What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:04:13:17:28:42 by BarmierKev.

Thanks for the report, Kev.

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm in two minds about the wisdom of letting Stirlo go out on loan.

It tends to suggest he isn't expected to feature in our first four championship matches. But- loan him out, and it's a chance for another county to chat him up.

He only signed a one year deal, so if he doesn't feature regularly in our four day side he may up and leave at the end of the season.

Which is a real problem- because he might be one of the first names on the team sheet in white ball cricket, he doesn't automatically get in the four day side on merit.

I say a real problem, because I don't want him to leave, but we must pick our strongest four day side.

Couldn't make this due to work.
Looks like the usual QnA session,usual sort of answers.
Will see how much the official site reveals soon!

I felt a bit annoyed about the response to the question about over rates. As Middlesex claim to have the ambition to be amongst the leading clubs in various aspects of county cricket, the club ought to be dismayed about seemingly being the worst of the 18 counties at controlling the over rate, although I am not convinced they are massively bothered. It can’t be good that we have been culprits in two of the five instances of teams being deducted points for a slow over rate in the last two seasons. As 14 counties have not been penalised in this time, why have we been penalised twice? I wouldn’t be so fussed if it was a common offence. Yes, our primary objective is to win matches, but the regulations state that the over rate must be kept under control in order to retain all the points gained from a match. Hopefully the fact we will be captained in the majority of our matches by Adam Voges, who can bowl spin, will help us avoid any deductions in 2016.

I wasn't sure whether or not to I was allowed to mention speculation about Paul Stirling being loaned out. As Richard Scott said, it would be preferable for Stirlo (or indeed any members of our squad) to be facing division two opposition than playing a 2nd XI match against someone like MCC Young Cricketers. However, Angus Fraser said that it could be strange for a player if they find themselves playing County Championship cricket for one team and limited-overs cricket for Middlesex, although Gus also said this wouldn’t be an issue if a player was only on loan at the start of the season before the limited-overs matches have begun. Like a lot of people, I would like Stirlo to break into the County Championship side, although I imagine it would only happen if a couple of players are unavailable due to injuries and/or call-ups.

I am not sure whether or not to sympathise with the man who complained about lack of facilities at friendly matches, as the main purpose of the matches are to provide practice for players, and it shouldn't necessarily have to be at the top of the club’s thoughts to provide facilities for spectators. If you want to attend a cricket match where spectators are catered for, you only have to wait for a couple of weeks after the friendlies.

As nice a guy (and top slipper) as Ollie is I really think it is time Stirlo was given a run at his expense.
I don't think Ollie's performance with bat or ball in red ball cricket warrant automatic selection any longer.

Championship Matches 53, wickets 96 (less than 2 per match) only four 5 wicket hauls in 5 years (2 in the same match - the bunsen prepared by Surrey in a bid to stay up).
With the bat, aside form a solitary career best century Ollie has just 6 half centuries in 5 years.

I certainly think Stirlo is capable of matching 1.81 wkts per match whilst weighing in with considerably more runs...

Darren- Part of the problem of course is that Rayner is picked when it is thought spin won't be a factor (so he gets picked as an economical bowler who will help look after our over rate) The moment we do get a spinners wicket Patel gets picked instead, so I'm willing to keep going with Ollie.(as in he is more useful than might be readily apparent from his figures)

If Stirlo does break in to 4 day side it would need to be at 6 or 7 (not a 4 day opener), He would be a waste as low as 8, and it would then feel like 3 proper bowlers (9-11) plus Stirling, Franklin, Voges, which would be very risky, so a batsman (Gubbins or Franklin?) would have to be left out to get any extra bowler in.

Chunky,spot on.

Agree with posts of chunky and darren re stirlo. The wickets have to encourage spin in 2016.

Orders of ECB and last 4 days.

Green tops for the birds we hear. So, Ollie, lovely guy that he is, is gonna face more competition, of which, for reasons above, Stirlo is likely to be one.

The hierarchy claim that they want to see Stirlo succeed. But as chunky opines, always a risk attached.

Same could be said of Harry. Young, strong and promising.

To inject a note of controversy-

Good hard working guy that James Franklin is, his arrival caused Neil Dexters departure (Dex no longer an automatic pick) and could see Paul Stirling go the same way.

I would happily have Stirling at 6, and Rayner at 8, (or Patel 11), but with Franklin as 4 day stand in skipper, I can't see that happening,as it would undermine his authority if he was left out.

I have noted that although Franklin has bowled a bit in the friendlies, he is yet to take a wicket this season.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:04:09:12:41:03 by chunkyinargyll.

Was there an update on a replacement for the Middlesex Room, by any chance? I won't hold my breath...

According to Facebook club posting,we have been given the Presidents box again for Middlesex matches.
I wonder how many games we won't be allowed to use it for?!

I was surprised that no questions were raised at the AGM about members’ facilities at Lord’s. The article on the official website about this advises people to check the website and noticeboards to see if there are any times the President’s Box will be unavailable.

For me, the most interesting part of the article is where it says “the rest of the Grand Stand will remain closed at this time”, which backs up what Richard Scott said at the AGM when he suggested that most of Middlesex’s matches at Lord’s will be played on the Tavern side due to the Warner stand being redeveloped, something which could impact team selection. However, I would have thought there will not be enough pitches on the Tavern side to play most of our matches on that side, especially as we are playing seven County Championship matches at Lord’s, so surely we will have to play at least a couple of matches on the Grand stand side.

My experimental trip up to the President's Box was interesting but not a view I would want to have for a day's cricket (especially if we are towards the Tavern side) and refreshments limited, on a different level from the box itself and with no view of the cricket from there. Apparently, there is a move to have some sort of outlet at the top of the Allen stand but this will not be enclosed.

Basically, if you want a good view, the chance to get into the warm and access to reasonable food and drink, it has to be the Pavilion.

Fozzie. Middlesex Room. Question at AGM. Available when?

Answer. Not in 2016. Required for Control Centre.

Alleged to be back in 2017.

Re the question of seating at Mts. Attended day 2 of Northants game.

From observation, about a dozen would have been more than adequate.