Durham make the trip down fromthe North East for a vital CC1 game. The weather is variable but Somerset seem to hope their spinners will have a say as Roelof va der Merwe joins Jack Leach in the home team line up.
On a windy Taunton morning with the sun out but drizzle and cloud about I turn up at Taunton expecting Durham to take the bowling option and not take the toss. What do I know, Durham want the toss, they lose it and Chris Rogers decides to bat first. The inclusion of 2 spinners suggests he expects it to turn later in the game (the pitch is a little greener than one would expect here so they've left some on). But can our front end face Rushworth and Onions and blunt their new ball attack?
THe Somerset side is;
Trescothick, Abell, Rogers, Hildreth, Allenby, Trego, van der Merwe, Overton C, Davies, Groenewald, Leach
Lewis is rested but it is probably the two spin option that the skipper is interested in.
Marcus and Tom stride out to face Rushworth and the said Onions. But they lose the early skirmish as Tom strides back after wafting at Onions' first ball and being caught by Rishworth with nothing to his name. 6 for 1 after 1.1 overs. Marcus drives smartly through the covers to score his first boundary with his first ball but he doesn't survive Rushworth's second over as he snicks one behind with a score of 6 and it is 6 for 2 before we really settle down for the day.
Rogers and Hildreth effectively open for their county and do a little better, pushing the score to 22 after the first 5. Not the start we were hoping for in the sun having chosen the batting option but where would we be if we didn't have to rebuild on the first morning of a home Championship match?
After 10 overs we've blunted the first Durham attack and reached 49 with Hildreth on 24 and Rogers 19. Coughlin comes on at the River end - let us hope it isn't his gsme to make a name for himself as usually happens to one Durham player each season. (Gareth Breeze is not playing........)
We pass 50 in the over and move on. Unfortunately during his next over Chris plays a loose one and is out to Stoneman at point for 30 at 61. Once again, he scratched around, got a start and then let it go. Jim Allenby is now in.
Wifi issues stopped the rest of the day and a strange day it was too. I was going to go through it later but to be honest the second day was as strange so the scoreboard will probably give you most of the detail anyway. Needless to say our front end was blown away by seam and stupidity with certain players getting out to un-necessary and downright orresponsible shots (Pete, James, Roelof Ryan you know who you are) Jim Allenby was seemingly unlucky with his dismissal which the replay suggested has harsh to say the least. But with some fight fromthe tail in the forms of Cove, Ryan, Tim and Jack we staggered to 184 by 3 in the afternoon and were looking down the barrell of an innings defeat if we were lucky.
From then on it all went very weird. Wood at the end of the day said the footholes were breaking up from ball one and after 10 ovets of Cove and Tim and Jim the skipper switched to spin and brought Jack on from the River and Roelof on from the New Pavilion. The first time I have seen spinners in attacking mode at Taunton since the days of Mushtaq nearly 20 years ago. It also is the firsttime I have seen a team of Somerset spinners murder batsmen in such enjoyable circumstances for thst time as the Durham batsmen illustrated that they had litte difence against a ball that was doing all kinds of things in the hands of our slow men, especially RvdM who had it spitting and shifting all over the place.
In tandem and in order the two men started to remove the Durham men one after another all afternoon. By the end of the day they have not got to our total, 17 wickets have gone down in the day and all it pretty level. Durham end at 154 for.
A cloudier and , muggier start to the day with supporters wanting to see the back of the last three Durham men, preferably before they pass our total. We start with RvdM at the New Pavilion and Craig at the River but it is not very long before they have Jack back on with his spinming partner. in no time we have removed all three for 5 runs more than we got and the game is a one innnings match 30 minutes into Day 2. Jack has 5 for 69 and Reolof has 4 for 59 with Craig popping in with a skittling late during the lasy part of Day 1
Then...? Hell in a handbasket as Onions and Rishworth find a brand new ball that is swinging all over the place and Somerset batsmen who simply do not have a clue. A first baller for Trescothick is followed by Rogers leaving 3 before the 5th has him in front. Then a King pair for Tom. How the mighty have fallen. 3 for 0 in 7 balls and Durham's 5 run advantage still intact.
It isn't until Allenby gets a boundary in the 3rd over that we get anywhere near their score. We have 21 before Hildreth is caught at second slip off Onions. Trigger follows him LBW a couple of balls later without bothering anyone. Allenby follows them after racking up 15 at 33 for 6 and we finally reach 50, and then 56 (lowest score against Durham) in the 14th as RvdM takes 3 boundaries off Onions.
At lunch with a 44 run stand between the Dutchman and Cove we are 80 for 6....making a game of it? Not unless they more than double this!
After the break we continue moving and take the total over 100 in the 22nd courtesy of a leg bye but in the 24th RvdM's valuable contribution of 47 ends when Onions cleans him up and it is 105 for 7. In comes Ryan Davies, probably chanting to himself "don't hook don't hook". These two did a faitly decent jon in the first innings but it isn't a long partnership as Hickey bowls Overton for 38 at 117. Another useful contribution but one feels it won't be enough. Jack Leach is in to support Ryan who at least looks up for the fight but the spinner chops on at 128 and in comes Tim Groenewald to finish it off against the two Durham spinners of Borthwick and Hickey.
But after smacking a huge Somerset Stand six off Borthwick they find that they've got Wood from the New pavilion and he isn't going to give them any half volley lob ups to murder. In fact Ryan tries to pull him but the ball is way too fast and he is lucky that Onions drops him coming in from the New Pavilion boundary. He does six Borthwick to the CA in the next over, taking us over 150 with a boundary off the next one. Another one takes them to 156 after 35 with Ryan at least taking them on..
We have 175 at 39 when they replace Wood with Coughlin. Ryan is on 46 with Tim on 18. A 48 run immensely valuable partnership which becomes a half ton one off 52 balls. 178 at 40 overs. Hickey takes the 41st and Ryan wants 50. He tries to take the six and nearly gets caught but runs 2 togo tor9. Unfotunately the red mist sort of comes down and but he chips it up and is caught at midwicket for 49. A real fighting knock with the wrong end....but there is some considerable promise there. All out for 180
52 for the last wicket. 70 odd for the 7th. We are side with no front end but a lot of battling bowling allrounders.
Durham need 176 to win znd you have to say that a side that is 21 for 4 really does not deserve to get out of jail in this one.
That, however, is a personal view and not one held by Rogers, Overton and Groenewald. Jennings is LBW with the 5th ball of the first over as the seamers look to take the shine off the ball before giving it, I expect, to the spinners. 4 for 1 after 2.
Roelof is on for the 6th but they leave Craig on at the River. In the 7th when it looks like he might have gone on a little long Ryan goes for one that he should have left to Jim and drops it. Hero to villain? But Borthwick then slaps one to Hilda and it is 19 for 2.
Tea comes with the 9th at 27 for 2.
After Tea it becomes pretty obvious in the first hour that the venom of yesterday is not there and the Durham men are far more circumspect than they were. At 60 for 2 in the 21st I call the game for the visitors. Unless Craig can find something or Tim has one of his inspired spells, this game will burn out early tomorrow if not in the last half hour tonight so I'm gonna get the Bicknoller bus before the flower nazis of the Taunton show get on there with their purchases.
Hope to get home and find I'm wrong but the gut says NO.
The game did not end on Friday night. During the last hour the spinners retook the high ground and put another three Durham batsmen back in the hutch but the score went over 100 and the visitors needed 46 runs in the morning with 5 wickets remaining. A very small crowd came to see what was probably going to be a valiant defeat of Somerset. However, Jack Leach had other ideas and in his first over (the second bowled) He sent Onions back LBW with his 5th AND Coufghlin back caught by Allenby with his sixth. Blood in the water after 11 balls and things were looking a little more hopeful.
Poynter and Hickey took 5 off RvdM's next but Poynter only lasted another 2 balls of the next Leach over and the last batsmen departed LBW for 12. No one really cared what the score was but the 3 wickets had gone down for the 5 of the previous over. Now it was REALLY on.
At 136 for 8 Durham went into the 45 over facing Roelof but failed to finish it as the Dutchman dispatched Wood caught Trescothick (his 500th professional catch) off the third ball and then Rushworth capitulated from the fourth caught by Allenby.
Somerset had won one of the strangest games I've ever watched. A 39 run victory with the last 5 wickets falling for 7 runs in less than 5 overs on the third morning. 13 ducks in the game including 3 first ballers for Somerset's opening pair. No score over 190. Nearly all Durham's scalps to seam and nearly all Somerset's to spin. Somerset win from a position of being 3 for 0 and 33 for 6 in their second innings and Durham fail needing 46 runs to win with two days to get them in. 9 match wickets for Jack Leach and 8 for Roelof van der Merwe who probably just snatches the man of the match award for his batting in the second innings as well. 500 catches for the Boss and loadsa points in the CC1. That may very well be relegation out of the way for this season..... can we even consider the other end of the table? After this game absolutely anything is possible.
Some significant happenings at the Durham v Yorkshire 50-overs clash on Sunday, with regard to Durham`s county championship visit to Taunton on Thursday.
Paul Collingwood, who took back the captaincy last week when Mark Stoneman announced he was leaving for Surrey next year, injured his leg while batting and did not field. He will not play against Lancashire in the final 50-over match at Old Trafford today, and must be doubtful for Taunton on Thursday.
The situation with regard to England fast bowler Mark Wood is also intriguing. His return to the game after two ankle operations is being monitored by the ECB, who have him under contract, and he was only given permission to play very late on yesterday.
He may be given another 10 overs for Durham at Old Tr4afford today, but whether the ECB feel he is ready for four-day cricket at Taunton is up in the air.
Somerset will have some interesting selection decisions to make also, with Chris Rogers, Marcus Trescothick and Jack Leach returning after missing the one-day action.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:01:10:52:57 by Grockle.
Ah, back in the red - took me a while but I got there in the end 😉
I'm sure all three of those will play, I'd guess along with Young Tom, Hildreth, Allenby, Trego (tho they may have to wheel him out), Cove, Gregory, Davies and TG. Conceivably a bowler may be rested for Davey to come in; I've assumed Myburgh is still injured...
I think that is likely to come under consideration soon - particularly if the seamer rotation policy is to continue depending on the extent to which Josh Davey is seen as a really good CC option (or not) by our management.
i.e. if one of LG, TG and Cove is going to be rotated each match, then it may come down to a decision between Josh D and Roelof for the extra place. Four of our remaining six games are at home. I would expect us to try to prepare dry surfaces.. on such a surface, Roelof may well be deemed a better bet than Josh... However, under such a scenario there would, potentially, be quite a lot of first-innings bowling for Allenby/Trego to do, particularly if we were to lose the toss and have to bowl first.
The alternative option would be to include both Josh and Roelof so as to have three front-line seamers plus two spinners. But in that scenario one of Allenby/Trego has to be omitted which would necessitate trusting Roelof with the bat....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:01:12:29:14 by AGod.
Indeed. From the team perspective, at least Tom looked in superb touch the other day.
He'd not had a great season prior to injury.....
...... However, he has already this season made two tons (one the other day) in conditions where his (batting) team-mates overwhelmingly failed around him.
I always give more credence to runs made in those sort of situations than I do an equivalent volume of runs made in a match where the bat is well on top and where most people in the line-up have, thus, scored well.
Yes, no good reason, really, for him not to be number 11. Number 11 is after all (these days at least) the spot where you'd most expect to find a guy with some shots in his locker but with a severe shortage of patience and consequent shot selection issues.
Paul Collingwood (c), Mark Stoneman, Keaton Jennings, Scott Borthwick, Jack Burnham, Michael Richardson, Adam Hickey, Stuart Poynter, Mark Wood, Paul Coughlin, Usman Arshad, Chris Rushworth, Graham Onions.
Well the pitch looks to be close to the pitch they didn't play on against Middlesex.
It is hard to say exactly because the covers are on and the square is being covered up, Durham players are on the outfield practising slip catching with Paul Collingwood doing the easy bit with the bat, I had the pleasant company of Ken Palmer while watching them.
Agree Grizzzly fully expect RvdM and Davey to miss out. Hope we have produced a pitch that will assist Jack in this match. Perhaps similar to the Surrey CC match in late May? If we do win toss bat first and bat big then over to the Taunton Vettori!
I approve of the strategy (and consequent selection) for this one. Much more sensible than the strategy employed vs Middx.
For me it's all about the ratio of chance of winning to chance of losing. With the strategy vs Middx I thought we only had a tiny chance of winning the match - no more than ten percent - whereas I thought they probably had a 70 percent chance of winning.
Our % chance of winning on a dry pitch might be no higher than 10% might even only be 5% given how tough it can be to force results at home, but I would say that their chance of winning, importantly, is no higher than ours when we follow this sort of strategy.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:04:10:50:04 by AGod.
Not necessarily. You just need a good reason other than that. Langer declared at 50 for 8 to use the residual dampness at Lord's and there were zero problems with not giving Middx the chance to get their third bonus point.
So what's the story from the ground, people? I assumed we'd produced a dry and relatively bare track, hence the team selection. This was the strategy that I would have pursued. And both teams wanted to bat first on it. What's happened? Has overhead weather favoured the seamers? I've always thought that Wood is too good for our batsmen but then he only has 3 of the wkts. Wood needed at Edgbaston..
Yes, I know, Bagpuss. That is why Langer declared - all I was saying is that it gets judged on a case by case basis so that if we had a plausible reason to declare we should be fine in this case too. I wasn't saying that we did have a plausible reason - did not know one way or t'other as have not been able to listen.
This is certainly offering a keenly contested match. Muchall is about the only proper batsman left and he's coming up to retirement. The Durham tail has been known to wag so we need to dock it. Good fight back
These kind of games and the 50 over matches have at least stopped the halfway through Day 1 'We're Doomed' posts.
These are the ones where the experts come on, predict the other side with get 700 for 5 in a day and then bowl us out for less than 100 in a session and we will ignominiously lose a game in less than 2 and a half days.
It's been a definite 'day of two halves' at the moment.
Seam blows us away for no apparent reason
Spin turns them inside out when reason suggests it shouldn't
What an interesting day's cricket, played on what looked like a damp pitch.
Where as Durham took their wicket with the faster bowlers Somerset took most of their wickets with the slow bowlers.
The day started at 10am watching the queue for QF tickets for the 17th, I got my ticket during the lunch break, the queue lasted until mid-afternoon.
Unfortunately Marcus Trescothick didn't get his 50th hundred for Somerset today, he was caught by Scott Borthwick bowled by Chris Rushworth playing this shot, if you can call it a shot it looked more like an angled bat.
James Hildreth seems to want to score his runs in fours today, I am not sure where this ball was intended to go too.
This was meant to be another four by James Hildreth but Mark Wood had other ideas.
When Paul Coughlin bowled to Jim Allenby Jim thought he got everything out of the way of the ball, the umpire thought differently and gave him out caught by Stuart Poynter.
Craig Overton was a bit unlucky when the bail was just removed by a good ball from Chris Rushworth.
Mark Stoneman got an edge off Jack Leach and Marcus Trescothick caught him at short leg.
Scott Borthwick hit this ball from Roelof van der Merwe straight to James Hildreth.
Keaton Jennings, another wicket for Roelof van der Merwe and another catch for Marcus Trescothick.
Stuart Poynter hit the ball straight to Chris Rogers off the bowling of Roelof van der Merwe.
I'm not going to say it was great as the batting was indifferent to say the least!
They are a very string seam attack but Tres, Hildy, Tregs, Roloef, Ryan and Tim all played some very ordinary shots to help the bowlers out!
Then we got to the good bit! What a wonderful sight to watch 2 somerset spinners working on tandem and causing such huge problems for the batsmen.
I like watching batters scared of proper pace bowling but nothing better than watching them completely bamboozled by quality spin bowling!!!
It just goes to show how 4 day cricket changes, at 184ao its all doom and gloom, despair and guaranteed defeat and looking at relegation spots!?
At the close if you asked a neutral I honestly think we are just ahead. Of course it is finely balanced and could go either way but if I had a spare tenner and had to chose 1 team I'd chose us.
We can't possibly bat that badly again, and Durham's batters have looked largely clueless v our spinners.
First session is crucial if we assume 100 runs it could be.....
180ao, Som 70-2
210ao, Som 40-1
240AO, Som 10-0
or worst case they are still batting at lunch and we are then in very big trouble!!!
Can't add much more to what has already been said. I saw Somerset's innings and the first hour or so of Durham's.
A number of poor injudicious shots led to a number of Somerset's dismissals - Trescothick, Abell, Hildreth, Trego (the worst of the lot just prior to lunch), Van der Merwe and Davies.
It is the best that I have seen Davies bat and the partnership between him and Craig Overton looked as if we were going to push on to a good (but not brilliant) score. There were no demons in the pitch when we batted and I can't recall seeing a ball that misbehaved. Today's display with the bat highlighted that we are desperately short on batting talent.
Allenby stayed a long time at the wicket after having been given out. IMO it was getting near to showing dissent, and I don't like it.
I chuckled when I heard a rumour today that Allenby is going to captain the side in all formats next season.
Don't fret anyone because it aint going to happen.
A glass half - empty or a glass half - full?
Regardless, both glasses need filling up.
I definitely err on the side of being positive but as a somerset supporter I feel that is quite acceptable!
I really don't get those who claim to "support" our team but find every possible reason to criticise and go quiet when we do well.
At 184ao we could be dead and buried now. As it we showed huge fight and no little skill to get right back to pretty much level. Not even I envisaged being in this position at 3pm!
Huge credit to Rogers for bringing spin on so early and setting such perfect fields.
He never caved when they played odd big shot and kept the catchers in.
Any report on Tresco, went off injured in the last hour, I missed it, someone suggested he got hit in the head off an edge from a Leach delivery? He walked off unaided, was it just a bump, or cut?
WSM fan on the poor and ordinary shot selection you've forgotten the main man our skipper Rogers who once again got himself out after getting a start. Very poor shot and tame dismissal playing away from his body. Thought Tres got a good one early doors. As for Ryan his dismissal kind of summed up his season with the bat. Clearly has talent and played well for his 31, but a lack of discipline, poor shot selection and inexperience cost him his wicket today.
Having said that excellent fightback by the bowlers. RvdM and Leach superb assisted by a pitch that was taking a fair amount of spin. Yes, spin on day 1 at Taunton! As for tomorrow this is a cliché, but the first hour is crucial. Wrap up the Durham tail quickly either for parity on 1st innings or a small deficit then over to the batters who simply have to show more discipline and application second time round against probably the best seam attack in the country.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:04:23:19:52 by Cleavo.
Very disappointing because he seems to have had a number of them this season - the frustrating thing being that he has not been the type of batsmen associated with lots of soft dismissals in his career elsewhere.
Chris looked to me just a cover drive, whether it stopped a bit or bowler held it back but it just popped up to point really.
Yes tame but I personally wouldn't class as reckless as some others.
He has had 3 horrid leg side strangles, yes you could say 3 too many but I still say that type of dismissal (like tom today) aren't proper wickets, just pure bad luck.
His worth to our side though is un quantifiable!
His impact on the team for me has been huge, so positive, tough, hard and game management top drawer.
Knows exactly what to do when, manages bowlers superbly well, and clearly getting best out of the players. He is tough and a winner and is getting that across.
How easy would it have been to fold up at Notts when they get 196-0, or today after 184ao, easy to sulk and let them close at 160-3 and its basically job done.
His captaincy has free-ed up Trescothick too to just bat and he passed 1000 runs before August.
Whatever we are paying him is money very well spent for me, top top man and we will be very lucky indeed if we can keep him for next season.
I agree wsm I was just joking is humour not allowed now either on This site? Sad day iif so. As I say was s good fight back but cleavo is correct too we need to get these last ones pretty quickly so we're not too far behind.
I bow to your superior judgement, Cleavo, for I did not witness Chris Rogers' dismissal to as you say "a very poor shot". That is why I did not list him in my list of those who IMO played injudicious shots.
There were too many on that list as it was.
Hoping for a good day's cricket today whatever the outcome.
A glass half - empty or a glass half - full?
Regardless, both glasses need filling up.
I notice there are no byes yet in 52 overs of the Durham innings on what, even if "there were no demons in the pitch" (Tom), looked hard to bat on and was turning a lot - do those who were present feel Davies kept well yesterday? From the brief online highlights, it looks to me as though he batted well and aided Craig in the recovery - could we say he had another good day for us?
If it was turning through damp rather than dryness yesterday - which is precisely what is implied by Roelof's expectation that the ball will turn less today, then we may find today is a completely different sort of day, with the bat well in the ascendancy.
That ought, perhaps, to be the case given that there was reportedly not an awful lot in the deck for the seamers.
So the question is:
Can/will Somerset bat properly?
If I had to guess how the day will go, I would guess the following:
Durham's lower order will wag and get them up to 210-215 or so.
First innings' failures will have concentrated minds and so hopefully only Wood, with his pace through the air, will be a real menace in our second innings.
So I'd guess Durham 210-215 and then Somerset maybe 250-5 or so.
But if the turn on day one came through damp rather than excessive dryness then the sort of scenario above would not really put us in the box seat, IMO. We'd need at least 100 more from the final five wickets on Saturday.
I have an appointment at 11.00 and hope when I get back at 12.00 to find Trescothick and Abell firmly ensconced. This is going to be virtually a one innings game unless the Durham tail takes hold so we do need to bat very well
Ronniesabre I thought you would have have us Home and hosed by now. That's shocking you should be banned from the board for such negativity !!!
Please name me all the posters who have been banned from this site for anything at all Ron since 1994....I know of two and I run that part of the process. One of them was still posting last week so even that was a short run thing.
ref the pitch inspectors. It seems they ask questions if there are over 15 but the people at the ground can allay fears - in this case it seems that officials confirmed that it was 12/5 seam/spin and that many of them were poor batting rather than anything the pitch was providing so they won't be popping by.
Every innings I've seen with Chris he has scratched about. He quite obviously has some quality but has rarely, if ever settled at the crease this season. Once more yesterday he could have become victim to a number of balls before the one that got him.
Have to agree with Tom that Ryan Davies looked his most composed yesterday and showed some good stuff in his 30. He simply needs to get rid of the naivety that makes him think that he needs to score big all the time - a young born in T20 kind of view - it was a shame when he hooked himself out because everyone was enjoying that little bit.
Ronniesabre I thought you would have have us Home and hosed by now. That's shocking you should be banned from the board for such negativity !!!
Please name me all the posters who have been banned from this site for anything at all Ron since 1994....I know of two and I run that part of the process. One of them was still posting last week so even that was a short run thing.
Maybe you missed out the (TiC)?
Check my later post grockle please and you will have your answer
I think Wood will be back to blow the lower-order away if necessary.. so even if this pair get a bit of a stand going after lunch, Wood's extra pace and ability to swing the ball at that speed of 90mph + are likely to prove too much.
One cannot criticize the likes of Jack or Tim if they cannot cope with Wood's explosive speed - it is not reasonable to expect them to be able to do so.
What is reasonable is to expect a top six to be able to do rather more than make about 130 or so runs in an entire first-class match.
I know the usual comments will be forthcoming viz "Durham have good bowlers." Nobody is denying that but there's no point in having a top six whose failures need to be excused because the opposition "have good bowlers."
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:05:13:45:14 by AGod.
He has done nothing of the sort. It was a 50 50 decision to go. It probably should have been Jim's but he went and the rule is, if you go catch it but it wasn't as easy as it looked and he dropped it. The wicket went down quite quickly so the drop was not costly while his 79 runs in a low scoring game were very valuable.
He has certainly earned his place this game
Having said that I'm off home because this is going to grind to a win over the next couple of hours or early tomorrow and the 8pm Bicknoller bus will be heaving with flower people from the flower show.
A bientot people. We are done in this one I am afraid..... unless we aren't. 50 partnership up between Stoneman and Richardson at 69 for 2.
I'm not exactly giving up Nailsea but we weren't going to have anything tonight and the buses are heaving because of the Flower Show. As it is we have a 45 or 5 wickets tomorrow. Still in it just about....a crucial hour tomorrow like the one this morning.
Still probably Durham's but we aren't done yet as you say.
I'd be very bothered if I was a Somerset bowler/all rounder because our batting unit has simply not turned up to this game. Had any of them been here we would probably be walking away with the points.
Not Tom or Marcus or Chris Or James or Pete arrived. Only Jim of the front 6 has any kind of credit. He was very unlucky in the first innings and at least got into double figures in the second.
Grizzz. Poor seam batting by us on Day 1 against a fair attack but nothing all that worrying for CC1 batsmen.
Poor spin batting against us by Durham with our spin twins teasing a and twisting them in good conditions on Day 1
Day 2 Durham struggled again in the morning in overcast and moist conditions...but against our spin attack
Day 2 - conditions for swing bowling used effectively by an attack experienced with it. Our batting very poor against an attack working very well. Some out to good balls. Some not setting themselves for the long haul but it settled after midday and looked far more benign in the afternoon for the tail - but it still needed hard work and the guys should be credited with their work ethic.
Durham got a pitch with less worry from the spinners and a little more worry from the seam - though certainly not as much as the Day 2 morning but a little more than the afternoon of Day 1. So hard work from the spin twins to keep us in this and we probably don't have enough runs to put it away.
However, can we use tomorrow's first hour effectively? If so this game is not dead yet. By 12 it probably will be with only 45 runs to bowl at.
Only Van der Merwe, Overton, Davies and Groenewald at the end came out with much credit. Davies again played some confident shots and with a little more application could have scored his maiden 50 and go beyond. However, no criticism of him on a day like this.
I can't comment on the earlier dismissals as I was late getting to the ground, although even if I had been there I could have missed them in the blink of an eye.
Some of Durham's ground fielding was atrocious with missed stops and ridiculous overthrows.
The scorecard speaks for itself, and even if we do pull off a sensational win tomorrow, there is still a lot to be rectified one way or another in going forward.
Today I heard it said 3 times that "We deserve to be relegated" and in truth I couldn't argue with that.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017:02:02:15:53:28 by Tom Seymour.
Now you see Tom... there's balance there and I can argue with nothing.
To give you an idea about the first few wickets. One of the snappers took the advantage of change of innings to pop across to Morrisons to get some batteries. He left as the players went in to change over, bought his stuff, checked his bank balance and returned to the ground....by which time we were 21 for 4. He reckons 20 minutes at best and that included the 10 minute turnaround.
From the start of play at 11:00 to us being 5 down in reply took 50 minutes - in which time 8 wickets fell.
Random thoughts on the last two days, while my wretched computer is deigning to let me on the site -
I wouldn't say the wicket was a demon but it's certainly given some help to bowlers of all kinds - while not particularly green it seemed to have just enough in it for bowlers of Rushworth's and Onions' quality to get the bit of movement they need, and there was distinct turn and occasional bounce on the first afternoon; also I think it's fair to say that both sides bowled better than they batted.
In saying this I'm not joining the shoot-em-all brigade, nor insisting on the irrelevance of the opposition's quality, nor demanding lengthy punitive practice sessions (whom, AG, should we hire as net bowlers to get our batsman practice against pace attacks of Durham's quality?)
Both top-order collapses, to my mind, were down more than anything else to good bowling. Marcus got a good one in both innings and Tom in the second, JH did look out of touch in the second but had an outstanding spell of bowling to cope with, Chris in the second was ill-advised to pad up but it still looked a bit high (a view shared by the Durham couple I was talking to at the time). JA clearly didn't get a touch on his in the first innings (though I agree that he shouldn't have made it quite so obvious that he thought so too), and Pete in the first got a vicious inswinging yorker that he'd have been hard put to deal with no matter what shot he played. Wood's first spell was devastating and based essentially on sheer pace.
The one shot that really looked irresponsible to me was CR's in the first innings, but Wickham assures me that it was a slower ball which he picked from the hand. (Maybe he should be batting 3 for Somerset).
Well done our lower-order batsmen both times around. Shame they have to put up with such a rotten top four - I mean, look at the seasons Marcus and James have had.
Are we done? No, we're in a situation where we're likely to lose.
Obviously it's more likely that Durham will get another 46 runs from their last five wickets than that we'll get the five wickets first. What's the point of predicting probable outcomes as if they were certainties? Anyone can predict the probable outcome in most cricketing situations, and there's nothing especially clever about doing so. But certainty - Headingley 1981, Som v Lancs 1993?
A great shame that young Ryan dropped that catch after having such a fine match with the bat - and I have to disagree Grockle, I'd say it was definitely his catch not slip's, and it was costly as the batsman reprieved went on from 10 to make 57. Yes I'd have kept Bates too, but these things happen.
This has still been a fine and exciting match which could yet go either way. Like practically any other match, it could already be standing very differently if any of several (potentially) key moments had gone the other way. It's disappointing some of our players didn't do better, but as always they're up against eleven other fit, talented and dedicated young men out to do the best for their own team.
(Edited for added clarity).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:05:21:51:27 by mikeindex.
Ref Davies Mike. On first seeing it (and that's all Ryan got) I thought it was curving down and probably wouldn't reach Jim so I thought the same as you in relation to going for it. But we have this replay system now and on that it was NOT going to ground beforehand and probably would have gone straight into Jim's gut as he bent to the catch.
But, as I said, the rule is that if you go, you have to catch and he didn't I'm afraid so it was an error in that sense. It was probably too far for him to dive/
I thought Jim's reaction afterwards was to his credit as well because Ryan seemed very aware of how important it was to get the catches. Jim came back and talked to the keeper at the end of the over and patted him on the back. Exactly what he needed.
You are also right about the fact that no cricket fan could say they haven't had an interesting two days... you don't see many games like this. And it isn't over yet though I don't expect a huge crowd will witness the final result tomorrow.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:05:20:39:41 by Grockle.
Tom, re Ryan Davis,and his maiden 50, he scored 52 not out against Hampshire at the Ageas bowl in June,in a match he certainly showed those of us present what he is capable of.
And again today he showed that he can bat, and unfortunately a mistimed pull was his undoing.
As far as AGod's usual call for the head of our batting coach, what do you really think that any coach can teach the likes of Tres, Chris Rodgers,James Hildreth, and Peter Trego that they cannot see and know for themselves. Perhaps you should place more blame at our technical analyst.
It doesn't take much savvy to understand that if 5 out of 11 batsman get ducks, (including 4 of the top 6) then it is expecting a lot of the other 6 batsmen to make good their shortcomings, whether it was brought about through incompetence or otherwise.
I also have to agree with Grockle that Davies made a costly mistake in going for that catch, which is what I said upon first sight from where I was sitting.
Mike TA1, thanks for your shots today, but in the caption of the photo showing Chris Rogers’ dismissal, are you saying that he just padded the ball away without offering a shot? I did not witness it myself, and am not saying that the umpire’s decision was wrong, but it appeared to have been an unwise thing to do by such an experienced cricketer.
As far as our batting coach is concerned, I thought that Maynard said upon his appointment as D o C that he was primarily a batting coach and so therefore the club did not need the services of Dave Houghton as well as him.
Maynard talks a good line if nothing else. I thought that certain aspects of our batting was beginning to show improvements when D H was at the club, but it certainly has regressed since he left. IMO of course.
I see - so the "all" that it said was "if five batsmen get nought, the other six have to score all the runs their side can make".
It didn't occur to me that you'd have considered such a very basic mathematical concept to be worth stating - I thought you must be making some deeper point about the abilities of the five cricketers concerned, or (as is your usual wont) about the squad and its management as a whole.
These last 3 wkts were crucial but I'd rather have been with Maynard on the bus. The patter would have been riveting!! Just like on here. Trego Rogers tres Allenby and Hildy must be absolutely knackered they've given so much to this game they must need a rest now. At least month off I reckon !!! Grockles the posters cricket site !!!
Make no mistake, Mike Index, if I want to say anything "about the abilities of the five cricketers concerned, or about the squad and its management as a whole", then I will say it - be it at the ground, on here or anywhere else.
I suggest that you worry about your own innuendoes and none of my making.
I'd stay with the cricket Ron...the rest is looking a little too much like a kind of strange unhealthy obsession.....
I think you need to go back and read the post properly. I said there was nothing going to be decided tonight I didn't say we'd lost.
Those last three wickets may very well be crucial but if you use the buses to get out of the town to the villages you will know that it isn't always as easy as it seems because they will fill them and leave and that's your goose cooked for that evening.
The last one is 8pm and there is no bus for the two hours before that and the Taunton Flower Festival is on - come out to Bicknoller some time they are obsessed with bloody flowers. This morning the bus to Taunton was full from 15 miles out.
Lots of people getting onto one bus versus seeing no result even after an extra half hour and sleeping in Taunton? No real decision I'm afraid. Hope that helps you though I'm not sure your posts have anything to do with the details you refer to anymore...not sure what they are about....
Mat Maynard doesn't work for the bus company by the way - you do know that?
Tom, I asked a specific question about a specific comment of yours, namely "five ducks says it all". I did not understand what you meant by "it all".
You have now explained that what you meant was that the other six had to score all that side's runs, which I'm afraid still strikes me as a point too obvious to be worth making, but at least now I know.
Innuendoes? If I want to make an innuendo I will make it, be it at the ground, on here or anywhere else.
The Chris Rodgers dismissal was strange, but he seemed to be leaving the ball, it dipped and swung in, assuming he could not get his bat to the ball, he swung his leg out to defend his stumps, making it look like a kick, ended up out LBW, on another day he might well have got away with it.
Just how I saw it, others of course will have their opinion.
Grockle We were told in no uncertain terms today by someone who ought to know something about the internal aspects of the county that MM was NOT the team's batting coach and never had been.
Not the info many here believe they have been given but this gentleman brooked no argument that this was the case.
I'll leave you to make of that what you will.
Oh I have no idea what to make of that. I am entirely certain that Dave Houghton is no longer employed by SCCC as 'Batting Coach.'
Who have been the best batting side in CC1 this season?
Surely the answer is Middx?
They do definitely employ a batting coach.
His name is Dave Houghton.
Moreover, until the past couple of seasons Middx had a reputation as having a very collapsible batting unit. When I was Lord's to preside over our most recent win there, Middx batting collapses were greeted with weary resignation ... their fans seemed to view them as invevitable.
I think they had started to make a turn for the better before DH joined them, but they are going incredibly well with the bat now, despite not having had Chris Rogers (who made so many runs for them) during Dave's tenure at Lord's.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:06:10:36:38 by AGod.
That one picture of yours, Mike, would seem to confirm the impression given by the commentary team, namely that the ball was swinging and seaming all over the joint.
We seem to have tried to prepare a good batting wicket but the track seems to have confounded all expectations. Most unusual really.
Perhaps the closest parallel might be the track from the Sussex game of a few years ago (the one where Alf took wickets with four successive balls)?
As I recall, Tres, Alf and Magoffin all said the same thing about that track, namely that there was a massive amount of help for the pacemen with the new ball, then very little with the older ball. This could help to explain how it is that numbers 7 through 11 have massively out-performed 1 through 6 (indeed the Keeper and bowlers would be justified in feeling that they are the only ones that have turned up for this match as they have had to do all of the work).
I know Durham didn't have quite such a late order rally, but we can probably put that down to the work of our spinners?
I see Matthew M feels that, if we had another 45 runs in the bank, he'd have expected us to be able to put them under real pressure.
As it is, as he rightly says, we would need a couple of very early wickets today to really put them under pressure.
Of course, if Durham do win, it would be yet another Taunton match in which the victor batted second - making it 3 out of 3 this season and, I would guess, about 90% of all the results that there have been at Taunton over the past five years. When the new regulations about the toss were announced, I said then that I thought we would be disadvantaged by them for that reason - as we would no longer be able to follow MT's preferred strategy of insertion. However, I will concede that Mr Rogers seems to be mainly a "bat first," man anyway.
And with that win, we can start looking upwards (genuinely) as the drop now very, very unlikely.
That also means we can take the gamble of used pitches (hoping for spitting cobras) in all of our remaining home matches - the gamble being, of course, that Rogers may not win the toss and that it is also possible that said used track may greatly assist opposing seamers.
Astonishing. Even my wife got caught up in the progress of this match, and she has no interest in cricket. Well done to all who contributed in their different ways - I would include Rogers in this for his imaginative captaincy.
Do we play any counties with a spin attack potentially as good as ours? If not then you may well be right about the pitches, AG.
We are now second in the table. My realistic but pessimistic post when we were 33 for 6 that Durham would be top by tea, shows how little I know- although I did say if we got to 200 we were in with a shout. VdM finishes so the he is on a hat trick next game.
Well there is Jeetan Patel, Bobstan. He is on our remaining slate. Their second spinner is a young wrist-spinner, by the name of Poysden.
We also have Notts. My default answer to your question in respect of Notts would normallt be 'no,' but then I seem to remember us getting destroyed by Mr Carter, a tall off-spinner. BUT, I think we need to approach that as a one-off and try to back our spinners. I'm not sure whether Imran Tahir will still be with them, but if so then playing them on a turning track could be an adventure!!! But, I would think that we need to bear in mind that - unlike Jack Leach - Tahir can be expensive in taking his wickets.
The other game is against Hants. I think the best they have is either Liam Dawson or the guy that has been loaned out, I think, to Sussex. His name escapes me but he has played ODIs - oh Briggs.
Well done AGod, for your posting of 11.20, that's the most positive post I have seen from you, great.
Anyway what a result, was in two minds this morning to go down to the ground, opted for the commentary, what a fantastic result,it will wipe away memory of some of the poor batting display by our top batters to some existent, but the spin bowlers can be really chuffed with their performances throughout.
Also, in terms of future strategy, I would argue that the toss rule mitigates against trying, instead, to win the matches primarily with seam bowling...... preparing a track to suit the seamers was tried against Middx and yet their reserve attack was too good for our top six on it. I think we have to assume that all three of our remaining opponents will be able to put a more accomplished seam attack on the park than Podmore (well though he bowled), Fuller, Harris and Franklin.
One little thing is the it CANNOT wipe away our poor batting display because we won this game with 7 men at best playing their part in each innings and that has to be remembered if this is going to be built on.
Roelof van der Merwe and Jack Leach!! Jack Birkenshaw came to look at Borthwick and Hickey. Npot sure those are the names he'll be going away with.
Warks 324 (Jack 7-106) Patel 98 and 207 (Jack 4-74, Tom Cooper 5-76) by 17 runs
Somerset's second-innings total shows the extent of the risk vs Patel. But the scorecard also reveals a Warks middle-order who made five runs in six combined innings vs Jack and Tom Cooper (implying, perhaps, that at least part of the Warks side is clueless vs big turn).
Last season's game vs Notts on a turning track: At Taunton, JUne 14-17
Notts 410 (Rehman 2-129) Brendan Taylor 152, Lumb 73, Wessels 63 and 190 (Rehman 2-60) LOST to Somerset 200 (Abell 76 carried bat) Carter 7-56 and 402-8 (107.4 overs) Tres 65, Tom 72, Mybs 56, Jim 62, Pete 79, Bates and Rehman getting us over the line, Carter 3-139, Samit 3-57 by 2 wickets.
On a flat track, I'd rather have wrist-spin than finger-spin every time, sans doute.
But on a big-turning track?
Other than the very rare wrist-spinner that is very accurate (Shane Warne and Anil Kumble being the best examples) then I'd back the finger-spinner, in general, as he is liable to take as many wickets as the wrist-spinner at lower cost on such a track (all other things being equal)>
Someone mentioned yesterday that if Somerset were regularly in the habit of preparing poor pitches that lead to low-scoring matches, we could be in trouble this time from a pitch inspector.
But as the national press, and posters on this site, are constantly stating, our pitch record is at least perceived as being exactly the opposite, and we are likely to be cut some slack on this occasion.
"As capitulations go this was right up there from Durham and was dreadful to see.
"Durham coach Jon Lewis says he can't blame his players for what happened today but on a pitch which offered excessive turn from the first morning they should have had an idea of what was likely to come.
"Chris Rogers, the Somerset captain, says the pitch was too dry and the groundsman didn't quite get it right. Ironically it is now getting a drenching as I write this. But it offered plenty for Durham's seam bowlers too.
"Whether the umpires feel the need to report it is another matter. But it was a bizarre match which featured 13 ducks and no score above 200. Make of that what you will."
Chris possibly opening his mouth too soon but Mark Wood said it was crumbling from the start of Day 1. It may be that MM's comment about that Middlesex wicket being 'dangerous' might not have been so far from the truth.
What a pleasant 15 minutes with the denizens of Gimblett Hill.
Only Poynton wanted to take on the spinners. A couple of shortish balls from VdM despatched for four and two. Else it was the #SomersetVettori and VdM show!
Bold decision on the wicket choice and astute captaincy. Their seamers had a good match our spinners had a great match!! Batting never easy but well done to our lower middle order esp Craig and Ryan.
If we had beaten Middx in that very close match we would have been almost out of sight at the top of the table!
So glad I eschewed the temptations of the Taunton Flower Show and the WSR Steam Fayre 😁😁
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:06:13:17:40 by Grockle.
Glad you got to see it. I have a wedding or I would have been there too...just because it was possible. When I left at 5:00 yesterday it simply wasn't but by just gone 6 the spin twins had turned it back in our favour and I wondered if it just had enough - though even then I though 5 would be a tall order.
The important thing is they got the wickets early and the score was still high. 46 with 5 looks a hell of a lot less likely than 39 with 2 and all the main men gone. Once Poynter went it was ours.
I've given the MoM to RvdM simply because he got us a second innings total batting with Ryan and Craig. I said that the Onions drop of Ryan yesterday was costly. Funnily enough it cost Durham 39 runs!!
Can there ever have been a season where a team has been involved in so many amazing finishes?
Surrey - Jack and Timmy G see us home
Gloucester (50 over) Craig O and Timmy G bring us home
Middlesex - so so near to the impossible
Congratulations to all involved, which includes management and Simon Lee and his team.
And lets not forget, that Chris Rogers may not yet be contributing the mountain of runs expected, but there is "never know when they are beaten" attitude showing it's self in the team. An Aussie inspired trait, perhaps!
They had no problems on Day 1. No questions asked Day 2. Can't see why they would have issues with Day 3.
Interesting comments from Chris Rogers about getting used to the drainage system which seems to be draining more effectively than expected when it isn't raining and Simon and the guys are getting used to it.
Also his views about the side as a whole. He reckons we are a couple of years behind the development of Middlesex in terms of our unit coming of age and that is anyone wants the CC1 title then they have to take it away from them.
We came pretty close at home but probably don't have enough 'wheels' for 2016. Anyone want to put a bet on before 2020?
Well well, what a game and what a season. Almost every victory has been a nail biting, character inspired snatch from the jaws of defeat. Not sure i have ever had better value for my membership.
Huge credit to Jack and RVdM, both of whom we know have passion and character and once again Tim G plays a vital part with the bat (has any number 11 ever influenced so many wins?). However most credit goes to Ryan Davies who these last 7 days or so has shown he has a real future at this club, I hope they let him have a real drink tonight for he has now shown to be a man.
Regarding pitch inspections, i think if the umpires were going to report it they would have done so before now. I also think that umpires / inspectors take a dim view of pitches that might be construed dangerous but are much more tolerant of pitches that give a bowler who bowls well some help.
Chris also pointed out that Simon and his crew are dealing with the first season run through of a new system and that will give them some leeway. They still have to do their jobs but slight variations and uncertainties have to be taken into account. It aslso has to be said that we had a very, very strong seam attack here from Durham who took a number of wickets because they were good and the atmospheric conditions were right in their favour on Friday morning.
I had the pleasure of attending the first two days. The consensus among those I spoke to was that (although we expected to lose) it had been a very enjoyable match - so much better than 450 plays 400 on a bland pitch. It was all the better for me as a result of those I sat with and talked to (who included several Grockleites).
I fully agree with thee summaries which mikeindex and wsm posted a few pages back. Apart from a couple of balls which kept a bit low, I thought that the only balls which misbehaved were a few balls from VDM on the first day which bounced off a length - but this was not enough to warrant a visit from the pitch inspectors.
On the whole, I wouldn't blame batsmen who get out very early in their innings. Batsmen are always more vulnerable to a good ball (and there were plenty of these) when they first come in - and, as mikeindex has observed, later batsmen are not more culpable merely because some of their colleagues have already succumbed. I would, however, be a little less charitable than wsm to Abell's dismissal in the first innings - although it was a poor ball outside the leg stump, having a waft away from the body is not, in my view, a percentage shot. I felt that some batsmen contributed to their own downfall in the first innings, but, in the second, that most of the batsmen were got out by good bowling in favourable conditions.
In this match, Cove batted better than anyone else on our side - though Davies is to be commended for two bright and breezy knocks and VDM showed a lot of character in the second innings. Well done to TG, too, for very sensible batting in the second innings - and bravery in getting behind the line to Wood.
Davies kept very well in the first innings. His drop of Stoneman early in the second innings - compounded by a missed stumping (though the ball may have been difficult to take) - seemed to have been a turning point and I think that this affected his overall confidence for a while.
Most international teams would be happy to take the Durham seam attack. Wood was the most spectacular - the quickest spell I have seen this season. He seemed too quick for some of our batsmen in the first innings.
I am afraid that the "very bad stories" to which one recent poster referred passed me by. For example, I was not aware of stories relating to assault, robbery, corruption or the like. If anyone should think that someone getting an edge to a very good ball (which they weren't even at the ground to see) amounts to a very bad story, then they would benefit from taking a more balanced view of cricket and of life.
In conclusion, well done to MM, CR, the whole team and the groundstaff - you have provided rich entertainment and have come away with a great result.
Do we know for sure that no pitch inspector ever attended?
If so, it would seem most unlikely that the umpires would consider reporting the pitch after the match? After all, to whom would the ECB turn for an assessment of events, sans an inspector - other than Jack Birkenshaw, who would appear their only recourse?
Well, that was a quiet morning then chaps. Nothing much happening really.....!
Pretty astonishing really & a testament very much to our fighting spirit.
Those who have decried our efforts throughout the season must now surely be reconsidering their attitude, as we are winning games from the point of defeat, such a welcome change from the opposite which occurred all too frequently in previous years.
To win without any meaningful contribution from our top end is simply stunning. TG really is having a great season, and Jack Leach's class is becoming ever more apparent. He must surely be in the frame for a trip to India this winter.
As for Chris R., I rank his Captaincy skills right up there, even if his batting style can be somewhat scratchy & erratic. Still, who cares. If his (perhaps 'Brearlyesque' ?) Captaincy takes us to the holy grail of the Championship title, I can't see anyone complaining !
As regards the pitch, well of course I wasn't there, but there is clearly debate, ranging from the semi unhinged on the Durham board thread, to the perhaps somewhat surprising public comments by CR that the Groundsman "got it wrong".
I certainly hope we don't get penalised for this & suspect/hope that we will indeed be given some latitide, both for the reasons mentioned elsewhere, and also that we have an excellent track record.
Having said that, this is the second match where there have been pitch related 'issues', which will surely mean there will be intense scrutiny on the surfaces we produce to play on for our remaining games. I don't think we can rely on continuing empathy from the ECB if the same were to occur again.
All in all though, let's enjoy the moment.
September has the potential to be a very very interesting time for SCCC.
P.S. Thanks again to Mike, for superb photo's throughout the game !
Incredible spirit and belief shown by the boys yet again, they play for each other, a real team effort.
Such a low scoring match indicates it was a very difficult wicket to bat on, both sides struggled, it's pretty obvious it was a bit of a pearler....but we won, a stunning victory at that.
By the way, I'm going to bookmark this thread and come back to it when's I feel a little blue, some of you are stupendously critical, usually of those players you don't like, or rate.
I was there for the whole day on Thursday (perfect seam and swing bowling by Durham) and 17 minutes today.
A small gathering of Grocklees on Gimblett Hill at 10.45 am this morning felt that we really needed a miracle with two or three wickets in the first over! Someone up there!!!! must have been listening - a sort of heavenly earwigging!
The rest is history - so much for my advice to her in doors - could we have lunch about 1.30PM!!
I am among the five thousand people who will in later years claim to have witnessed an astonishing demolition this morning, five wickets for six runs in a mere twenty-two balls. But I really WAS there, as were Tractor, Mike the Lens and - from the evidence of postings here - a small handful of Grocklites. I have no idea how many were in the ground altogether, but the strength and the length of the final applause was worthy of a winning cup final at a Lord's full house.
And thus came an appropriate end to an astonishing match, perhaps one of the very best I have seen from the many I have watched since 1949. For those of my generation it was reminiscent of Weston-Super-Sand in the Fifties, with a constant ebb and flow and individual scores of thirty or forty being worth three times that amount in more orthodox games.
And, as ever, it was a delight to be among friends on Gimblett's Hill. Some of us are growing old - but extremely gracefully - and will persist in coming to the world's finest acres as long as our health allows us (and county cricket is still tolerated by those who think they know best).
In the first innings our top six batsmen contributed 97 and the bottom five 77. In the second innings it was only 23 compared with 154, which is clearly cause for concern. It is also cause for some optimism. Overton and Davies batted very well in both innings (contributing 160 runs between them - out of 364) and I would not dream of criticising Davies for the way he got out, given the circumstances. Overton batted with great sense and discipline.
Of course it was the bowling for which this match will be remembered and the fact that we fell cheaply to a side containing Rushworth, Onions and Wood is not an utter disgrace. Wood was an absolute joy to watch, generating massive pace off a relatively short run, and he deserves to rejoin the England ranks very soon. But who are those three trundlers to be compared with our mighty VdM and Leach? For a while in Durham's first innings (still only day one) they looked almost unplayable. That session must have been a great learning experience for keeper Davies and he acquitted himself extremely well. Leach is on course to becoming a living god in the Somerset pantheon - and if Birkenshaw was not impressed he must have been watching the Test on telly instead.
Many of my recent visits to Taunton have been ruined by rain; this time there was not a drop and today was a perfect day for playing the greatest of all games. Why did Leach and VdM have to go and spoil it by ending everything by 11.17?
I have read a few pages but have found very little humble pie being eaten!?
It's funny how "supporters" love to revel in victory but not 24 hours earlier have battered various players and coaches for being useless brainless and hopeless!
One guy in my stand on Friday, he left at lunch having planned to be there all day as he was "disgusted with our performance" and "couldn't bare to watch anymore of this rubbish"
I'm afraid with that attitude you have no right to celebrate today.
Cricket more than any other sport fluctuates, that's the beauty. This game swayed by the half hour let alone session. We fought right to the end and 39 run win in the context of a 180 a side match was "relatively" comfortable!
After the Glos 50 over win, the Surrey home 4 day, Notts away 4 day and today, can we please now show some positivity.
With Rogers in charge we are NEVER beaten, he has instilled such fight and belief in the team we keep going until the end and look what we have done.
Of course 180 all out twice isn't what we want, but what a great match, and despite facing a superb seam attack we have come out with a huge 19 points.
A nice 11 days off for the players and stupid gap in the middle of school holidays where we have 1 day to watch in about 16 days.
It'll take until the next match however to wipe the smile off my face anyway.
For me we are safe! So why not dream of the top spot. We are by no means favourites, but with 3 home games left we can do a lot to ensure they are "result" pitches, no need to play safe and ensure draws. Yorks and Lancs away every chance of results too, if we can get 3 wins from those 5 you just never know.....
I really like that post, WSM fan, my conscience being utterly clear about indulging in gloom and doom one day and rejoicing the next. It is odd that so many people seem to keep doing it, not realising that the latter makes a nonsense of the former.
I think I must have worked out very early in life that two key characteristics of a real Somerset supporter (not to be confused with a fair weather fan) are persistent optimism and a nice black sense of humour.
I don't know what to say about the result apart from well done Somerset. However, this could easily have gone the other way and the posts would have been somewhat different.
And if dirt were dollars we'd all be millionaires....
Firstly you are not providing balance by constantly offering the negative perspective. You are offering personal bias.
Secondly I can't name (off the top of my head) any posters who only post when we win.... can you?
There have been some gracious posts from those who usually struggle with the concept of success when it comes. That is providing balance. People looking at both sides not one person permanently looking at the black and then wearing that as some kind of badge of office
You see that's the point. An individual posts about the game and they post the issues and the achievements...there are no 'negative' or 'positive guys' on a forum with balance. There are just posters with perspective.
You yourself create the 'negative guy' concept and the divide that comes with it and then you play to it for sympathy making out as if you are some kind of persecuted minority.
Saying 'well done' but the result could have been different if everything had gone wrong achieves what? You could also say that if we'd played a whole lot better then we would have won a whole lot bigger.
Over the years you have held many fictitious and totally self appointed roles on Grockles. It seems your new one is go out of your way to look for the misery in any good event as if, mistakenly, you are keeping the rest of us in emotional check by offering the alternative view (but always the same one). We don't need the help thanks awfully.
Just say well done, we didn't bat well - many have already done so
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:08:00:30:14 by Grockle.
Sadly I was unable to make the final morning, so will console myself by joining the 4000 who will in future pretend we were there.
Jack's 34 wickets, I see, have come at the best average of any CC1 spinner with more than four wickets (including Jeetan Patel and Imran Tahir): [stats.espncricinfo.com]. Surely consideration, at least, for international recognition can't be far off if he keeps up this level of performance.
A couple of mini-stats from the lately concluded, sensational game: four out of eight opening batsmen (if you see what I mean) were out first ball: "How unique is this?", as earnest inquirers are apt to say on the Ask Steven Facebook page. (I'm sure it's not unprecedented but it must be pretty unusual).
Less quirky, but perhaps more informative as regards the discipline shown by both sets of bowlers, is that only 14 extras were conceded in the whole match and these did not include a single no-ball or wide.
Two things comes to mind – some clubs have said that some of the developments at their grounds has caused the bowl to swing more than it did before. What I have noticed this year sitting on the Gimblett's Hill is that the wind direction often feels like it is coming from a different direction than the flags indicate. Could the Somerset Pavilion development be causing the ball to swing or seam about more than it did before?
Second – this has also been said by other clubs that after having drainage installed on the outfield it has change the nature of the square. It has been said the drainage system is drawing moisture from the square more than it did before.
Maybe after years of trying to change the nature of the pitches without any luck, having the drainage system installed has done it for us!!
It is somewhat trenchant to think that all the management hype at the beginning of the season seemed to be concentrated on investing money in the T20 Blast, where Friday night capacity crowds are the order of the day - and to just let the other two formats take care of themselves.
Yet we finished a country mile adrift at the bottom of our T20 Group, but currently stand second in the First Division of the cc and topped our 50-over Group with one more win, and two less defeats, than any other of the 18 counties.
Are we a long-order side then, and do we see the influence of Chris Rogers in the most important competition of the all? Or is it because T20 is an absolute lottery for bowlers, but ours can express themselves in longer formats?
Interesting, Mike. For several years Notts explained The failures of their openers by saying that The (then) new stand there had changed The air-flow within The stadium And made The ball hoop around. However, Given that Notts' problems with their openers have reduced greatly in The past couple of years, It might just be that they were making excuses At The time. Or perhaps their batsmen have adjusted?
For Simon Lee, in The remaining home games, The trick - If He Can pull It off - would be to get The day 1 turn from this track from day 3 onwards..that would be enough to hopefully still produce results but with less chance of a fuss being made about The pitch.
Chris did say that the wicket had been watered heavily yet was still much drier than anticipated.
I'm not sure we are a side of any format at the moment. I do know we probably have a fairly decent seam attack that bats all the way to number 11 and a couple of spinners in form.
A few years ago we had a big debate about the value of a tail being able to bat and I still stand by the view that front end should make the runs BUT when that isn't happening 150 from the boys who can then make use of them with the ball is pretty useful.
Chris Rogers has done little of effect with the bat but he does seem to be a person who will gamble to win and if that doesn't work seems to refuse to allow his side to just lose.
I'm personally all for that and if the deciding match of this year's CC1 happens to be the loss to Middlesex at Taunton then I'm happy with that because we lost a game we were working to win rather than lost one we were trying not to lose. We've been crying out for that kind of ethic for a while.
He himself seems to think that this group of players is starting to work together to win together with some work yet to do. I hope he stays to do it next year though he has to get the good piece of willow out and confirm he is worth his place in the team - unless the Brierley role is the one he is going for.
Jamie Overton certainly put a lot of Rogers in his developments this year. He simply sets fields for the bowler to bowl to rather than saying "run in, bowl fast, bowl short, and let's see what happens".
The front end batting collapses need to stop but you have to imagine confidence now is at a level it probably hasn't been for over 2 years now. A win in something would make a lot of difference. I'd like to see a good run but finishing it off this year would be a step forward but we may not be ready for that step just yet.
Some superb posts from the likes of LoL, The Preb and WSM, an absolute joy to read.
Maybe next year we don't chuck all our hopes and resources into the T20 hat, I''m sure Chris Gayle has enough dosh in the bank as it is. Maybe next year could be the year we successfully defend our county championship crown.
You've got to hand it to Matthew Maynard, he's building one heck of a team over there.
LoL, what are those dates you'll be in Taunton next?
Some sad nerd was on here a few days ago saying that Trescothick and Rogers only needed to score about 390 more runs to react a joint total of 50,000 first class runs. That was hardly helpful, given that they scored only 36 more between them against Durham.
Great win, did anyone think that VDM could spin the ball that well? I thought he would merely offer a very useful holding role like Allenby does with his medium pace. I thought we light in the spin department at the start of the season, but it looks like we have two quality spinners.
So we are 13 points behind the Sex having played the same number of games. The ridiculous decision to declare and give them 15 points whilst costing ourselves 5 is beginning to look more stupid by the day!
I thought it was a daft decision at the time and still do I terms of its likelihood of costing us points.
However, perhaps Rogers had a point that the decision was not only about that particular match in isolation but about trying to give the players more experience of pressure situations. Since that defeat, our non T20 results have been really good - with three narrow wins and one other win which, although resounding, involved coming back from an unpromising start (at T Bridge).
So you would rather we didn't try to win games? If you gamble you sometimes lose. Would it have still been a daft decision had we won?
It was probably a dafter decision to bowl Craig 5 overs before the end of the game when Jack was taking wickets and Tim had bowled a number of tight overs while it hadn't been Craig's day and continued not to be. Probably should have bowled Jim.
It's all about the relative likelihood of winning vs losing in any given situation. When a given declaration presents more chance of losing than winning, then I'd sooner not give the opposition the chance to win.
The only chance of winning with that declaration was if Middx just went hell for leather for it AND kept doing so when they lost wickets. In the event, they did do that, but Rogers could not have known that that would be their policy. When they slipped to about 150 odd for 5, I was very surprised that Middx did not simply opt to shut up shop.
Had Middx's policy been the one that most sides would usually use - namely go hard at it for the first few wickets and then, if too many wickets are lost, simply try to shut up shop, there is almost zero chance that we could have won given flatness of track vs shortage of overs available to us to bowl.
However, as I say perhaps Rogers was right - with hindsight - to say that even though we lost, being involved in a very close game was a good experience for the younger players.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:08:12:28:04 by AGod.
Surrey would have fancied their chances against Msex with the sex at 82 for 5 yesterday. Durham would have fancied getting the runs on Saturday morning. I agree with Grockle. The declaration was bold but the decision in the fourth innings had more to do with us losing.
We staked 5 points for the chance to win 15, odds of 3-1 if you will. However the chances of winning given the nature of the pitch, the weight of history both within the match and far beyond were 75-1 at best. I fully agree that trying to win is ocommendable,one assumes those 1st WW Generals were trying to win, but when that chance is so remote you then must instead try not to lose, particularly when against your most likely rival.
We had nine wickets down at the time of the declaration. If you think "the ridiculous decision ... gave them 16 points whilst costing ourselves 5", you have to take the view that our nos 10 and 11 would, with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY, have batted at least another half-hour to deny Middx any chance of a successful run chase. (Plus of course they would have had five points from the draw so even then it would have cost us 11 not 16).
As it was the game would almost certainly not have been lost if a) Marcus had taken a vital catch following a brilliant bit of captaincy by Rogers, b) either of two borderline umpiring decisions had gone our way or c) Craig had bowled a bit better. Even with three balls to go, if Simpson's last six had landed in deep square's hands we would have had two balls to dismiss the no. 11.
I realise that if the catch had been taken or the umpiring decisions gone the other way Middx would More than likely have put the shutters up and a draw would have been the result. Leaving us no worse off than if Jack and Tim had succeeded in defending for another half-hour.
I totally approved of the decision at the time and continue to do so now. It gave us the best available chance of a win and as good a chance of a draw as any other option.
Though if I did not approve of it, I think it would be appropriate to frame my comment in terms of "As an informed observer, I disagree with this decision...", rather than "As someone who knows much more about cricket than Chris Rogers, I know this decision was wrong..."
No, MikeIndex, logically Railboy would have to think only that it was worth giving Tim and Jack the chance to continue to bat on. Nobody is saying it was a certainty that they would have succeeded. The decision relieved Middlesex of the task of taking the final wicket (one that they had been struggling with for quite some time).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:08:08:16:27:56 by AGod.
The game was lost when Bailey was dropped and therefore batted for another hour.
It had little to do with the declaration or the chase to it.
Being there for all of the game I certainly did NOT feel that it was a ridiculous declaration or a minute chance of turning it into a win. Not interested in WW1 history (?) or the history of the fixture between the two. History is there to learn from and use to change the future.
What is the point of declaring if you never give the other side a chance of winning? They'll not take it on if you don't give them a sniff.
It was a gamble but there is no way the odds were 75/1 of us getting it given that the game was won by a six with 3 balls to go.
"History is there to learn from". Yep, when was the last time a team was bowled out in a session and a half on a benign wicket on the last day at Taunton? Conversly, how many times have teams achieved unlikely totals on the last day at Taunton ( usually us!).
And Mike, I do not claim to know more about cricket than anybody. However, on the evidence available I might know a bit more about gambling!!
Anyway, my last word on the subject, didn't mean to cause an argument and perhaps my choice of language was ill judged. This is such such a fantastic time, I will continue to savour it rather than sullie it.
True...though the pitch was not benign for the whole of the last session and a half and both Jack and Tom were in fine form on it at the time. It was much also much less benign when George got his second life in that first innings.
But as you say...it's a decent time to be supporting the side and we are still in things. Had we taken the draw and carried on with the policy at Taunton we'd been criticised for in the last few months we may not have had the belief to win the Durham one. Swings and roundabouts......
On to the next one after a rest I'd personally rather they weren't having.
I would much rather have a captain that tries to force results than one happy to take draws.
Rogers risked 5 points for a possible 16. Obviously Middlesex winning pulled them 16 away from us, but from what I've been seeing on this message board over the season, the top of the table is irrelevant and we are in a relegation scrap, so those points don't mean that much.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment.
We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals.
We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards.
If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing