Kent review

Today we lost a very winable match.

First of all at 150 we were 10 runs short on a ground which appeared to cause batsman problems but also had short boundry's. Our first three Batsman went early which always cause's problems. In my opinion all three were cheap wickets hamiton brown guided a ball that was there to smash tamely into the hands of backward point, Davis caught behind by Geriant Jones (great catch) down the leg side always disappointing and Roy putting one down third mans thoart on a small pitch.

Quick Mention to a great innings by Wine Gums.

Even ten short I was confident especially the way Arafat and Nannes started, in the end Arafat went for 19 runs off 4 overs including two edges for four that would have been wickets had we had slips. Nannes was Nannes brilliant.

Then 13 balls that not only changed the game but lost us the game, the last ball of Nannes opening spell a dropped catch by Meaker, an easy chance and in my opinion he was celebrating before catching it. The very next over the man Meaker dropped Van Jarsveld smashed Meaker for about 18 runs. Then the moment I had been dreading the ball was tossed to Schofield and six balls later the game was lost. Meaker and Schofield conceded in two overs what Arafat and Nannes had done in five overs.

Schofield hold your head in shame you have disgraced your county and I for one will never see that £18 again

Depressed - thanks for an informative review.

Can I also ask what you thought of de Bruyn's innings? Listening at times to Churchy and checking on the scores now and then, he seemed to usefully consolidate things at first but then lacked the momentum to really push on. Along with Meaker's and Schofield's failings, that also seems to have cost us today.

Guildford

The way De Bruyn played his innings was ok, I know on paper 25 from 45 balls doesn't look good but he did the right thing came in and went slowly first of all this is understandable as we had lost three early wickets. Then later on it was as if he said to Maynard I will anchor the innings and try and go at one a ball while you try and hit everything out of the park.

But although trying to do the right thing he did seem to struggle with his timing (as did a few batsman) and paticulary found it hard to score of Riaz who I was very impressed with for Kent.

I'm still not happy with the balance of our team for T20. We should go with four bowlers Arafat, Nannes,Batty and Dernbach and then 7 batsman ( as long as one is Davis and two are Hyphen and De Bryun to cover the 5th Bowler)

Wilson I have never been a big fan. Meaker does not control his length well enough for one day cricket and I think I have made my feelings on Schofield quite clear.

Thanks, Depressed. Very thorough.

Meant to mention before that if you look at the earlier thread you'll see we were thinking and worrying about you as the game went on - particularly at the start of Kent's seventh over!

the difference depressed was that mahmood and van jaarsveld were both going at better than a run a ball and not leaving it to each other.de bryun is not a youngster so he should know better

I think regardless of circumstances getting 25 from 45 is poor and in the end I guess was the difference, well that and the bowling. I think I'm more annoyed that we didn't/couldn't get more than 150 than that we failed to defend it, we have successfully done that twice recently but the batsman need to start making bigger scores. Very impressed with Wine Gums though and Arafat bowled well so that's a positive.

Thanks for the review Mr. Depressed.