SURREY VS DURHAM SPECSAVERS COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP

First topic message reminder :

SURREY HAVE NAMED A THIRTEEN MAN SQUAD FOR THE SPECSAVERS COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH AGAINST DURHAM STARTING AT THE KIA OVAL ON SUNDAY.
Mark Footitt is unavailable for selection and will have an MRI scan for a suspected side strain that he suffered in the recent game against Somerset.
Jade Dernbach and Stuart Meaker are still on the treatment table and there is still no place in the squad for James Burke.
The Surrey squad to play Durham in the Specsavers County Championship at the Kia Oval on Sunday May 1st, Monday May 2nd, Tuesday May 3rd and Wednesday May 4th:
Gareth Batty (capt)
Zafar Ansari
Rory Burns
Tom Curran
Steven Davies
Matthew Dunn
Ben Foakes
Arun Harinath
Mathew Pillans
Ravi Rampaul
Jason Roy
Kumar Sangakkara
Gary Wilson
get the feeling davies will get one more chance so wilson and pillans to miss out imo.
over to you chaps

I've got the right

I hate Collingwood - always does well against us!

Dunn's interview on Surrey website: "we were trying to make it as hard as possible for them not to score"

And ... yes, I was there! Oh dear, oh dear!

I actually have some sympathy for the bowlers.

I described the other day the wicket as being a green top in the middle but shaved a couple of yards before each crease. I guessed the intention was to help the seamers to begin with and then the spinners as the game went on. However, today it was only aiding the batters. Although the colour in the middle has dimmed, there are no cracks or dust in the shaved areas. Thus, the wicket was of precious little help to any bowling type and especially as it continued to behave perfectly (from a batting perspective) all day.

Add to that - the position of the wicket. It's only about 55 yards from the Gas Holder side (I think that's the minimum permitted distance?). The distance on the other (Tenison) side was near to double that. This meant that whilst fielders were positioned on the rope to try and stop the short boundaries (not always successfully, particularly when the ball went over their heads into the new stand!), any push on the other side normally meant the distance the unfortunate fielder (usually poor old Baron) had to cover to get the ball would result in at least two runs. Admittedly, this was no different from when we batted but it seemed more noticeable with the easier wicket as above and our bowling as below.

So to the bowling. No one bowled well. However, it wasn't as terrible as the scoreboard might suggest. Curran, Batty and Ansari were not at their best but were just about ok. In more helpful conditions and against less solid batsmen, their figures would have been more flattering. Sadly, Dunn and Pillans looked like the fill-in bowlers they were. To their credit, they kept going but were too inconsistent. Pillans had some pace and got lift at times but particularly bowled too much down the leg side in his early overs.

The Durham batsmen were not only good but worryingly too good for us. Young Burnham is understandably getting all the plaudits on cricinfo but everyone (bar Stokes) on their side played a valuable role today. All showed considerable application, mixing patience and aggression as necessary against the few good balls and the too many bad ones. Collingwood was the perfect example of the canny pro here - clubbed his side to maximum batting points with an over to spare and then dead batted Ansari to ensure we didn't get even a second bowling point.

I thought Colly might have declared tonight 60 or so ahead and given us an uncomfortable 5 or 6 overs until stumps. If we had batted and lost a wicket then, it would have beautifully set up Durham for the last morning imo. As it is, I guess they'll be looking to get a lead of 120 plus and hope we implode. We should be comfortably able to bat out what then remains of the rest of the day but that's not to guarantee we will!

PS I didn't see Ansari's injury. I set off for my train just as he was starting that fateful over. I did notice though that he stopped a ball off his own bowling a couple of overs earlier which seemed to cause him some discomfort.

cheers guildford so a draw or a durham win

Great report Guildford

If Guildfords pitch report is correct, should be a bore draw today!

Good stuff Guildford

I wonder if the ECB will be keeping an eye on the wicket here - 450+ playing near 600 isn't exactly a pitch you'd call fit and proper....

Thanks, guys. The draw should be nailed on. If we do somehow lose, it'll be more due to a group panic than the wicket.

Not there today so you'll have to make do with Churchy.

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:Batty hits stokes for 6

Olly and all - First six of the innings. Doubt it will be the last of the game. Martin Emerson (Radio Newcastle) on commentary saying how short the boundary that side (Gas Holder) is.

I to say I told you so and so I will! 7 sixes so far from the Durham batsmen to our one.

Really worried about the Ansari injury - if it requires surgery again that could be his summer over before it's even begun...

Carse - 3 runs off 27 balls. Maybe we should aim to keep him on strike....

Corporal - there was some toilet type discussion at the Oval as to how to pronounce the surname of Carse and whether the ''e'' should be emphasised - sorry for that!

Update on Zafar Ansari is his left thumb is heavily bruised...reports churchy

guildfordbat wrote:Corporal - there was some toilet type discussion at the Oval as to how to pronounce the surname of Carse and whether the ''e'' should be emphasised - sorry for that!

Well, at least it wasn't a silent "c" ;-)

jimbobgooner wrote:Update on Zafar Ansari is his left thumb is heavily bruised...reports churchy

His spinning hand - not good news at all

A ton for Colly and the declaration at 607/7, a lead of exactly 150.

Surrey batsmen should be looking to end the day with red ink and handshakes around 5 o'clock. Don't muck it up!

So we managed to take 7 wickets in 153 overs. Brings back memories of one particularly dire season (?5/6 years ago) when practically every opposition first innings was minimum of 450 and more typically 550 - 700.

Corporalhumblebucket wrote:So we managed to take 7 wickets in 153 overs. Brings back memories of one particularly dire season (?5/6 years ago) when practically every opposition first innings was minimum of 450 and more typically 550 - 700.

Don't despair just yet, Corp. The rest of today will be crucial. If we can bat out a Bore Draw then it will just confirm that the pitch was a road.

I think what we need to flourish at this level from now is:

1/ Batsmen - stop putting together lovely 35-70 cameos and when you get in, go big - or very big
2/ Bowlers - get fit again (most seamers plus Zaf); rediscover your MoJo (Curran Snr); finish those damn' exams soon, please (Curran Jr)
3/ Oval Groundsman - give us more sporting pitches please. +/- Eight high scoring draws won't help us cement a place in CC1

Just noticed that Surrey's 5 bowlers each conceded over a ton.

Think this goes to show how well Durham bowled on day one. That was my impression at the time having witnessed it even though the scoreboard then (reading 371/7) seemed to suggest otherwise.

Harinath gone for 18

And Burns follows soon after...

Kumar gone

72-3 - here we go!!

A stokes special is what I feared in this game....cmon boys....

Pop up a gets Davies

Yeah we're in trouble now...

139-5 now - Roy gone. Effectively -11 for 5. If we lose this heads ought to roll.

Not looking like son of Boris will bat so 6 down effectively

I think I get most of the nicknames on here, but where does Son of Boris = Ansari come from?

This will be a pretty spectacular defeat if it carries on like this.

Ansari's thumb must be really bad if he can't even come out and hold up an end

Anyone listening to the commentary? If so, did I badly misread the pitch or are we batting like headless chickens?

The former

guildfordbat wrote:Anyone listening to the commentary? If so, did I badly misread the pitch or are we batting like headless chickens?

Perhaps we're just not as good as the other teams in CC1?

If we get everyone fit again, if those who are playing find some form, if the returnees come to the party, we could be ok. But that's three too many 'ifs' for my liking. Still, it's not all doom and gloom. If we complete our capitulation today, we might be going to our next game on the crest of a slump but hey, it's only Yorkshire away. The word on the street is they're so worried by us they're likely to make room in their 11 for a rare appearance from some young whippersnapper batsman feller called Root. Meuh, say I. What could possibly go wrong for the Brown Caps?

50 for TC

I can't be the only one wondering why Onions and Rushworth have only bowled 14 out of the 72 overs so far surely? Rushworth has only bowled 5!

Indeed Olly. I don't think his County captain did Onions' hopes of an England recall any favours.

So, an honourable - just about - draw in the end. And, dare I mention, all our top five made between 14 and 34. Aaaagh!

Good draw in the end considering we didn't have our 2nd/3rd best seamers and our best spinner/all rounder got injured mid game

Gotta wonder how many more injuries we can take tho

A relief that sanity finally prevailed and we got the draw.  Very limp performance for much of the day with our batsmen getting in and then out in a procession.  But Foakes and Curran finally got their heads down to earn the draw.  Chastening match for us, I'd say.  

I was also puzzled by Durham's tactics of bowling Borthwick so much today.  I imagined it to be in order to get in as many overs as possible before the last hour. But he ended up bowling 39 overs in the match for no wickets.

A very decent effort from That's All and Tom Curran to ensure the game was saved; particular credit to TC after JimBob was calling for his demotion to number 11 and I was also voicing concern as to whether he was a suitable number 8 (the solution seems to be to move him up to number 7! ).

Do feel we were a bit jammy to end up with only 1 less point than Durham. They were some way above us throughout the 4 days. Worrying.

Btw, I agree with Olly and the Corporal that the Durham bowling analysis looks odd - that's just based on the scorecard, didn't watch or hear commentary today.

As far as this match goes, good to get the draw in the end (even if we were worryingly outplayed), and good for Foakes and Curran Snr to make some runs.

Injuries make team selection for next time a bit worrying though. Assuming Rampaul's back, but Ansari and Footit are out we seem either very light on batting or bowling.

One option is a five man attack with Burke, Curran and Batty at 7, 8 and 9 which looks weak batting-wise, especially given how brittle the top order have been at times. The other would be to bring Wilson in and play a four-man attack of Curran, Rampaul, Batty and AN Other (Dunn, Pillans or Burke). Again that would worry me, especially in the first innings, where Batty wouldn't bowl much so one of those having a bad day would seriously strain the two frontline quicks.

My displeasure at Burke's treatment has been put to press before - in my mind he is the only logical replacement for Zaf if he is indeed sidelined. Burke has been in good nick in the 2nd XI games this year, and I'd personally have no issues with him at 7, Curran at 8 and Batty 9.

Rampaul if fit for Philans would be my only other change. Not wishing to write off the young man after one bad game, just would prefer Dunn's experience (and proven match winning ability) in the side over him at this moment in time.

James100 wrote:As far as this match goes, good to get the draw in the end (even if we were worryingly outplayed), and good for Foakes and Curran Snr to make some runs.

Injuries make team selection for next time a bit worrying though. Assuming Rampaul's back, but Ansari and Footit are out we seem either very light on batting or bowling.

One option is a five man attack with Burke, Curran and Batty at 7, 8 and 9 which looks weak batting-wise, especially given how brittle the top order have been at times. The other would be to bring Wilson in and play a four-man attack of Curran, Rampaul, Batty and AN Other (Dunn, Pillans or Burke). Again that would worry me, especially in the first innings, where Batty wouldn't bowl much so one of those having a bad day would seriously strain the two frontline quicks.

Hi James - I appreciate you're only floating a 4 man attack as a possibility and aren't keen on that option. Just to add - neither am I!  

It's important to recognise that in a 5 man attack, Ansari often does a lot more than a fifth of our bowling. In the Durham debacle game, he was into his 40th over in the 136th over when he got crocked. If Zaf isn't playing and another bowler doesn't come in, the question arises - how do you make up his overs? Hopefully, Yorks' first dig won't last as long as Durham's but it would still be a lot to be made up. Especially with a 4 man attack comprising a skipper reluctant to bowl, someone returning from minor injury who has only played 2 first-class matches in the last 3 years, an already overworked 21 year old and another who got plenty of tap against Durham.

So it's 5 bowlers for me although with some of them being a fair way from mugs with the willow. Most likely option is Burke, Curran, Batty, Rampaul (assuming fit) and Dunn/Pillans in line with the posts from you and Olly. However, I reckon Alec Stewart will be talking to Sam Curran's headmaster to see if there's any chance of Sam wagging school for a few days next week. Very unlikely to get agreement but I suspect the question will be asked. Another possibility would be to rush Meaker back if he's just about ok - again unlikely and impossible for us to judge as we don't know how he's doing but might be considered in the current circumstances.

On Dunn/Pillans, I like Dunn and would be happy for him to have another go. However, my guess is that Pillans is now (slightly) ahead of him in the pecking order. Pillans did tighten up yesterday after a poor start whilst Dunn was erratic throughout the day. Possibly significant that Pillans opened the bowling today whilst Dunn wasn't required/trusted.

I completely forgot about Meaker - has there been anything anywhere about how long he is actually out for?

I doubt Sam Curran will get any time off - he tweeted about his first exam the other day, so imagine he's now in full on exam mode unfortunately