SURREY VS LANCASHIRE SPECSAVERS COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP

First topic message reminder :

SURREY HAVE NAMED A THIRTEEN MAN SQUAD FOR THE SPECSAVERS COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP GAME AGAINST LANCASHIRE AT THE EMIRATES OLD TRAFFORD STARTING ON SUNDAY.
Stuart Meaker is named in a Championship squad for the first time this season but Ravi Rampaul is unavailable for selection due to the hamstring strain he sustained against Middlesex.
Jade Dernbach and Zafar Ansari remain on the treatment table on the plus side Matthew Dunn has recovered from his hamstring injury sustained against Yorkshire.
Sam curran has gone back for more exams (latin) (politics)
THE SURREY SQUAD TO PLAY LANCASHIRE AT THE EMIRATES OLD TRAFFORD ON SUNDAY 22ND MAY, MONDAY 23RD MAY, TUESDAY 24TH MAY AND WEDNESDAY 25TH MAY :
Gareth Batty (capt)
James Burke
Rory Burns
Tom Curran
Steven Davies
Matthew Dunn
Ben Foakes
Arun Harinath
Stuart Meaker
Mathew Pillans
Jason Roy
Kumar Sangakkara
Gary Wilson
wilson will carry the drinks again and i'd go for dunn to miss out as well
over to you chaps

Yup it's hard to see this as anything other than a Lancashire win and we shouldn't take anything away from Jarvis' exploits today. That said, it wasn't good enough from Surrey. As Guildford says, Sangakarra really didn't look that hard done by, and Davies was out again playing a bit of a nothing shot. Burns deserves plaudits, and the lower order—Burke in particular—did well to hang around for a while.

I'd open up with Curran and Meaker tomorrow, I'd suggest they're our most likely wicket takers if Surrey are to get back into it. (big if)

guildfordbat wrote:In some ways, I suspect Stewie and MDV wouldn't be too upset if one of the top 5 copped a small injury or went down with the lurgy after this match. That would get Wilson and hopefully a bit more steel into the batting and make a tricky decision for them.

Not sure Sibley could also be accommodated unless we have a night of the long knives.

The problem with going with only 4 main bowlers is that they all need to be fully firing, in terms of both fitness and accuracy - that would worry me.

The way I feel atm I would sacrifice the elegance of Davies for the fight of Wilson, tell Roy and Sanga they're next if they don't immediately do something more and hope Sam and Zaf are available bl**dy soon!!

I find it interesting you seem to be implying we need more from Sanga Guildford?

Top run scorer in Div 1 as it stands (well certainly coming into this round of matches)

Would like to hear your reasoning behind your thoughts

Leading run scorers in D1:

http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/batting/most_runs_career.html?id=10771;type=tournament

Hi Olly - sorry not to reply last night, temporary computer crash!

To be clear, Sanga is a wonderful batsman and history will rightly judge him as a world great.

His 171 first dig against Somerset is the clearest example of that this season and gave us our best chance of a CC win before our bowlers let their tail wriggle off the hook.

But ... yes ... I am still (at least a bit - he added backtracking slightly from his annoyance of last night ) dissatisfied with Sanga. I'll try and explain where I was coming from in my earlier post.

I'm actually not going to give him a hard time about getting a duck yesterday. From Bradman to all, it happens. However, where I do have a concern or frustration, is that when he has got in, he is not going on enough to make the really big scores that tilt a game.

Ignoring yesterday's duck and the ton against Somerset, in his other 8 CC innings he's four times reached double figures but failed to go beyond 32. In the other 4 knocks, he's scored between 61 and 83. Now, on the one hand, that's impressive and commendable. Those sort of scores certainly help the team but they are not match defining. That's what I want to see more of.

To me, this ties in with ''the ruthlessness'' that both Stewie and MDV have spoken about and want to see. I grabbed a few words with Stewie the other week when the seconds were playing at Guildford (whatever people may think of his tactics etc, he's incredibly approachable and open). He was still fuming then that Harinath and Davies had both blown the chances the previous week when in the 80s and 90s to score centuries and set the game up for us.

Admittedly, Sanga is doing massively better than our other top 4 batsmen (I agree with you about Davies and Roy, the former has insufficient grit for my liking). He's also doing better than all others in Division One - which probably weakens my case - but I still want more from him. He's still so good, I don't believe it's too unreasonable to want that.

I do wonder if Sanga actually feels the same. He normally comes across as a most gracious and delightful person. His reaction to his adjudged lbw yesterday though was petulant. That's unlike him. He normally takes the rough with the smooth. Maybe, he thought it was a shocker (James and I didn't). There again, perhaps he was showing his frustration at again not doing enough.

I accept there is some greed involved on my part in what I say but I make no apology for that. I am greedy for Surrey success.

A wkt would be nice

jimbobgooner wrote:A wkt would be nice

Poor Pillans must be especially thinking that! By my reckoning, his combined CC analysis from his two and a bit matches so far and 70 overs is 0/241. He also went wicketless in Friday's t20 opener.

Should of played Dunn

Perhaps he is a batsman and he's just too embarrassed to tell Batty
(Pillans)

Dreadful session

Lancs 90/0 at lunch.

Given Burns' comments last night about the wicket being difficult to bat on, that seems an excellent effort by Smith and Hameed. Understandably they're far more interested in staying put and being able to slowly build a lead than worrying too much about batting bonus points. Apart from Pillans, the Surrey bowlers going at less than 2 per over. Tidy but it's the end column in their analysis that shows where this game is heading.

Are we actively trying to injure Tom Curran? Just gonna bowl him until he breaks or something?

Batty strikes

TC strikes

Meaker strikes

We're hanging on by a fingernail here, good to see Meaker bowling economically

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:We're hanging on by a fingernail here, good to see Meaker bowling economically

Yes, agreed. Just checked Meaker's CC economy rate on cricinfo, it's 3.77. Not awful and a touch better than I would have guessed but still not great. He's doing well so far today with 1/22 off 11.

Btw, Olly - feel my Sanga essay deserves a response.

I will when I'm home from work tonight Guildford! Can't reply in length for fear my boss will see!!

Time for some gloom - 4th wicket pair looking ominous. Already only about 20 short of our total. TC already bowled 22 overs - Burke just 5 (at 1 an over).

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:I will when I'm home from work tonight Guildford! Can't reply in length for fear my boss will see!!

Doesn't your boss understand about proper priorities?

kingdaveeagle wrote:Time for some gloom - 4th wicket pair looking ominous. Already only about 20 short of our total. TC already bowled 22 overs - Burke just 5 (at 1 an over).

Not like you, King Dave!

Meanwhile, try this one - in his 3 CC matches so far, Pillans has a return of 0/251. I very much doubt if any Surrey bowler in the history of the Club has ever conceded more runs before taking a wicket.

Fair to say he won't be playing in the next championship game Guildford

To be fair, Pillans probably hasn't been as awful as his figures suggest - mind you, that would take some doing!! I think the plan is for him to bowl a steady line and length to dry up the runs, apply pressure and allow the likes of Curran and Meaker to take the bulk of the wickets. Trouble is they're not taking many wickets which enables the opposition batsmen to get in and go after him. As James suggested during the Middlesex game, Pillans also probably lacks sufficient variation at this level.

6 Surrey lads from this XI have bowled in CC this year:

Batty - 9 wickets at 47 & 3.4 rpo
Burke - 4 wickets at 41 @ 4.6 rpo
Curran - 15 wickets at 42.5 @ 3.4 rpo
Meaker - 1 wicket for 26
Harinath and Pillans 59 and 268 runs.



Contrast that with Lancashire:

Jarvis 19@24
Wagner 18 @27
Kerrigan 14 @29
Bailey 7 @28


Based on last season I really felt Surrey would thrive in CC1 and Lancashire struggle, but Surrey need to fix the bowling woes sooner rather than later.

Which of course you all know, so apologies for stating the bleeding obvious.

Time for a new bowling coach

Burkey getting some tap. First spell of 5 overs cost 5 runs. Second spell of 5 either side of tea cost 40!

Darren Stevens, Chris Read, Olly Rayner, Toby Roland- Jones ... to that list of players who usually rub their hands in glee when they see a Surrey fixture coming up should be added Alviro Petersen. Before this match, he had a CC average against us touching 71 including scores of 210 for Glamorgan in 2011 and 167 for Somerset in 2013. That average is going up further as he approaches another ton ....

Burke and Pillans not good enough for Surrey if truth be told

Petersen goes to meaks after bringing up his ton

And no weather forecast with corporal on holiday

2nd wkt for TC

3rd wkt for Meaks

Wkt for run out should bowl him more often

jimbobgooner wrote:Wkt for run out should bowl him more often

JimBob - can you or anyone tell me what's happened to Burns? I heard one of the Lancs radio guys refer to an earlier delay due to his injury but he didn't say what it was. Thanks.

Lancs are threatening, but still haven't landed a true killer blow yet...very much on the verge if the tail wags however

Not heard anything about that Guildford will try and find out on twitter

3rd wkt for TC

Full bowling points? Surely not....! Another wicket needed in the next 6 overs....

Apparently Roy and Davies are off the field as well

BOOM FULL BOWLING POINTS

Wonder if Roy is still feeling the effects of that knee injury he got against Essex

Stumps a lead of 151

guildfordbat wrote:Hi Olly - sorry not to reply last night, temporary computer crash!

To be clear, Sanga is a wonderful batsman and history will rightly judge him as a world great.

His 171 first dig against Somerset is the clearest example of that this season and gave us our best chance of a CC win before our bowlers let their tail wriggle off the hook.

But ... yes ... I am still (at least a bit - he added backtracking slightly from his annoyance of last night   ) dissatisfied with Sanga. I'll try and explain where I was coming from in my earlier post.

I'm actually not going to give him a hard time about getting a duck yesterday. From Bradman to all, it happens. However, where I do have a concern or frustration, is that when he has got in, he is not going on enough to make the really big scores that tilt a game.

Ignoring yesterday's duck and the ton against Somerset, in his other 8 CC innings he's four times reached double figures but failed to go beyond 32. In the other 4 knocks, he's scored between 61 and 83. Now, on the one hand, that's impressive and commendable. Those sort of scores certainly help the team but they are not match defining. That's what I want to see more of.

To me, this ties in with ''the ruthlessness'' that both Stewie and MDV have spoken about and want to see. I grabbed a few words with Stewie the other week when the seconds were playing at Guildford (whatever people may think of his tactics etc, he's incredibly approachable and open). He was still fuming then that Harinath and Davies had both blown the chances the previous week when in the 80s and 90s to score centuries and set the game up for us.

Admittedly, Sanga is doing massively better than our other top 4 batsmen (I agree with you about Davies and Roy, the former has insufficient grit for my liking). He's also doing better than all others in Division One - which probably weakens my case - but I still want more from him. He's still so good, I don't believe it's too unreasonable to want that.

I do wonder if Sanga actually feels the same. He normally comes across as a most gracious and delightful person. His reaction to his adjudged lbw yesterday though was petulant. That's unlike him. He normally takes the rough with the smooth. Maybe, he thought it was a shocker (James and I didn't). There again, perhaps he was showing his frustration at again not doing enough.

I accept there is some greed involved on my part in what I say but I make no apology for that. I am greedy for Surrey success.

A well thought out and reasoned post Guildford. He is still very good, but I would note that he is now 38 years old, and playing in foreign conditions (such conditions he struggled with throughout the majority of his test career). Two major factors for any player, father time catches up with everyone and I think for Sanga to atop the run scoring list at this stage of the season is something to be celebrated.

I also note your thoughts about the fact there's only one hundred, and no real killer instinct. This brings up a wider debate about batting averages - should we lambast a batsman who scores around his average everytime, but celebrate a batsman who scores 200 in one innings, then scores of 0-10 in the next 3/4?

I obviously hope Sanga goes onto better scores this season, but personally if he continues to average 50+ and hang around the top of the run scoring charts that is more than good enough for me

As we were knocked over for 191 first time out, you would think their lead of 151 will be be too much for us to pull back to make a proper contest of it.

Game seemed to open up in the last 2 sessions after a cautious morning session. We've done pretty well to get max bowling points and an encouraging return for Meaker. However, as JimBob in particular has said, Burke and Pillans don't seem cut out for bowling in Div One - not atm anyway.

Lancs seemed set for an even higher total when Petersen was approaching his ton but I don't think they'll be too disappointed. They've moved the game on and, with the Corporal auditioning for The Great Escape and not around to give any rain forecasts, seem to have ample time to get the win. Unless the heavens do open, we're going to have to play out of skins for the next 2 days to get anything other than the 3 bowling points out of this game.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Hi Olly - sorry not to reply last night, temporary computer crash!

To be clear, Sanga is a wonderful batsman and history will rightly judge him as a world great.

His 171 first dig against Somerset is the clearest example of that this season and gave us our best chance of a CC win before our bowlers let their tail wriggle off the hook.

But ... yes ... I am still (at least a bit - he added backtracking slightly from his annoyance of last night   ) dissatisfied with Sanga. I'll try and explain where I was coming from in my earlier post.

I'm actually not going to give him a hard time about getting a duck yesterday. From Bradman to all, it happens. However, where I do have a concern or frustration, is that when he has got in, he is not going on enough to make the really big scores that tilt a game.

Ignoring yesterday's duck and the ton against Somerset, in his other 8 CC innings he's four times reached double figures but failed to go beyond 32. In the other 4 knocks, he's scored between 61 and 83. Now, on the one hand, that's impressive and commendable. Those sort of scores certainly help the team but they are not match defining. That's what I want to see more of.

To me, this ties in with ''the ruthlessness'' that both Stewie and MDV have spoken about and want to see. I grabbed a few words with Stewie the other week when the seconds were playing at Guildford (whatever people may think of his tactics etc, he's incredibly approachable and open). He was still fuming then that Harinath and Davies had both blown the chances the previous week when in the 80s and 90s to score centuries and set the game up for us.

Admittedly, Sanga is doing massively better than our other top 4 batsmen (I agree with you about Davies and Roy, the former has insufficient grit for my liking). He's also doing better than all others in Division One - which probably weakens my case - but I still want more from him. He's still so good, I don't believe it's too unreasonable to want that.

I do wonder if Sanga actually feels the same. He normally comes across as a most gracious and delightful person. His reaction to his adjudged lbw yesterday though was petulant. That's unlike him. He normally takes the rough with the smooth. Maybe, he thought it was a shocker (James and I didn't). There again, perhaps he was showing his frustration at again not doing enough.

I accept there is some greed involved on my part in what I say but I make no apology for that. I am greedy for Surrey success.

A well thought out and reasoned post Guildford. He is still very good, but I would note that he is now 38 years old, and playing in foreign conditions (such conditions he struggled with throughout the majority of his test career). Two major factors for any player, father time catches up with everyone and I think for Sanga to atop the run scoring list at this stage of the season is something to be celebrated.

I also note your thoughts about the fact there's only one hundred, and no real killer instinct. This brings up a wider debate about batting averages - should we lambast a batsman who scores around his average everytime, but celebrate a batsman who scores 200 in one innings, then scores of 0-10 in the next 3/4?

I obviously hope Sanga goes onto better scores this season, but personally if he continues to average 50+ and hang around the top of the run scoring charts that is more than good enough for me

Thanks, Olly. Certainly a thoughtful response.

I accept I'm harsher on Sanga due - at least in part - to the failings of other batsmen which puts the spotlight more on everyone. If the rest of the top 4 were averaging 40 to 50 rather than all being in the 30s (not dreadful but not good enough in a generally high scoring season so far), I might not be having a bit of a pop at him. That I am might not be entirely fair but we do need imo (and, far more importantly, the opinions of significant others at the Club) the ruthlessness to more thoroughly and consistently press home an advantage.

Interesting comment from you about the wider debate. When we used to have (bl**dy good) debates on this forum about Hall of Fame cricketers, I used to regard reliability as a real plus whilst others were sometimes more swayed by rare stand-out performances. Hmmm - perhaps, I'm turning tack here. Alfie and MfC who contributed significantly to the HoF discussions and often look in on the Surrey threads might in particular care to add a comment together with the Corporal when he returns to barracks.

As for Surrey, I fear we will continue to suffer with Ansari injured and therefore without a decent all-rounder in the team to provide balance. Maybe, Sam Curran will supply it soon but that'll be asking an awful lot of a teenager fresh out of school. In the meantime, I'll continue to make demands of Sanga to compensate, whether that's reasonable or not.

LondonTiger wrote:6 Surrey lads from this XI have bowled in CC this year:

Batty - 9 wickets at 47 & 3.4 rpo
Burke - 4 wickets at 41 @ 4.6 rpo
Curran - 15 wickets at 42.5 @ 3.4 rpo
Meaker - 1 wicket for 26
Harinath and Pillans 59 and 268 runs.



Contrast that with Lancashire:

Jarvis 19@24
Wagner 18 @27
Kerrigan 14 @29
Bailey 7 @28


Based on last season I really felt Surrey would thrive in CC1 and Lancashire struggle, but Surrey need to fix the bowling woes sooner rather than later.

Which of course you all know, so apologies for stating the bleeding obvious.

Whilst on the face of it, these figures look terrible (and I'm not about to say they're great!), it should be noted that in a full strength bowling attack, only TC and Meaker would be playing, the others being in the side at the moment due to a slew of injuries. Whilst obviously strength-in-depth is important, it will always be hard to take wickets missing this many first-team players. Tom Curran as well is young and new to the 1st division and there are already signs of his bowling improving—he's now taken 7 wickets in the last two innings he's bowled in.

It's not great, but at least there is a road map for improvement, and later in the season we should be able to get out a bowling attack consisting Ansari and four of TC, SC, Rampaul, Footit and Meaker.

Well, for a while Lancs looked as if they were batting Surrey completely out of this game - but a good fight back. Still whip hand to Lance - but all it takes is one decent batting performance and 4th innings nerves could settle in.

LondonTiger wrote:Well, for a while Lancs looked as if they were batting Surrey completely out of this game - but a good fight back. Still whip hand to Lance - but all it takes is one decent batting performance and 4th innings nerves could settle in.

Assuming this last wicket is picked up for little to no runs - a score of 300 from Surrey could see a tricky little 150ish chase for Lancs in the 4th innings. Obviously they'd still be favourites, but gives us a chance.

As Guildford has said - we will need to play very well to get anything from the game, but surely the top/middle order won't fail so badly a second time round...(famous last words!)

In the Corporal's absence, let me be the harbinger of bad news on the weather front....no chance of the weather intervening to save Surrey... A lovely sunny day in Manchester tomorrow....more cloudy on Wednesday but dry...
I actually fear the game being all over by the end of tomorrow...positives to take from the match this far....Meaker's return... Burns performance...Negatives...well plenty of those!....The Corporal is due back at the end of the week....having had a significant birthday....shall we say... ...maybe his return will coincide with an upturn in Surrey's fortunes.

Churchy has just tweeted Rory Burns has been ruled out of the remainder of the game v Lancs with mild concussion after being hit fielding at short leg yesterday

jimbobgooner wrote:Churchy has just tweeted Rory Burns has been ruled out of the remainder of the game v Lancs with mild concussion after being hit fielding at short leg yesterday  

You couldn't make this up.

Who do you reckon opens with the Baron then? Maybe Davies. My wildcard would be Foakes although he's probably too knackered since being behind the stumps from Sunday evening.

Btw, a teeny crumb to enjoy on the highlights - good backing up by Meaker and then a cool head to get the run out.

Probably Davies, Guildford it would have been hard enough to survive with 11 wkts intact