County Championship/Bob Willis Trophy 2021

First topic message reminder :

Starts in eight days time on the 8th of April, so we may as well have a thread for it. It's another revised structure for this year, with two trophies up for grabs: the County Championship and the Bob Willis Trophy.

The 18 counties have been split up into three seeded groups:

Group 1: Derbyshire, Durham, Essex, Nottinghamshire, Warwickshire, Worcestershire
Group 2: Gloucestershire, Hampshire, Leicestershire, Middlesex, Somerset, Surrey
Group 3: Glamorgan, Kent, Lancashire, Northamptonshire, Sussex, Yorkshire

Counties will play every group opponent home and away - a total of ten matches. After ten matches, the top two teams in each group advance to Division One. Teams finishing 3rd and 4th go to Division Two. Teams finishing 5th and 6th go to Division Three.

In the division stage, each county will play a total of four more games. They will not, as far as I'm aware, play again against their initial group opponents. For instance, if Essex and Warwickshire make it through to Division One, they won't play each other in the division stage, just the top two from groups two and three.

After these four extra games, the team that is top of Division One will be classed as the County Championship winners. The County Championship winners will then play the team that finished second in Division One in the five-day final to determine the Bob Willis Trophy winners.

The group stage will run from April-July. The division stage will start late August and conclude in September. The final is set to be played from the 27th September-1st October (the ECB know it rains and gets dark then, right?).

I can't say I'm a fan of this format, to be honest, as the County Championship trophy has been relegated in stature, but I hope it all works out well.

With SkyBet, defending champions Essex have been installed as favourites at 5/1 to win the Bob Willis Trophy. Perennial runners-up Somerset are the second favourites at 13/2, then Yorkshire at 7/1. Lancashire, Nottinghamshire and Kent a bit further back at 9/1. Forum favourites Surrey at 12/1. No-hopers such as Durham, Glamorgan and Leicestershire way out at 66/1.

Close finish in store as Crane nips out another - Lancashire need only 45 more runs, Hampshire need 5 more wickets.

Duty281 wrote:Close finish in store as Crane nips out another - Lancashire need only 45 more runs, Hampshire need 5 more wickets.

How about it being a tie?

At the other end of the rubbish pitch spectrum from Chelmsford we have Surrey 335-2 responding to Glamorgan's 672-6.

Guildford's man Jamie Smith with a century though it should be added. Yes, it's a road but the lad looks a good talent.

dummy_half wrote:

Duty281 wrote:Close finish in store as Crane nips out another - Lancashire need only 45 more runs, Hampshire need 5 more wickets.

How about it being a tie?

Could be, Lancashire losing another just as they appeared to be coasting. 19 to get, four wickets left.

Now 9 to get but only three wickets left. Crane and Dawson spinning it sharply. Vilas on an excellent 39* at one end.

Cripes, down to three to win as Vilas plunders a boundary. Then Bailey's run-out two balls later.

Two to tie, three to win, two wickets left. Bit of a close finish!

Oh I don't believe it. The number ten batsman foolishly takes a single off the last ball of Dawson's over leaving himself on strike v Crane. Fourth ball of Crane's over the number ten edges to slip.

Nine down, one to tie, two to win. Matt Parkinson on strike for a possible two balls v Crane. This is a mad old game.

Vilas sweeps hard for four and wins the game for Lancashire by one wicket. What a finish! What an innings from Vilas.

That puts Lancashire in the final. They'll win the County Championship if Warwickshire don't beat Somerset. Notts going into the final as well, I think, if they beat Yorkshire and Warwickshire don't win.

So some early morning pie flinging by Somerset and a declaration by Warwickshire gives Somerset a target of 272 and Warwickshire most of a day to take the 10 wickets they would need.

Will be very tough for Warwickshire to bowl Somerset out on a lovely batting wicket.

Notts coasting to victory in the other Division One game.

Duty281 wrote:Will be very tough for Warwickshire to bowl Somerset out on a lovely batting wicket.

Notts coasting to victory in the other Division One game.

Notts with a couple of wickets lost recently, but only need 44 with 7 wickets in hand, should be a simple victory, which the need to potentially nick second place.

Somerset off to a steady start in their 4th innings - looks more like a Somerset win or draw than the win Warwickshire need.

Three quick wickets lost by Somerset - Championship race maybe swinging back towards Warwickshire

Definitely Warwickshire's now - Somerset 85/6.

Is Danny Briggs injured or just wondering who he's upset? One over, one maiden and one wicket of Lammonby, hasn't bowled a ball since!

Elsewhere, Surrey take a lender day 4 lead against Glamorgan in a thriller. Pope has already surpassed his highest FC score but has a chance to make a triple century.

Serves Lancs right after their abject surrender against Notts in 2010 - where Voges got a rapid 100 and then Lancs lost 3 wickets in less than 16 overs to deny Somerset the title. Looking like sweet revenge.

Hogan is keeping wicket and Chris Cooke has taken the new ball. Glammy have used all 11 bowlers! Just need a concussion sub to go for the record on their own.

Cooke taking the new ball

A nice touch from Surrey to get Rikki Clarke in ahead of Will Jacks on his final professional appearance though. Nearly 18 years from his Test caps and 15 years from his last ODI appearance but still chugging along. His batting became more hit and miss over the years but he developed into a very fine seam bowler indeed with the Dukes ball. He's one of the very best slip fielders I've ever seen too and a lovely bloke to boot. He'll be missed on the county circuit.

Warwickshire County Champions.

Top effort from them today. And they'll play Lancashire in the five-day final.

So a Warwicks win in the County Championship and a terrific finish to the season with so many counties in with a shout until almost the end. Good of the weather, patchy at best this season, to provide a sunny finish.

Not sure if they've decided on the formula for next season. There are pros and cons of the current, likely-to-be-temporary, format. Every county starts with a chance of winning the title, but you do away, to start with, to two divisions which is supposed to get the cream rising to the top.

There are only 14 four-day matches under the current system. But even that might be reduced if the money men have their way. At the moment we still have 18 counties playing red-ball cricket. But for how long?

It's been a terrific season, despite the rain at times. A really good Test series, crowds again, and some good county cricket.

Can't see The Hundred and The Blast co-existing. Best thing about The Hundred was the boost to women's cricket. Not sure it does ANYTHING for men's cricket.

14 four day matches is still too many for me, somewhere in the 10-12 region would be ideal.

The five-day final starts tomorrow...but heavy rain forecast through the week means little chance of a positive result.

Duty281 wrote:The five-day final starts tomorrow...but heavy rain forecast through the week means little chance of a positive result.

I think first innings can then determine the winner.

guildfordbat wrote:

Duty281 wrote:The five-day final starts tomorrow...but heavy rain forecast through the week means little chance of a positive result.

I think first innings can then determine the winner.

Yes, thanks, I'd actually forgotten about that.

Don't think we actually need concern ourselves with the first innings tiebreaker - Lancashire 9/4 after 6 overs! Warwickshire not missing Woakes one iota.

Lancashire don't even last 28 full overs v Warwickshire, all out for 78. They only got that far because of Luke Wood.

Always rubs it in when you are skittled out cheapily and then the opponents pass your score without losing a wicket.

Some discussion about whether Yates will make the England squad to tour Australia this winter. Despite the poor Lancashire bowling he is making a good case for himself in this innings with some delightful cuts and drives.

As for the trophy it's 99.9% in Warwickshire's possession. Coasted past Lancashire's score with ease and a draw or a win gets the same outcome for them now. Surprised with how much play there has been today - if this were a test I think the umpires would have hauled them off for light about two hours ago!

Duty281 wrote:Some discussion about whether Yates will make the England squad to tour Australia this winter. Despite the poor Lancashire bowling he is making a good case for himself in this innings with some delightful cuts and drives.

Whilst I feel Sibley's weaknesses (basically can't score on the off side or against spin) will prevent him from being a long term Test player I could see him being a useful stop gap in Australia if the tour goes ahead. He isn't cowed by pace or the short ball and batting against the Kookaburra I think there is still value in openers that 'blunt the new ball' than there is against the Dukes in English conditions. Between the increased use of the wobble seam and the Dukes swinging late into the innings it is more often than not challenging to bat at any point in the innings in England currently. As such 'blunting the new ball' to make life easy for the middle order isn't as indispensable as it once was in England. In Australia I could still see there being value in it though.

That's if the tour goes ahead of course. Root stopped short of saying he'd definitely be going when talking about the Ashes today.

Well, Sibley couldn't have asked for much better conditions and situation in which to bat today. Blue sky and any clouds high up. No demands whatsoever to score quickly. Just stay there and let the Bob Willis Trophy get ever further from Lancs' grasp.

And Sibley gets out. Like you said Guildford, couldn't ask for better conditions and a better match situation in which to deliver a high score. Instead he's out for 57 - apparently his sixth score of between 45 and 57 in the nine innings since he was dropped by England.

Duty281 wrote:And Sibley gets out. Like you said Guildford, couldn't ask for better conditions and a better match situation in which to deliver a high score. Instead he's out for 57 - apparently his sixth score of between 45 and 57 in the nine innings since he was dropped by England.

Yeah, wasted opportunity. Gone lbw to Bailey.

It's long been my perception since watching Sibley in his Surrey days that he's particularly vulnerable to an lbw shout and often falls that way. Casual scanning of scorecards in more recent times and seeing him bat for England haven't changed my mind. Possibly he just doesn't move his feet quickly enough.

Duty / JDizzle - you're both good on stats for all cricket things. Do you have access to any stats showing how often he is out lbw compared to other dismissals? Cheers.

Well for England it's not a standout.


  Bowled 3 (8.3%)
  Caught 13 (36.1%)
  Caught Behind 11 (30.6%)
  LBW 9 (25.0%)
  Stumped 0 (0.0%)
  Run Out 0 (0.0%)
  Hit Wicket 0 (0.0%)
  Handled Ball 0 (0.0%)
  Obstructed Field   0 (0.0%)

guildfordbat wrote:

Duty281 wrote:And Sibley gets out. Like you said Guildford, couldn't ask for better conditions and a better match situation in which to deliver a high score. Instead he's out for 57 - apparently his sixth score of between 45 and 57 in the nine innings since he was dropped by England.

Yeah, wasted opportunity. Gone lbw to Bailey.

It's long been my perception since watching Sibley in his Surrey days that he's particularly vulnerable to an lbw shout and often falls that way. Casual scanning of scorecards in more recent times and seeing him bat for England haven't changed my mind. Possibly he just doesn't move his feet quickly enough.  

Duty / JDizzle - you're both good on stats for all cricket things. Do you have access to any stats showing how often he is out lbw compared to other dismissals? Cheers.

Sibley's had 170 first-class innings and he's been dismissed 154 times. 36 of those 154 dismissals have been LBW (23%).

Duty281 wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

Duty281 wrote:And Sibley gets out. Like you said Guildford, couldn't ask for better conditions and a better match situation in which to deliver a high score. Instead he's out for 57 - apparently his sixth score of between 45 and 57 in the nine innings since he was dropped by England.

Yeah, wasted opportunity. Gone lbw to Bailey.

It's long been my perception since watching Sibley in his Surrey days that he's particularly vulnerable to an lbw shout and often falls that way. Casual scanning of scorecards in more recent times and seeing him bat for England haven't changed my mind. Possibly he just doesn't move his feet quickly enough.  

Duty / JDizzle - you're both good on stats for all cricket things. Do you have access to any stats showing how often he is out lbw compared to other dismissals? Cheers.

Sibley's had 170 first-class innings and he's been dismissed 154 times. 36 of those 154 dismissals have been LBW (23%).

Thanks for that, Duty and to you too, Afro, for your earlier breakdown of Sibley's dismissals in Tests. My perception seems to have a bit skewed. I would have guessed his lbw dismissals would have been more.

That said, I'm unsure how his lbw dismissals compare generally against others. I did have a look at Burns' dismissals in Tests for just one comparison.

Burns' 53 dismissals in his 29 Tests break down as follows:

Caught 36 (67.9%)
LBW 10 (18.9%)
Bowled 5 (9.4%)
Run Out 2 (3.8%).

That maybe backs me up to a point although certainly not conclusively.

Sibley's would seem to be a bit high for an opener, but not massively so, at 23%. 18% of Burns' dismissals in FC cricket have been LBW, 19% for Hameed, 21% for Cook and (going further back) Strauss was 17%.

LBWs in general have shot up over the last few years with DRS changing how seamers bowl.

I also read somewhere that there's also been an upturn in LBW dismissals since more seamers have perfected the wobble seam as well. It's a delivery that encourages seamers to bowl straighter I think as it can then challenge both edges which brings LBW into play.

Not so long ago the wobble seam set certain bowlers apart, there were plenty of Test seamers that didn't bowl it and some old school commentators claimed it wasn't even a real delivery but just poor control of seam position. Now there are very few Test seamers who don't bowl it and young seamers coming through academies are being taught it the same as they learn outswing and inswing. It's had a really interesting affect on how seamers are bowling, especially with the older ball. Many bowlers seem to just be using the wobble seam once the ball stops conventionally swinging as an alternative to searching for reverse swing. Reverse is such a temperamental skill dependent on variables out of bowlers control. Even ball tampering won't always lead to reverse swing, it's a pretty random thing to rely on. Whereas the wobble seam when bowled accurately as someone such as Ollie Robinson does can be very effective much of the time.

king_carlos wrote:LBWs in general have shot up over the last few years with DRS changing how seamers bowl.

I also read somewhere that there's also been an upturn in LBW dismissals since more seamers have perfected the wobble seam as well. It's a delivery that encourages seamers to bowl straighter I think as it can then challenge both edges which brings LBW into play.

Not so long ago the wobble seam set certain bowlers apart, there were plenty of Test seamers that didn't bowl it and some old school commentators claimed it wasn't even a real delivery but just poor control of seam position. Now there are very few Test seamers who don't bowl it and young seamers coming through academies are being taught it the same as they learn outswing and inswing. It's had a really interesting affect on how seamers are bowling, especially with the older ball. Many bowlers seem to just be using the wobble seam once the ball stops conventionally swinging as an alternative to searching for reverse swing. Reverse is such a temperamental skill dependent on variables out of bowlers control. Even ball tampering won't always lead to reverse swing, it's a pretty random thing to rely on. Whereas the wobble seam when bowled accurately as someone such as Ollie Robinson does can be very effective much of the time.

Typically good and informative post about the wobble seam, Carlos.

I also suspect that, as a consequence of the introduction of DRS, umpires are no longer so (ultra?) cautious in upholding lbw appeals. That's even the case imo for county games where DRS still isn't normally in use - perhaps because the umpires now realise they can approach a decision with greater confidence rather than so regularly relying on the age old ''not sure and so not out''.

Still think Sibley gets given more than others, mind, which may indicate a weakness on his part.

Warwickshire closing on 464/7, Rhodes 151*. Yates made a century but was out shortly after.

Just a case of whether Warwickshire can bowl Lancashire out a second time, on a slow batting wicket with some turn, or the rain/bad light triumphs and the season ends with a draw. Either way Warwickshire are getting the trophy.

Bigger news from today was the ECB recommendation that the County Championship remains with this conference-style format in 2022, before a return to the usual two divisions in 2023. The counties have to vote it through, apparently it seems they will. Also this silly five-day final, which doesn't generate much enthusiasm, is likely to be scrapped with immediate effect.

king_carlos wrote:LBWs in general have shot up over the last few years with DRS changing how seamers bowl.

I also read somewhere that there's also been an upturn in LBW dismissals since more seamers have perfected the wobble seam as well. It's a delivery that encourages seamers to bowl straighter I think as it can then challenge both edges which brings LBW into play.

Not so long ago the wobble seam set certain bowlers apart, there were plenty of Test seamers that didn't bowl it and some old school commentators claimed it wasn't even a real delivery but just poor control of seam position. Now there are very few Test seamers who don't bowl it and young seamers coming through academies are being taught it the same as they learn outswing and inswing. It's had a really interesting affect on how seamers are bowling, especially with the older ball. Many bowlers seem to just be using the wobble seam once the ball stops conventionally swinging as an alternative to searching for reverse swing. Reverse is such a temperamental skill dependent on variables out of bowlers control. Even ball tampering won't always lead to reverse swing, it's a pretty random thing to rely on. Whereas the wobble seam when bowled accurately as someone such as Ollie Robinson does can be very effective much of the time.

It’s an interesting one this - I’ve been reading Hitting Against the Spin by Nathan Leamon and Ben Jones, and there is a chapter devoted to DRS and it makes fascinating reading.

The frequency of LBWs has barely changed from the 2000s (1 every 378 balls) to the 2010s (1 every 363 balls). It doesn’t go any more divided, so maybe there is a difference in the past few years but 2010 with Asif tormenting England was the first time the wobble seam became common knowledge.

But the bowlers who get LBWs has changed. Pace bowlers actually got less LBWs last decade (17% of wickets down to 14%) whilst spinners got more - 21% up from 18%. Those numbers are read off a graph so may not be exact but the trend stands.

And this is due to a few things - umpires are definitely much more comfortable giving LBWs on the front foot to spinners but also spinners (and Swann was the leader in this) bowl a lot more balls from around the wicket to batters they are turning the ball away from. So that is SLA to RHB and OS to LHB - by 2018 they bowled nearly 90% of balls from around the wicket compared to mid 60s in 2006.

And a quick bonus stat - what do Allan Border, Desmond Haynes and Javid Miandad have in common? There is at least a 15 percentage point difference between their % of LBW dismissals at home compared to away. Home umpiring, eh!

But the book is an interesting read. Would recommend if you love stuff like that.

Duty281 wrote:Sibley's would seem to be a bit high for an opener, but not massively so, at 23%. 18% of Burns' dismissals in FC cricket have been LBW, 19% for Hameed, 21% for Cook and (going further back) Strauss was 17%.

Those are some interesting numbers - as right hand opening batters who open in pace friendly conditions should get out more LBW than lefties. Purely as most balls are bowled by right arm bowlers who will bowl more balls that can get a RHB out LBW. A lot to lefties will pitch outside leg, even for masters like Jimmy.

Hameed is the interesting one as he is in line with the three lefties rather than Sibley. Perhaps Afro’s stat of 25% of LBWs in Tests is more accurate and backs up Guildford’s point as a lot of Sibley’s FC stats will be pre his big technique change?

guildfordbat wrote:

king_carlos wrote:LBWs in general have shot up over the last few years with DRS changing how seamers bowl.

I also read somewhere that there's also been an upturn in LBW dismissals since more seamers have perfected the wobble seam as well. It's a delivery that encourages seamers to bowl straighter I think as it can then challenge both edges which brings LBW into play.

Not so long ago the wobble seam set certain bowlers apart, there were plenty of Test seamers that didn't bowl it and some old school commentators claimed it wasn't even a real delivery but just poor control of seam position. Now there are very few Test seamers who don't bowl it and young seamers coming through academies are being taught it the same as they learn outswing and inswing. It's had a really interesting affect on how seamers are bowling, especially with the older ball. Many bowlers seem to just be using the wobble seam once the ball stops conventionally swinging as an alternative to searching for reverse swing. Reverse is such a temperamental skill dependent on variables out of bowlers control. Even ball tampering won't always lead to reverse swing, it's a pretty random thing to rely on. Whereas the wobble seam when bowled accurately as someone such as Ollie Robinson does can be very effective much of the time.

Typically good and informative post about the wobble seam, Carlos.

I also suspect that, as a consequence of the introduction of DRS, umpires are no longer so (ultra?) cautious in upholding lbw appeals. That's even the case imo for county games where DRS still isn't normally in use - perhaps because the umpires now realise they can approach a decision with greater confidence rather than so regularly relying on the age old ''not sure and so not out''.

Still think Sibley gets given more than others, mind, which may indicate a weakness on his part.

I've definitely noticed umpires in county cricket are quite lets say, trigger happy, when it comes to LBWs over the last few years. And actually, I'd say the standard of county umpiring is just flat poor in some instances too (I know it is a one off, but I remember in particular Sibley getting a stinker in his first innings back from being dropped).

Duty281 wrote:Warwickshire closing on 464/7, Rhodes 151*. Yates made a century but was out shortly after.

Just a case of whether Warwickshire can bowl Lancashire out a second time, on a slow batting wicket with some turn, or the rain/bad light triumphs and the season ends with a draw. Either way Warwickshire are getting the trophy.

Bigger news from today was the ECB recommendation that the County Championship remains with this conference-style format in 2022, before a return to the usual two divisions in 2023. The counties have to vote it through, apparently it seems they will. Also this silly five-day final, which doesn't generate much enthusiasm, is likely to be scrapped with immediate effect.

Thanks, Duty. Although hardly difficult, your reading of the match position is spot on.

As for the ECB recommendation and the reversion to two divisions in 2023, that seems fairly sensible taking all things into the mix. The significant aspect still to come for 2022 will be the scheduling of domestic formats and the games within them. Expect that late November / December.

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:
...

I've definitely noticed umpires in county cricket are quite lets say, trigger happy, when it comes to LBWs over the last few years. And actually, I'd say the standard of county umpiring is just flat poor in some instances too (I know it is a one off, but I remember in particular Sibley getting a stinker in his first innings back from being dropped).

My gut feel is that's right although it needs to be kept in mind that umpires' decisions in county games have been subject to greater analysis in the last few years with more streaming of matches together with increased quality of streaming.

Just a 440 first innings lead for Warks then. Guess the Lancs road map is 560 by the close tomorrow and then skittle 'em for 110. Simples!

Probably not advisable for a Lancs opener to run himself out.

Terrific end to the season for Warwickshire. This is probably the last BWT final.

Plus and minus points about the conference-style county championship which will now likely be in operation in 2022.

All sides start with a chance of winning the championship and I think this leads to more-attacking play. However, the better sides are not necessarily playing all the time against similarly-good sides.

So a return to the two-division format in 2023 looks like a good idea. As with the Premier League on football, the top division is not a closed shop and if you're good enough you will rise to the top.

Hats off not only to Warwicks but also to Notts who after being in the doldrums produced winning cricket.

Nottinghamshire if anything have shown that a return to the division format is not the way to go as the talent becomes too concentrated. With three separate leagues it gives an equal chance of overall victory so the teams with money are less likely to monopolise said talent.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/58913832

Good news with the County Championship returning to a proper two-division format from 2022, not 2023.

Division One:

Essex, Gloucestershire, Hampshire, Kent, Lancashire, Northamptonshire, Somerset, Surrey, Warwickshire, Yorkshire.

Division Two:

Durham, Derbyshire, Glamorgan, Leicestershire, Middlesex, Nottinghamshire, Sussex, Worcestershire.

So Notts accumulate the most points, finish third overall and start next season in division 2?

Duty281 wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/58913832

Good news with the County Championship returning to a proper two-division format from 2022, not 2023.

Division One:

Essex, Gloucestershire, Hampshire, Kent, Lancashire, Northamptonshire, Somerset, Surrey, Warwickshire, Yorkshire.

Division Two:

Durham, Derbyshire, Glamorgan, Leicestershire, Middlesex, Nottinghamshire, Sussex, Worcestershire.

How is this good news? It means more meaningless county games, a more condensed format is the way forward.

Can't comment overall, but it did seem like last year's format produced a far more interesting finish, with the best teams playing each other often and each game seemingly critically important.

Also why are we basing which division teams are in based on 2019 results