Williamson ... a one over specialist?

Why, with figures of 1-0-2-1, was Kane Williamson only given one over?
Did I miss something?
If not, why, oh why, oh why???

Dire performance this evening!

Chris,

I don't know the answer as to why Williamson didn't bowl any more after his first highly effective over. Possibly he had an injury although that doesn't seem too likely given he later batted at number four.

I again don't know if it was the case with Williamson but there does seem a growing trend in t20 to continually chop and change the bowling. I appreciate there is a case for 'not letting the batsmen settle and get used to the bowling' but we often seem to go too far the other way. Bowlers benefit from finding rhythm and need to 'cash in' when they are on top.

Last night in Surrey's game against Hants, Viscount Tim Linley came on when the game was more than slipping away from us. He took a wicket in his opening over and conceded just three runs. He was then taken off and didn't bowl again until later when he (almost predictably) conceded 13 in his second and final over. Bizarre!

As for Gloucs' overall performance and result last night, probably best for me not to intrude on private grief ....