Tom Maynard's conduct. Identifying and expressing just some of the issues is complex enough.

A good although very difficult discussion.

Guildford - I think good points have been made by yourself and all contributors, including the thoughtful comments by Chichester on the other thread.

I think for me one of the main reasons it feels an understandable and appropriate gesture is that Tom was already performing pretty much at a level which would have led before too long to deserved award of a county cap following Surrey's normal standards. I think of his heroic counter attacking innings in the cc against Middlesex when trying to salvage a completely lost position....

So to refer to Chichester's comparison, to me it would seem artificial to award posthumous degree to the late student if they had only just started at uni, whereas it would probably feel right in the case of someone who had already made a major contribution and was clearly heading towards a good degree....

Meanwhile just read on Surrey website a curious description of the Viscount's play:

Linley recorded a strike rate of five runs per 100 balls as he produced a monolithic effort of two runs from 44 deliveries ,

Dimi:

I have decided to auction my match shirt from the T20 Final, with all proceeds going to the #tommaynardtrust..

It's the actual shirt I wore, and I will personalise it if wanted. Bidding will finish tonight at 9pm... It is for a great bloke and cause.


Top lad is our Dimi

jimbohammers wrote:Dimi:

I have decided to auction my match shirt from the T20 Final, with all proceeds going to the #tommaynardtrust..

It's the actual shirt I wore, and I will personalise it if wanted. Bidding will finish tonight at 9pm... It is for a great bloke and cause.


Top lad is our Dimi

i second that jimbo

JimBob - perhaps you could auction your van Persie shirt!

More seriously, good thinking and contribution from Dimi.

top stuff dimi

guildfordbat wrote:JimBob - perhaps you could auction your van Persie shirt!

guildford

As of 1 September, Tom Maynard who died on 18 June (RIP) remains Surrey's leading scorer in first class cricket this season with 635 runs. It is likely that he will finally be overtaken by Burns (601 runs) in the next match. Maybe also by le Roi (570 runs). Conceivably also KP (535 runs).

Worth recording that Surrey U17s have won the national U17 ECB competition. Surrey web site says:

"Speaking after the victory, Pemberton Greenish Academy Director Gareth Townsend, the U17 Head Coach throughout the season and the man in overall charge of the Surrey Age Group programme, said: “I am proud of what has been some outstanding performances over the years by our young cricketers in ECB competitions, many of whom are now performing for the county in First Team cricket.

“In a week that has seen Arun Harinath score consecutive first-class hundreds, a great team effort by the U17s has capped off a great week for me personally."

reports today that northants want to sign spriegel
spriegel's contract ends this year and with adams seeing him as only a one day player i wonder if he will leave.sad if he does imo

These reports about Spriegel have been circulating for a few days. He has been an excellent CB40 player for Surrey and hasn't been given all that many chances in the cc. I think he might well have made a good number six and serving as a second spinner. If he gets a good offer from another county I think he should take it...

spriegs confirms via he's twitter account that he is leaving the club and is excited by the challenges ahead with northants.
sad that adams never seemed to rate him in 4 day cricket.
all i can say is good luck spriegs

From a neutral standpoint my impression of Spriegel was that one-day cricket was where his strengths lay, and that it was probably right that in a Surrey side with so many one-day type players in the Championship team he was rarely considered.

Having got rid of Schofield last year I expect Surrey would have been happy to keep him as a one-day player, but I suspect Spriegel realises that he probably will play all formats of the game at Northants and so it is quite a good move for him.

There's an article on cricinfo about Davies being dropped for his lack of form, possibly due to the death of Tom Maynard: http://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2012/content/current/story/581326.html

I can't imagine being shunted up and down the order helped him much either.

Going back a couple of years, it always annoyed me that he got didn't get a decent run in the England ODI team before being dropped for Matt Prior before the 2011 World Cup. And that was despite him having been the best one day opener in the country for about the previous 3 years.

I can imagine that Tom's death will have had a major impact on all the Surrey players. However, it is only for so long that it can be used as an excuse. Come next year it certainly can't be.

Chrisss, I tend to agree with you on Davies. Your claim that he was the best one-day opener in the country is debatable but not far from the truth, and the decision to switch to Prior was a bad one which was difficult to understand.

However, I think England were right to ditch the idea of a 'keeper opening the batting in the UAE, and that effectively rules Davies out of one-day contention.

I also agree that Surrey's utilisation of him has been bizarre. Putting him at the top of the order and he does OK, then bring him back down again because it was never meant to be long term in the first place. If you don't think its going to be long term, then why put him there?

This season's form has probably cost him the number two 'keeper position too. With Bairstow in the squad that's an option, and if they don't trust his 'keeping I expect Kieswetter, who played for the Lions this summer, to have overtaken Davies.

In other Surrey news, the normally reliabe Richard Spiller reports in today's Surrey Ad that Tom Lancefiel has been released.

He showed definite promise when having a taste of first eleven cricket two years ago and became a favourite of our own Much Happier (formerly Depressed) Surrey Fan. Unfortunate to miss out since then due to injury and possibly Adams' selection policy.

Spiller also reports that the futures of Chris Jordan and Tom Jewell are ''pending''. These two were practicing on the outfield during the lunch interval today so they're not completely out of the frame yet.

Guildford - thanks for that intelligence. I would not be surprised if it's true Lancefield has been released. I think it's fairly telling that he has been given no opportunities in the first team this year and his performances for the seconds haven't really been such as to demand promotion to the first team.

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:Guildford - thanks for that intelligence. I would not be surprised if it's true Lancefield has been released. I think it's fairly telling that he has been given no opportunities in the first team this year and his performances for the seconds haven't really been such as to demand promotion to the first team.

Evening Corporal - now confirmed on Club website. Belated damage limitation exercise, I suspect, following Spiller spilling the beans.

Good luck to Spriegs at Northants and Lancefield wherever he ends up, plenty of talent there by all accounts. Spriegel has done a great job in CB40 for the last 2 years and pretty well in T20 as well but never really had a run in the CC side. I think he has a future as a number 7 batsman and 5th bowling option and if he gets a run at Northants he'll do well in all 3 formats for them.

It is perhaps too soon to start speculating about next years side, potentially a pointless excerise anyway given the team that played the first game and the one that played the one just gone - off the top of my head it was something like this:

Burns Jordan
Ansari Rudolph
Harinath Ramps
KP De Bruyn
De Bruyn RHB
Roy Maynard
Wilson Burns
Batty Batty
Meaker Meaker
Kartik Lewis
Linley Dernbach

So only 4 players remain from the opening win against Sussex to the win against Notts and only 2 in the same batting positions! There are to be some more departures and incomers I'm sure over the winter break but the core of our team is already in place, we currently have 9 batsmen who can play in the top 6 (excluding KP - what will he be doing next summer I wonder?), 7 seamers and a couple of spinners if you include Ansari. All of a sudden the future doesn't seem so bleak.

jimbobgooner wrote:spriegs confirms via he's twitter account that he is leaving the club and is excited by the challenges ahead with northants.
sad that adams never seemed to rate him in 4 day cricket.
all i can say is good luck spriegs

Jimbob (and others) I completely agree. In fact I would go so far as to say that if Surrey are playing Northants next season I will positively want Spriegel to do well against us. Not out of spite to Adams etc, but because I think he is a good cricketer who has given 100% for Surrey and wasn't ultimately given sufficient opportunity to prove himself at the four day game. I would really like to see him doing well with both bat and ball in the four day game. Fortunately, he won't be playing against us in the cc next season. All good wishes to Spriegel....

Excellent interview by Church with Spriegel on the Surrey website. By the end of the interview you can tell that Church is pretty choked up at his departure. Spriegel remains professional throughout - no criticism of Surrey.

Corporal - I would be happy for Spriegel to go on and be able to join your county eleven made up of players who reserve their best for playing against Surrey.

Team currently consists of just Read and Roland-Jones. Something for the October evenings ....

Completely Un-Surrey related post so I apologise:

On the 14th of October me and a few colleagues from work are running a 10k race in Ashford to raise money for the Javan Primates Project run by the Aspinall Foundation charity.

They do a fantastic job rescuing critically endangered Javan gibbons from being kept in horrendous conditions as pets. They're facebook page is here if you're interested: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Javan-Primates-Conservation-Project/197440736951785

I have been training quite hard for this and I REALLY don't enjoy running so if anyone can find any money to spare to give me a bit more motivation it would be very gratefully received!

To sponsor me you can either go to http://www.justgiving.com/Phil-Stuart to do it online or simply text the code GFDY60 followed by £1, £2, £3, £4, or £5 to 70070 to donate that amount.

Please don't feel obliged to do this but I feel like I should ask everyone I can!

It appears that Rory Hamilton-Brown is to leave Surrey:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2012/content/current/story/582086.html

Note that the article says that the decision was made "after the player and the individual decided that a fresh start may be best for all parties".

I'd say its a sensible decision. The ghost of Tom probably hangs over Rory at Surrey and a move away may indeed be the best thing for all parties. A shame as he was going well as captain.

no match thread for the lancashire game i have been in hospitail since monday.

100 for the brain
i have to say he has been good in the last 2 games

jimbobgooner wrote: no match thread for the lancashire game i have been in hospitail since monday.

JimBob - very sorry to hear that. Very best wishes for a full and speedy recovery.

PS Before learning this, I have to admit I was mildly irritated that you didn't ask your usual ''who will miss out from the squad?'' Just for once, I was spot on with Meaker and Edwards missing out although you'll have to check the wallpaper site for proof!

Hey, JimBob - are you aware I put up a ''Surrey v Lancs thread''? Not a patch on your usual article, admittedly!

whoops guildford

Shelsey93 wrote:It appears that Rory Hamilton-Brown is to leave Surrey:

http://www.espncricinfo.com/county-cricket-2012/content/current/story/582086.html

Note that the article says that the decision was made "after the player and the individual decided that a fresh start may be best for all parties".

I'd say its a sensible decision. The ghost of Tom probably hangs over Rory at Surrey and a move away may indeed be the best thing for all parties. A shame as he was going well as captain.

Tom Maynard's inquest is due to be reconvened on Monday 24 September and concluded then. It may be easier and more appropriate to comment further at that time.

also Surrey are rumoured to have made a move for Nick Compton and have allegedly offered him the captaincy.

jimbobgooner wrote: no match thread for the lancashire game i have been in hospitail since monday.

Jimbob - my best wishes too for a full and speedy recovery.....

So RHB will be leaving. This will also shine the full glare of the spotlight onto Adams' role. It was a massive risk to bring in such a young and unproven player as captain. But this was a judgement call that had seemed to be really working - with the CB40 victory and promotion to cc Div 1. But the seeds of destruction possibly also being sown at the same time in term of culture/discipline. I am sure we will hear a lot more about this.... Difficult to know what to make of the attempt to bring RHB back which was then rapidly abandoned.