SURREY vs LANCASHIRE LV=COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP

First topic message reminder :

SURREY HAVE NAMED A THIRTEEN MAN SQUAD FOR THE LV=COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP GAME AGAINST LANCASHIRE AT THE EMIRATES OLD TRAFFORD STARTING ON MONDAY.
Jason Roy returns to the squad after playing for England in the current One Day Series against Australia.
Jade dernbach misses out through injury hopefully he will be ok for saturday
The Surrey squad to play Lancashire in the LV=County Championship on Monday 14th September, Tuesday 15th September, Wednesday 16th September and Thursday 17th September :
Gareth Batty (capt)
Zafar Ansari
James Burke
Rory Burns
Sam Curran
Tom Curran
Steven Davies
Matthew Dunn
Ben Foakes
Arun Harinath
Jason Roy
Kumar Sangakkara
Gary Wilson
dunn and harinath (tough break) will probably miss out
over to you chaps

Wow - a last wicket parnership of 50 (of which "Clive" Dunn has made 1*!) "Norah" Batty has scored 46* as if to demonstrate that he is still a very useful lower order batsman.

50 for norah

480 all out dunn gave away his wkt when nora got to fifty

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:I think we have to give plaudits to Batty for the way he quickly moved down the batting order this season to give both Currans a chance to develop their batting; in that context it's worth remembering that last season Tom did not do a lot with the bat to justify a spot above 10 or 11.

Likewise on bowling, the way Batty has enabled Ansari to develop has been very commendable. I recall earlier in the season Batty endured a bit of mild criticism on these boards for not bowling himself until an innings was well advanced.  In a number of cases this was probably because he was giving Ansari a lengthy bowl, presumably to give him every chance to establish himself as a front line spinner. If this was a strategy it certainly seems to have worked well.

Meanwhile, Batty has just hit Arum Lily for six

Corporal - in his Sky interview with Fulton today (''UAE tour squad'' thread - alternatively titled ''We don't like Surrey'' - refers), Ansari gave credit to Batty for bowling him first (of the two of them) and allowing him good long spells.

Meanwhile, back in the match, business as usual as both Currans take a Lancs wicket.

At risk of sounding like Olly, an excellent day so far. Exactly what we wanted for this game and a good confidence boost for Saturday's.

Just hope the weather in Manchester follows the forecast of Chichester and the Corporal and not the Radio Lancs guy who was all too ready to write off tomorrow's play.

baby face again 1st bowling point

3rd wkt for baby face

Hmm ... bit of a Lancs fightback being led by one of their army of Kolpaks and their latest wicketkeeping import. Another wicket or two tonight would be the cherry on the cake of a second good day.

Yeah, Clive Dunn going for a few but don't panic, Captain!

5 down. It's going to take a Prince of an innings to get Lancs off the hook, but he's more than capable of Kol-packing enough of a punch to make us Saffer

SimonofSurrey wrote: 5 down. It's going to take a Prince of an innings to get Lancs off the hook, but he's more than capable of Kol-packing enough of a punch to make us Saffer

Hi guys - couple of questions.

I see from the scorecard that Foakes was keeping. Was Wilson injured or was Foakes first choice as keeper?

How bad was Ansari's injury?

Grateful if anyone knows at all. Thanks.

Excellent day's play for Surrey. The lower order contributed substantially again and there were yet more wickets for Curran minor.

Depending on state of Dernach's injury, Dunn is/was presumably a possible candidate for the final. If so, I don't think he will have done much to enhance his case.

BBC reporting Ansari taken to hospital following the injury to his hand he must surely now be a doubt for Saturday....

chichestersurryfan wrote:BBC reporting Ansari taken to hospital following the injury to his hand  he must surely now be a doubt for Saturday....

Are you ready, Freddie? Just a thought for the Corporal!

PS Anyone see my query about Foakes? That also could have a bearing on Saturday's team.

The injury for Zafar was to his left thumb the thought of him missing the final and jade

Absolutely...GB..I promise to keep the Corporal under control if The Burger Van  takes a hatrick on Saturday

guildfordbat wrote:Hi guys - couple of questions.

I see from the scorecard that Foakes was keeping. Was Wilson injured or was Foakes first choice as keeper?

the scorecard has him down as wicketkeeper guildford so maybe wilson not fully over his back injury

Cheers, JimBob. I didn't know that. If Wilson is playing just as a number 7 batsman with a dodgy back, Harinath can feel himself even harder done by.

guildfordbat wrote:Cheers, JimBob. I didn't know that. If Wilson is playing just as a number 7 batsman with a dodgy back, Harinath can feel himself even harder done by.

sorry guildford it was a sore neck close hey

Just listening to Alec Stewart's interview on the Surrey website. Sounds a bit ominous with the amount of pain Ansari is in, but we should know more when he's had results of X ray or other exploration.

Stewart was also advancing the case strongly for Tom Curran to go on the Lion's tour.

Just seen the interview, Corporal. That's why I like Stewart so much - he talks clearly and openly, perfectly prepared to expand upon a point. I lapped up the comments about Tom Curran - that's very much why he was my Player of the Season.

As Stewie is unsure at this stage about Ansari making the UAE tour, he must be a major doubt for Saturday.

Tom Curran removes Prince early on - 154 - 6 and a second bowling bonus point.

Two wickets in two balls for Sam Curran. He now has 5-60. The lad is incredible!

207-9 as Batty removes Lilley. We now have 7 bonus points to Lancs' 3.

Now Lancs have 4 as their last wicket pair have so far put on 52!

Finally, Lancs all out for 272 after Jimmy Anderson scores 42 in a last wicket partnership of 65.

Sharp contrast in figures of Surrey's three faster bowlers:

Tom Curran:     23.3 overs 3 wickets 54 runs  
Sam Curran:     19 overs 5 wickets 67 runs  
Matthew Dunn: 10 overs 0 wickets 62 runs  

Ok, so we've declined to enforce the follow-on and set off at a gallop in our second innings. I asume the ideal game plan is set them 400 in time to have a few overs at them tonight. We'll need to go easy as we are now down to four bowlers one of whom had a 'mare in Lancs 1st innings.

On a separate note, I think I'm right in saying that we would be Champions if we won from here: ie 24 points ahead of Lancs with one each to play, but with already more wins than they could manage, so gauranteed top spot? Or is my maths wobbly here? In any case, it's still a huge 'if'...

Simon - I think your maths is spot on!

I'm normally dead keen to enforce the follow on whenever you can but understand us not doing so today. Being a bowler light, let those remaining put their feet up for a bit and then get at 'em again.

I'm not too worried about Dunn. At his pace, the ball is always liable to zoom to the boundary if his radar is off. Let's see how he does second time round.

Anyway, cracking effort by the Currans last night and this morning.

Btw, I'm just back home so haven't followed anything yet other than the scorecard. Any news on Zaf?

By my own maths, Burns needs to score 55 in this innings to reach 1,000 Championship runs for the season. That'll be a fine achievement.

Sorry if that was a jinx! Burns gone for 44. Sanga still there and motoring ....

Agree it's the right decision not to enforce the follow on. Surrey rattling along at almost 6 an over.

Burns falls for 44, only just short of 1000 cc runs for the season.

Given the rate we're scoring at but our potential lightness in 2nd innings bowling it's important we don't get too ahead of ourselves here. Almost 370 ahead with 8 wickets in hand is nice but there is over four sessions still to play. Our priority must be to bat Lancs so out of the game that any target is unrealistic. If Nora decides that means 450 or even 500 rather than 400ish, that's fine by me, provided we also give ourselves reasonable time to try to bowl them out, ie a minimum of all day tomorrow. We are firmly in the box seat with one round of games to go after this and mustn't give them even a sniff.

afternoon all

100 for kumar

Afternoon Jimbob.  Excellent innings by Sanga

210 - 3 Davies out for 21. A fairly quiet supporting innings with no boundaries. Lead 418

afternoon corporal answers on a postcard how croft keeps getting wkts

le roi gone

baby face in at 6

baby face gone another wkt for croft

Surrey collapsing! 3 wickets in 11 balls. Lead is 426.

what makes it worse is we are not even trying to score fast

3rd wkt for croft

"Colonel" Mustard has conceded 20 byes in this innings.

In the last 10 overs Surrey have scored 54 - 4. That's not too bad a rate Jimbob!

272-6 off 53 overs isn't bad going!

Would like to see us have a go at them tonight,

283 for 7 declared so just the 492 for lancashire to win

Ok, so at stumps Lancs need 470 on the final day with all 10 wickets in hand. I'd have settled for that at the start of play. If they make the runs they deserve to be Champions. If not, we will go into the final round of games next week either:
1/ (draw tomorrow) 8 points clear leaving them needing to win, or to draw with full points and hope we lose catastrophically; or
2/ (win tomorrow) 24 points clear and already Champions

All in all, we're in a pretty good place, and it's all in our own hands.

SimonofSurrey wrote:Given the rate we're scoring at but our potential lightness in 2nd innings bowling it's important we don't get too ahead of ourselves here. Almost 370 ahead with 8 wickets in hand is nice but there is over four sessions still to play. Our priority must be to bat Lancs so out of the game that any target is unrealistic. If Nora decides that means 450 or even 500 rather than 400ish, that's fine by me, provided we also give ourselves reasonable time to try to bowl them out, ie a minimum of all day tomorrow. We are firmly in the box seat with one round of games to go after this and mustn't give them even a sniff.

Just catching up - only found out 10 minutes ago about the Viscount.

Anyway, thought this post from Simon and his more recent one were bang on the money.