SURREY VS YORKSHIRE SPECSAVERS COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP

Surrey have named a squad of 13 for this week’s Specsavers County Championship match with Yorkshire, starting at Scarborough on Sunday.
Of the professional squad, ten are unavailable for selection in this match. Club captain Rory Burns has not been included in the squad having been unwell over the last 48 hours. Ben Foakes will lead the side.
On the plus side Matt dunn has recovered from his ankle injury
Yet again there is still no update on Virdi
FULL SQUAD
Ben Foakes (c)
Gareth Batty
Scott Borthwick
Jordan Clark
Rikki Clarke
Sam Curran
Matt Dunn
Dean Elgar
Will Jacks
Morne Morkel
Ryan Patel
Jamie Smith
Mark Stoneman
Jacks and Clark to miss out possibly, it would be very harsh on Dunn to miss out.
Over to you chaps

Good man, JimBob. Thanks for this.

I fear Dunn will miss out. You don't often change a winning team (except where the skipper has had the squits for 2 days!) and so Clark might keep his place. Fairly common knowledge now that Dunny rolled his ankle the day before the Warks game playing football with team mates at the Oval.

Patel to just edge Jacks out and possibly open with Stoneman.

I understand there's no restriction on how much Sam Curran can bowl in this game. Surrey were very unhappy about the ECB limiting him to 30 overs for the Warks game and were going to leave him out before Dunn got crocked - that's why he wasn't named in the original squad.

Surrey bowling, Jacks and Dunn miss out

Should be noted we opted for a toss, so clearly wanted to bat first at Scarbados

bad toss to lose

1st bowling point

Yorks 5 down for a little over 200. 3 for Clark.

On paper at least, Yorks have a very decent bowling line up for this match but a long tail. Get 'em all out today for under 300 and it'll be a good job well done.

annoying 45 runs partnership for the 9th wkt

327 all out, 77 for the last 2 wkts
would have taken it at 187 for 1 though

48 for 0 at stumps

I would say that is an excellent day for Surrey. Not on top in the game, but at 187-1 it looked like they might be batted out of it, and now we have a shot tomorrow to bat Yorkshire out of it

Didn't see any play but have to Clark for his fivefer. He's been poor much of this season but was a lot improved with the ball last time out against Warks.

Good as well to bat through the last 14 overs without loss. We'll need to continue applying ourselves tomorrow - Yorks have 5 decent (or more than decent) frontline bowlers in their line up.

Agree that we have come back well, in a fast moving game

Unable to make Scarborough this year, but based on my elderly parents feedback it was an excellent day for batting, except for about an hour when the tide brought completely different overhead conditions. It is a shame that the batters we unable to see this period out, as Patterson and Coad showed what could have been.

Tide is an hour later tomorrow so Surrey have a real chance to be up near 400 by the time conditions shift. A long day in the field beckons for YCCC.

Elgar falls to Coad for 24

Stoneman goes to a century and then is given out caught behind in what I can only describe as the worst umpiring decision I have ever seen - he's missed it by a country mile, clearly hit his body/jumper and given out caught behind

Nonsense

https://twitter.com/_marcus_hook/status/1145688415134003200?s=21

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Stoneman goes to a century and then is given out caught behind in what I can only describe as the worst umpiring decision I have ever seen - he's missed it by a country mile, clearly hit his body/jumper and given out caught behind

Nonsense

I dont think anyones going to belive that Stoneman actually scored a century. The umpire shouldve done this far sooner to save the fielding sides embaressment and shame.

I agree it was a poor call, but I have seen many worse. Using stills never gives an accurate picture:

2nd batting point

3rd and final batting point
Apart from rocky, yet again the rest of the batsmen have let us down

2 thru 8 all made over 20, but none went onto 50 - not good enough really, even if there is clearly something in the pitch for the bowlers, at least one of them has to take on the responsibility and go on.

Would say Yorkshire have the slight advantage now, with Surrey having to bat last

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:2 thru 8 all made over 20, but none went onto 50 - not good enough really, even if there is clearly something in the pitch for the bowlers, at least one of them has to take on the responsibility and go on.

Would say Yorkshire have the slight advantage now, with Surrey having to bat last

spot on olly

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:2 thru 8 all made over 20, but none went onto 50 - not good enough really, even if there is clearly something in the pitch for the bowlers, at least one of them has to take on the responsibility and go on.

Would say Yorkshire have the slight advantage now, with Surrey having to bat last

Strongly agree with Olly's opening coment. It even ended up being 2 to 9 and it's fair enough to include the number 9 there as he (Clark) is meant to be an all rounder. Some may remember he scored a century against us not long ago!

I'll hold fire on who has the advantage. For one reason, I haven't seen any of the stream. I don't know how well the Maharajah bowled today (thought he would have bowled more before lunch when I glimpsed the score). However, I am conscious that we too often turn to jelly when up against a quality spinner 4th dig. Against that, we do have a 35 run lead - it would be very handy and put us in a decent position to have 'em at least 1 down before they reach parity.

One thing I am annoyed about is Clark getting out with only 2 overs left until stumps, presumably biffing away as he had hit boundaries off the previous 3 balls. Fair enough to do that to get us and JimBob a 4th batting point but once that was accomplished, the approach should have been to bring the shutters down, bat out the day and bring 'em back to bowl and field in the morning. Now their openers have as much time as they need to prepare for their knock and know exactly when it will be starting.

Anyway, tomorrow is Day 3. A day we must win. Moving Day.

Yorkshire will fold to 180ao, Surrey to win by 8 wickets.

LondonTiger wrote:Yorkshire will fold to 180ao, Surrey to win by 8 wickets.

Tiger's fears for his Yorkies unjustified so far. 34/0 better justifying my annoyance at Clark for chucking his wicket away late last night and allowing the Yorks openers to prepare as well and as much as they wanted. Currently they're 34/0 off 11 overs, just 1 run short of parity. 6 bowled on the reel by Morkel, that'll be it for him for a while.

Yorkshire 268 ahead 1 wkt left a very interesting last day ahead

jimbobgooner wrote:Yorkshire 268 ahead 1 wkt left a very interesting last day ahead

Yeah, I just wish we had all of the last day to bat.

An evil Surrey supporter would be hoping now that Morkel can smack one on the Maharaja's bowling hand early in the morning .... EDIT: Rats! he's already back in the hutch. He'll be sending a few done on day 4 for sure.

jimbobgooner wrote:Yorkshire 268 ahead 1 wkt left a very interesting last day ahead

100 less would be interesting! Why did Clark only bowl 3 overs? Injured? Or back to the bowler we all know?

56 and counting for the 10th wicket now, wonder when they'll declare?!

thegooch7 wrote:56 and counting for the 10th wicket now, wonder when they'll declare?!

Think we should now look to bat out a draw personally - if we'd wrapped it up quickly then I would've fancied a chase, but now getting 320 in 70 odd overs? Seems unlikely to me

thegooch7 wrote:56 and counting for the 10th wicket now, wonder when they'll declare?!

All out now but that that last Yorkie wicket got away more than we wanted. A maiden 50 as well for Coad, hmmm - Morkel shouldn't be allowing that.

318 to get in 83 overs. Possible but very difficult. Keep the wickets until tea and then charge.

Good platform at lunch 68-0, need 250 off minimum 63. That's 4ish an over, do-able if we can keep in touch with the rate and keep wickets in hand. If only we'd knocked that last wicket over cheaply!!

thegooch7 wrote:Good platform at lunch 68-0, need 250 off minimum 63. That's 4ish an over, do-able if we can keep in touch with the rate and keep wickets in hand. If only we'd knocked that last wicket over cheaply!!

Bang on the money there, Goochie.

As well as the spinner Maharaj, Patterson won't be easy to get away. Patterson tends to go unnoticed but he's a handy performer. Expect those two to put in a few shifts between now and stumps.

An hour into the afternoon and going ok. Not far behind the rate and only lost Stoneman.

Patterson going at 2.9 and the Maharaja at 3.4 whist the other three going between 4 and 5.5. I'm sure that shows where the bulk of the overs will be coming from.

Borthwick gone for an enterprising 24, Patel in now, need these 2 to see us to tea, then launch the assault afterwards, with Clark at 9 no need to shut up shop

thegooch7 wrote:Borthwick gone for an enterprising 24, Patel in now, need these 2 to see us to tea, then launch the assault afterwards, with Clark at 9 no need to shut up shop

Agree Gooch - Foakes, Curran, Smith, Clarke and Clark all capable of scoring quickly, but need to be given a platform and freedom to do so

...and we promptly lose Elgar, then Foakes for nothing.

Shut up shop time now

Cue the collapse, came to a standstill, then 2 wickets before tea

You could be right Olly, need 5 an over now as well

Wtf is going on, 5 down now!!

thegooch7 wrote:Wtf is going on, 5 down now!!

Managed to turn a position where we might win, into a position of near certain loss within 10 minutes

8 balls we had to survive to tea, now they can surround the bat....33 overs is looking a long way off to survive now

Just caught up with the score - we've lost at least 1 wicket too many to try for the win. Shut up shop, garden and chat between overs to make sure they don't get more than the minimum number and try to force the draw. That can be the only realistic aim now. Bl**dy annoying though - a couple of overs before the break we were decently placed.

looks like Jason Roy has heard about the surrey score

Who was at fault for the stupid run out?

6 down

5 wkts for 6 runs

Oh what a horror show ...6 / 27 yikes

18 overs left