SURREY VS HAMPSHIRE/MIDDLESEX T20 VITALITY BLAST

SURREY HAVE NAMED A 14-MAN SQUAD FOR THE VISIT OF HAMPSHIRE IN THE VITALITY BLAST ON THURSDAY.
Jamie Overton could be in line for his Surrey debut after agreeing to move on loan until the end of the season. The 26-year-old joins on a three-year deal at the end of the season.
Sam Curran, Tom Curran & Jason Roy remain with England ahead of Australia’s upcoming white ball tour.
Ollie Pope could miss up to four months after dislocating his left shoulder during the final Test between England and Pakistan.
Skipper Jade Dernbach is absent with a groin injury. All-rounders Jordan Clark (foot and ankle) and Rikki Clarke (hip) are out.
Nick Kimber (knee) and Liam Plunkett (hamstring) are also out of contention for this match.
Conor McKerr (knee) & Morne Morkel (ankle) are both out for the rest of the season.
Ryan Patel requires an operation on his right knee and will be unavailable for selection for the remainder of the season.  
There is no place in the Squad for James Taylor or Amar Virdi
FULL SQUAD:
Gareth Batty (c)
Hashim Amla
Gus Atkinson
Scott Borthwick
Rory Burns
Matt Dunn
Laurie Evans
Ben Foakes
Will Jacks
Daniel Moriarty
Jamie Overton
Reece Topley
Jamie Smith
Mark Stoneman
Stoneman wont play so we can discount him.
As well as Burns did getting a fifty it was too slow, so if Smith is available he should replace him.
so either Dunn or Atkinson will miss out for Overton and after the Kent game its more likely to be Atkinson.
Over to you chaps  

Thanks as always, JimBob.

You are assuming that Reece Topley will be fit to play two t20 games in a row!

Anyway, assuming all 14 are ok, definitely agree with you about Stoneman to miss out. Then Dunn or Atkinson as you say - like you, I'll say Atkinson although his better batting might save him. Then perhaps one of Burns, Smith and Borthwick - I'll say Borthwick although probably more in hope than anything else!

That's very bad news about Patel. I had no idea his injury was so serious. As they did with Morkel, the Club seem to tuck these nasty surprises away for us.

leaving Borthwick out wouldn't be the worse thing. Jacks would be the 6th bowler

jimbobgooner wrote:leaving Borthwick out wouldn't be the worse thing. Jacks would be the 6th bowler

Yeah, although Surrey seem particularly keen on Borthwick bowling this season. I don't understand why.

Big boundary to one side - looks like we’ll try to bowl spin from one end

The live stream really is very good now isn’t it

Im sorry but that DL adjustment is a joke. 2 runs!

Even Surrey couldn't lose from here

Good toss to win that was hey jimbo

Good to see Borthwick left out

jimbohammers wrote:Im sorry but that DL adjustment is a joke. 2 runs!

Hi guys - I do have some sympathy with Jimbo there. As he says, DL did his team no favours. Hants had up used up 3 overs (21/1 then, I think) when what had started as a 17 over game became an 11 over one. Thought that merited more than just 2 runs being added to the target we were chasing.

Hants' weakened side did lack firepower though and never looked in charge. Surrey bowled well and especially the spinners with top honours going to Moriarty. A real feather in his cap bowling 3 overs (the max allowed for only one bowler per side). As Jimbo was saying on a recent thread, he doesn't seem to spin it that much but is accurate and appears to have an air of confidence about him (I wonder if that hacked off some of Olly's mates in the Norfolk league). My early (too early really) guess is that he'll do better in limited overs games than 4 day matches; often keeping it fairly tight and able to take advantage when the batters go after him rather than bamboozling them out.

Something I noticed at the ground and don't know if this was mentioned on the stream. Overton was about to bowl the 4th over when the rain reappeared and everyone went off. Upon returning, we decided instead to stick with spin and the ball was given to Moriarty. That was certainly a good move and praise indeed to Batty and/or the management for it.

As often in t20 games and even more when reduced to less than that, fine margins play such a part. A good boundary catch by Jacks and a stunning one by Burns. If they had instead resulted in 8 or 10 runs for Hants as they might well have done on another day, we might still be looking for our first win of this season.

We got there but given we were chasing a low total, I thought we should have reached it with at least an over left. A 9 wicket win seems totally convincing but we only had 2 balls to spare; if a wicket had fallen in that last over, nerves would definitely have been jangling. In line with JD's post the other day, Amla is a class act and Surrey need him atm in all formats; however, t20 is the one his continuing steady approach and slow running is least suited to imo. Pleased to see Jacks at last get some runs - some of his drives contained proper power.

A big to Surrey's management for enabling some spectators to attend. Good to be back.

Unchanged squad for Middlesex bar any injuries should be the same 11 again

jimbobgooner wrote:Unchanged squad for Middlesex bar any injuries should be the same 11 again

Cheers, JimBob. Yep, go along with you there. The eleven for the Bob Willis game against Sussex staring on Sunday might be trickier though!

The game is being shown live on the sky sports cricket channel

As expected Surrey unchanged
Middlesex win toss and Bat

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:Unchanged squad for Middlesex bar any injuries should be the same 11 again

Cheers, JimBob. Yep, go along with you there. The eleven for the Bob Willis game against Sussex staring on Sunday might be trickier though!

Yep a real that one
Fingers crossed they announce the squad after the game, i don't know if i will be up if its early morning  

jimbobgooner wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:Unchanged squad for Middlesex bar any injuries should be the same 11 again

Cheers, JimBob. Yep, go along with you there. The eleven for the Bob Willis game against Sussex staring on Sunday might be trickier though!

Yep a real that one
Fingers crossed they announce the squad after the game, i don't know if i will be up if its early morning  

You'll have a bit of time, JimBob. Match doesn't start tomorrow until 12!

I quite like Charlie Dagnall. He always seems to be buzzing. Probably best suited for a t20. Not sure I could cope with his comms all day!

Decent opening over from Topley. Thank god he hasn't brought his dad along to do comms!

Jacks has 2nd over and bowls Eskinazi. A bit of turn there. There was a lot when he got his wicket against Hants, forget who, stumped by Foakes.

8/1 off 2. Good start.

guildfordbat wrote:Decent opening over from Topley. Thank god he hasn't brought his dad along to do comms!

16-2 off 4 overs from Jacks - handy!

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:16-2 off 4 overs from Jacks - handy!

97-7 off 18 overs, this has been a quite superb performance with the ball and in the field by Surrey

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:16-2 off 4 overs from Jacks - handy!

I've not understand why Borthwick has generally been preferred over him with the ball this season. Jacks is more consistent and reliable.

Ours to lose at the half way stage.

James Harris batting five for Middlesex is a thing.

guildfordbat wrote:Ours to lose at the half way stage.

We’re trying our absolute hardest to do so here

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:Ours to lose at the half way stage.

We’re trying our absolute hardest to do so here

For sure.

Btw, Olly, trust you've read this one from my book - you don't need a lot of runs for a lot of excitement.

Clueless batting from a team that needs less than a run a ball

Our only class batsman and the 20yo see us home. Good job we only bowled that great signing Overton for 1 over

Not quite as down as Gooch - good performance overall I think. Disappointed in Amla and Burns in particular, that’s the sort of chase they should be getting 40(40) to make sure there’s no sweat, but really they needed the wicket of Foakes to have a chance and he played beautifully.

Not convinced Jacks is an opener myself. Think we’d be a stronger lineup if we switched him and Burns in the order

Good and sensible batting from Foakes and Smith get us home. It could have been horrendous if either had gone cheaply.

On a more positive note, bar Overton we bowled really well and effectively. Not the headline act but Atkinson's contribution was more than useful. 3 overs in 3 spells of 1 over each - not easy for a youngster to pop in and out like that - and a fine return of 2/18.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Not quite as down as Gooch - good performance overall I think. Disappointed in Amla and Burns in particular, that’s the sort of chase they should be getting 40(40) to make sure there’s no sweat, but really they needed the wicket of Foakes to have a chance and he played beautifully.

Not convinced Jacks is an opener myself. Think we’d be a stronger lineup if we switched him and Burns in the order

Who would you have Burns open with, Olly? If Amla, that might have come off tonight chasing a low score. However, I would be concerned at them trying to chase or set a steep target and fearful we would be 50/0 off 10 with the game then already almost gone.

guildfordbat wrote:

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Not quite as down as Gooch - good performance overall I think. Disappointed in Amla and Burns in particular, that’s the sort of chase they should be getting 40(40) to make sure there’s no sweat, but really they needed the wicket of Foakes to have a chance and he played beautifully.

Not convinced Jacks is an opener myself. Think we’d be a stronger lineup if we switched him and Burns in the order

Who would you have Burns open with, Olly? If Amla, that might have come off tonight chasing a low score. However, I would be concerned at them trying to chase or set a steep target and fearful we would be 50/0 off 10 with the game then already almost gone.

I would have him with Amla - just think Burns’s game is very strong against pace and he can split the field in the power play (and give us a right/left hand combo). Coming in, in the middle overs against spin, not the best use of him for me.

Also not sure Jacks should be facing first up. Looks to me like he would be better coming in with the field spread a bit

England's loss is surrey's gain