SURREY VS DURHAM HOME LV= COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP DIVISION ONE 2024

Surrey have named a 14 man squad for the LV=Insurance County Championship game against Durham starting on Tuesday 17th at the Kia Oval.
Sam Curran and Dan Lawrence return from England duty
Gus Atkinson, Will Jacks and Jamie Smith are with England for the rest of the season
Ollie pope is rested by orders of the ECB
There is no place in the squad for Josh Blake, Yousef Majid or Jamie Overton
Full squad:
Burns
Clark
S.Curran
T.Curran
Foakes (wk)
Geddes
Lawes
Lawrence
McKerr
Patel
Roach
Sibley
Steel
Worrall
Annoyed about Pope being rested but what can you do with the ECB
This is a easy team to pick so barring any injuries Lawes, McKerr and Steel to share drink duties.
Over to you chaps

Cheers jimbob, surprised we haven't embarrassingly signed someone for 1 game as cover for Pope. Agree on the 3 to miss out, hope there's no turn or we're Donald Ducked! Wonder how our dope of a captain will approach this game, given we NEED to win it

Surrey win toss and bowl
Geddes, roach and Steel miss out

What was the point in bringing Roach back?! So 6 medium pacers....and Patel, let's hope it's a green top

A Durham bowling attack without Potts, Raine and even Carse I suppose looks innocuous. They will need to go big first innings…

Couldn't really blame Geddes if he wants to leave after being treated like this.

A dreadful first hour as Durham cruise past 50 without loss, and of course Lancs struggling. The negativity of those last 2 matches, and Saturday, is coming back to haunt us now

Better 2nd hour, pity Sam got a wicket with a no ball or it would've been our session. Need a really big effort after lunch

Six seamers?! What a load of nonsense. McKerr a total spare wheel that could've been Geddes or Steel, who at least offer spin or batting. Selection has been rubbish recently.

Ackerman proving a pain

All out 262, I knew Ackerman would score runs against us. Got a feeling we've let them get too many, at least Somerset look like they're only getting 3 bonus points, but a certain result there now, hopefully in Lancs favour

Good finish to the day, 52-0 in response to 262 all out. Think that's more than we should have let them get, a bit of sloppiness in the field and some dropped catches not helping.

Luckily, Durham's bowling so far, whilst quick is also wayward. With the short boundary too, you'd think it'll present plenty of scoring opportunities and a chance tomorrow to take a firm grip on this game.

Decent reply at the end of the day, but got to keep the rate up tomorrow, can't allow Sibley to lean on his bat all day scoring a single every 3 overs, we need maximum points because Somerset will probably get a 19 point win, and if we at least get a high scoring points draw it'll be in our own hands against Essex

As Olly said if McKerr doesn't do anything with the bat the decision to play him over Geddes was rather brain dead.

I was there yesterday, certainly was a green top but that's no reason for six seamers. Four if they're all fit and in form, five at the outside.

I did wonder if McKerr's inclusion was some cunning masterplan to have him bowl only at their tail. He did well wrapping things up at the end against Lancs at the Oval and on one occasion when he was on loan at Yorks. However, even that wasn't the case! Whilst he didn't bowl well and was expensive, I had some sympathy for him on the very few times he got the ball as he was desperately searching for a wicket.

So yep, Geddes would have been a better bet. As for Roach, no one in the crowd (including some usually knowledgeable ones) has a clue what's going on!

As for the state of the game now, I actually think we're in a very decent position. As JD pointed out, Durham are missing most of their A grade bowlers. We'll need to properly see how their replacements get on today with the ball but they did nothing last night and provided poor support with the bat to Ackerman. After an ordinary start*, Worrall impressed in his subsequent spells and merited his fourfer in the end (* yes, Olly, I remember what you said that too may four balls may cost him an England international spot when he qualifies next year).

Fast and large outfield so plenty of opportunities for runs to be run when the ball doesn't go beyond the rope. Batting should be our only job today and bringing up 4 more bonus points.

Re bonus points, we need to watch and guard those carefully. The scoreboard showed us a minus 3 yesterday. Often, that sort of deficit gets chiselled away by the end of the match with the number of wickets taken helping out the bowling side. However, we shouldn't assume that will automatically happen and may need to mix Lawrence's spin with seam in Durham's second dig.

Foakes there with 7 off 23 and looking set to cost JimBob a point.

guildfordbat wrote:Foakes there with 7 off 23 and looking set to cost JimBob a point.

Costing Jimbob a point with slow batting...and then getting out for not many runs. The Ben Foakes special.

At least Foakes is out now, an abysmal painful watch for everyone, Surrey continue to mess up as Durham are now into the tail

That has to be one of the worst LBW decisions I have ever seen

Great knock Ryan Patel, well deserved unsung hero

Excellent work by Patel and ably supported by some handy 20/30s from TCurran, Clark and Lawes. Have to say though we have rather been let off the hook by some woeful fielding, TCurran dropped twice early on in his knock and Patel dropped in the deep on 60 odd not out. All three catches should be taken at this level and in all three instances Durham barely got a hand on them!

Also what I have liked about this Patel knock - he's been proactive. Doesn't necessarily mean silly shots, he's pushed singles, twos and gone after bad balls. Just puts pressure back onto an inexperienced bowling lineup.

thegooch7 wrote:At least Foakes is out now, an abysmal painful watch for everyone, Surrey continue to mess up as Durham are now into the tail

and he wasn't out shocking umpiring

McKerr

4th and final batting point, very disappointing not to get all five against that attack

50 for Lawes

153 lead

Durham sending out not one, but two nightwatchmen for just two overs of batting. What nonsense

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:That has to be one of the worst LBW decisions I have ever seen

Hey Olly and all - I was there again yesterday. Haven’t seen any replays or highlights.

Can I ask you for your thoughts as well on Foakes being given out caught behind. The batsman wasn’t happy - no surprise there. However, whilst keeper Robinson and the slips confidently appealed, the bowler initially didn’t seem interested.

Generally, agree with your comments and those from the other guys during the day. Durham bowled well in the first two sessions but wilted after tea. However, their catching (or, more accurately, dropping) was dreadful throughout the day and that really cost them.

Patel wasn’t particularly comfortable early on but stuck in and became more aggressive as he went towards and beyond his ton. A smart and very valuable innings. He also featured in handy partnerships with the later batsmen, always running well for himself and his partners. Some good biffing late on from Lawes which you would have liked and JimBob would have loved as it brought up a 4th batting point.

As you said, two night watchmen is “nonsense”.

Won’t say too much for fear of a jinx but make sure you’ve got the keys for the bar, JimBob.

Heading up again now.

Have a good day Guildford - good start but Frankie off the field hurt I hear?

Curran Jr gets both Bedingham and Robinson in fairly quick succession as Durham's resistance, wilts...

The bar is open

Champions.....again

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Have a good day Guildford - good start but Frankie off the field hurt I hear?

Thanks, Olly. A good day and a comfortable win. Durham had had the stuffing knocked out of them in the final session on day 2 (Wednesday) and they continued to implode further yesterday after Frankie dismissed the second night watchman (ludicrous, which contributed to Ackerman being left stranded a second time) and proper batsman McKinney in the first over.

Don't know what the issue with Frankie was but he returned after not long, stayed on the field and took a further wicket for his 4h in the innings, 8 in in the match and 52 so far in this year's Championship. My Surrey player of the season (even ahead of Jamie Smith, PJ   ).

Sam Curran also bowled well and merited his own fourfer - a beauty of a lifter to get Bedingham caught behind. In contrast, Lawes bowled like a drain whilst McKerr was never given the ball. Despite the win, picking six seamers will always mystify me. At least, we were level with the over rate by the end and so didn't forfeit any points.

Just to add and mainly for Voice of the Beehive who raised this query early in the season. I finally grabbed a word with Head Groundsman Lee Fortis at lunch on day 2 to ask him about play in the Championship match at Old Trafford being further delayed as it was considered the wind made it too dangerous to remove the covers. He said there hadn't been a specific new rule about this but Health & Safety was increasingly a factor in professional cricket as in all work places. The decision rested with Lancs' Health & Safety Officer in conjunction with their Head Groundsman. Big Lee added that Surrey had asked Lancs if the same decision would have been taken for a Test match covered by Sky with 25,000 spectators inside the ground but didn't get an answer!

Thanks for the research Guildford and congratulations to everyone else of a Surrey persuasion. I still read and enjoy everyone’s comments on here. Unfortunately having moved to Worcestershire now I don’t get to see Surrey much but my heart is still with them.

Worcestershire members are very keen on signing Virdi on a permanent contract but I had a feeling he has another year at The Oval. Does anyone know his situation ?

Voice of the Beehive wrote:Thanks for the research Guildford and congratulations to everyone else of a Surrey persuasion. I still read and enjoy everyone’s comments on here. Unfortunately having moved to Worcestershire now I don’t get to see Surrey much but my heart is still with them.

Worcestershire members are very keen on signing Virdi on a permanent contract but I had a feeling he has another year at The Oval. Does anyone know his situation ?

Cheers, Beehive. No problem.

I don't know how much longer Virdi has on his Surrey contract as, unfortunately, the Club haven't for a while stated the length of them when announcing new or renewed ones. However, even if he has a year to run, the Club still might release him if he pushes to move on. Both parties might think that is for the best as he hasn't featured with any regularity since 2018 and that is likely to continue unless Surrey change their approach re reliance on part-time spin in the wake of Stewart standing down.

Glad to hear that Worcestershire members want him on a permanent contract. Virds is still a popular figure among Surrey members who have followed his loan spell with interest and been pleased for him taking Championship wickets again.

As a bit of an aside, Worcs have done well in Division One following last year's promotion and more than held their own despite many pre-season predictions that they would be going straight back down. Pleased for them and their supporters, a very decent club who have to get by on a comparatively small budget.

Thanks guildford.  It’s certainly a very different experience being a member at Worcestershire than at Surrey and I was not popular supporting Surrey in the two fixtures against the Pears this season. I was delighted with the outcome of the season for both clubs though.
A few members are not keen on Amar’s body language in the field but the majority would like to see him stay. Can’t knock the formula Stewie has followed in red ball cricket but a pity Amar has been treated the way he has been.

Sorry I’ve taken the thread off topic but I’ll continue that by mentioning some very unsubstantiated rumours the local ITK has been spreading regarding Surrey. Rory to hand over the captaincy to Dom and Geddes off to Middlesex.  Has to be said the gentleman concerned is not at all reliable and assured me last year that Ryan Patel was going to Essex so his rumours have to be taken with a large pinch of salt.  Thought I’d mention them though.