SURREY VS WORCESTERSHIRE SPECSAVERS COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP

Surrey have named a 13-man squad for the Specsavers County Championship match with Worcestershire, starting at the Kia Oval on Friday 4 May.
Nine of the eleven that battled through to a draw at Emirates old Trafford on Monday remain in the squad with Dean Elgar and Matt Dunn unavailable.
The top order batsman will be unavailable for the red ball clash with Worcestershire next month due to a pre-arranged commitment
while Dunn has suffered a fractured rib.
Conor McKerr is named in his first squad of the summer after recovering from a side strain picked up during the pre-season tour of Dubai. Rikki Clarke is available for selection once more having missed out on the match at Lancashire with flu.
Also Gareth Batty returns to the squad.
Full squad is as follows:
Rory Burns (captain)
Gareth Batty
Scott Borthwick
Rikki Clarke
Sam Curran
Jade Dernbach
Ben Foakes
Conor McKerr
Stuart Meaker
Ryan Patel
Ollie Pope
Mark Stoneman
Amar Virdi
McKerr and one of the spinners to miss out, not sure which one though
Over to you chaps

Good man JimBob - thanks for the thread!

Batting looks a bit light, eh? Pretty sure that will mean Patel gets the gig.

Two bowlers to miss out - McKerr most likely to be one. The other? More tricky. Maybe, Batty (Virdi should be safe after two successive fourfers) or Maker.

I wouldn't be amazed if Virdi and Batty are both in the eleven - depends on the track clearly but the weather at least should increase their chances of playing. That would still allow three frontline seamers plus Patel.

Good man JimBob - thanks for the thread!

Batting looks a bit light, eh? Pretty sure that will mean Patel gets the gig.

Two bowlers to miss out - McKerr most likely to be one. The other? More tricky. Maybe, Batty (Virdi should be safe after two successive fourfers) or Meaker.

I wouldn't be amazed if Virdi and Batty are both in the eleven - depends on the track clearly but the weather at least should increase their chances of playing. That would still allow three frontline seamers plus Patel.

Worcs squad:

Mitchell
D'Oliveira
Fell
Clarke
Head
Cox
Barnard
Leach
Tongue
Morris
Magoffin
Twohig

Would imagine Twohig missed out, unless it looks like it will take spin. Rhodes has been dropped, so everyone will shift up one in the order (although they should just move Barnard to 6). Batting just is not good enough whatever the order!

Cheers for that, JD.

Please stick around over the match and post here. It's always good to get views from sensible opposition supporters.

Don't know Twohig at all but take it from your post he's a spinner. I'm not convinced the track will much favour spin but Surrey are probably hoping it will  - it would justify any (possible) decision to play both Virdi and Batty.

I've always liked Magoffin although hope - spoiler alert for Surrey jinx! - his best days are behind him.

Meant to say earlier - rotten news about Matt Dunn. Mrs Bat (who knows a bit about broken ribs although not too much about fast bowling) reckons that could keep him out for a couple of months and that's assuming things are straightforward which has rarely been the case for the poor guy over the last two years.

Will try to keep poking my head in Guildford. Somerset are my team (purely due to my love of Tres growing up!), but having played a bit against both Barnard and Clarke I have some affection for Worcs these days.

I have never seen Twohig in action either, but he is another one of the Worcs production line - a left arm spinner. Re. Magoffin, going off his performances so far this year I think you can safely believe his prime is behind him. He is 39 this year to be fair!

Heading to the Oval tomorrow for my first day of the season so hoping to see Surrey make a good start. With Dunn injured I'd definitely play Meaker for his pace. McKerr and Batty to miss out for me.

I’d imagine Batty and McKerr miss out - having Meaker at 9 is a lot better than Dernbach there!

surrey win toss and bat
Dernbach and Batty miss out
very harsh on dernbach that specially after the coach was singing his praises on day one against Lancashire

Stupid run out that never looked on

Were batting well to that point, seems to be much less movement after the first 10 overs.

jimbobgooner wrote:surrey win toss and bat
Dernbach and Batty miss out
very harsh on dernbach that specially after the coach was singing his praises on day one against Lancashire  

The printed teamsheet had Dernbach on instead of Meaker so can only assume he was injured in the warm up?

Wonderful 50 for Foakes. Looking like someone who could play Tests as a specialist batsman.

apart from leach the rest of the Worcestershire bowlers look ordinary

1st batting point

100 for burns

2nd batting point

Good day for the Rey that - platform for the likes of Pope, Curran and Clarke to push on tomorrow morning and afternoon has been built, hopefully they take advantage

A dominant day for Surrey. The only glimmer for Worcs is they have kept the scoring rate some what in check so Surrey haven't completely got away from them. Days like today are when they need Tongue with his extra pace to come to the party really.

So...is it likely to be a worthwhile day tomorrow ? According to the map in my hotel bar I am some 33 minutes walk from The Oval and if my better half wants to go shopping - just possible I might have a free day...

Bit shocked to arrive in London this morning and wishing I'd packed some sunscreen ...more like July than early May !

Alfie - come along, I'll PM you shortly.

I didn't know if I would be able to until this morning but managed to get along today. All the comments above seem about right. A good day's cricket and Surrey are on top. However, Worcs aren't completely out of it yet. Their bowling - with Leach the pick by some way - was generally tidy if not always that threatening whilst their fielding was keen and pretty effective (D'Oliveira had obviously read JD's posts and realised he needed to start making up for his low scores with some fine diving stops!).

A carefully crafted century from Burns which just might get the media writing up his England chances even though the Test and Lions selectors have shown zilch interest to date. Foakes was dominant and looked a class above - a real surprise when he was out. As JimBob posted, Stoneman's run out was stupid - it was risky and unnecessary having battled hard to get through the first hour.

I don't see Surrey getting more than 3 batting points (sorry, JimBob!). However, that shouldn't matter too much if we can go on, bat big and bat Worcs out of the game. However, as often the case, a couple of early wickets for Worcs tomorrow and the game will look very different.

A question to Surrey supporters... Rory Burns... Good enough to play for England? Worth a shot?

jimbohammers wrote:A question to Surrey supporters... Rory Burns... Good enough to play for England? Worth a shot?

Hi jimbob,

The answers IMHO are unequivocally 'yes' and 'yes'. While others (Stoneman, Westley - remember him?) seem a tad fortunate to attract media then national selectors' attention, others seem inexplicably to slip 'under the radar'. Rory Burns is one of the latter. Given that he's scored more CC1 runs in this innings than others apparently in the England frame have managed all season, why not?

that Clarke lbw decision was a joke

yet again meaker not being trusted with the ball

jimbobgooner wrote:yet again meaker not being trusted with the ball

Yep utter nonsense he’s bowled only three overs and Patel has got through 7 - albeit Meaker was expensive in his overs

As usual, an enjoyable day at the Oval yesterday and made even more so by watching it in the excellent company of the learned and entertaining Alfie.

Surrey lost the two early wickets I had been worry gutting about on Friday to be 6 down before 300 was on the board. Pope and Sam Curran both falling to the cannily effective Leach, the latter batsman without troubling the scorers. That could have paved the way for 330 all out and a lot of gnashing of teeth here and at the ground. However, considerable credit to Clarke for making sure that didn't happen. He applied himself and scored 38 in an important partnership of 90 odd with Burns.

The Surrey skipper meanwhile continued where he had left off on day one - careful not to give his wicket away but making sure he didn't miss out on anything loose either. He was unfortunate not to get his double ton, falling just short to a sharp slip catch by Mitchell off Morris who like the other Worcs bowlers - with the exception of Leach - stuck at it gamely without lacking any real killer touch.

The last three Surrey wickets ended up putting on 60 runs. That's hardly anything for the record books but it was about 55 more than we've being getting recently! Encouraging that number 9, 10 and Jack all reached double figures.

Admittedly, it was very much a batting day being very hot and sunny - Alfie and I had a couple of drinks for purely medicinal reasons during the day before heading to the shade at the bottom of the members' pavilion for the final session. The track also looked as if there wasn't too much there for the bowlers. A brown top not yet showing much sign of wear. Alfie thought it could well aid Virdi on day 4 ... but he has to be bowling on it then with us going for victory. That seems some way off at the moment. We didn't have any real luck with the ball - McKerr sent down one particularly hostile over which ended up costing three boundaries, one above and another wide of the slips. Patel was tidy enough and had a couple of shouts turned down.

If Patel is going to be the fourth seamer as he was yesterday, I would seriously question whether we need a fifth. We could have left out Meaker and played an extra spinner in Batty or given a rare outing to Harinath to bolster the batting. To be fair, I would have chosen Meaker over McKerr before this match started. However, Meaker was poor yesterday. There again, coming on as sixth choice when others are already missing is not going to help his confidence!

Anyway, it's day 3 - moving day. If things are to move towards a Surrey victory, we're going to have to bowl better and have some good fortune.

SimonofSurrey wrote:

jimbohammers wrote:A question to Surrey supporters... Rory Burns... Good enough to play for England? Worth a shot?

Hi jimbob,

The answers IMHO are unequivocally 'yes' and 'yes'. While others (Stoneman, Westley - remember him?) seem a tad fortunate to attract media then national selectors' attention, others seem inexplicably to slip 'under the radar'. Rory Burns is one of the latter. Given that he's scored more CC1 runs in this innings than others apparently in the England frame have managed all season, why not?

Cheers for the reply, Simon. Big tons will certainly help his cause! I remember him playing well against my team, Hampshire, last season so I've always kept an eye out for his scores. One to watch I'm sure

should have kept jade in

Not at the Oval today and only able to look in occasionally on the live stream. Worcs now 312/3 off exactly 100 overs. I was worried for JimBob - and therefore us! - that it was looking at one stage as if we might not get any bowling points!

Churchy said before lunch that the track was getting even easier to bat on. Probably so but I still suspect we haven't bowled well and didn't pick the right mix of bowlers. McKerr and Meaker are similar and both are liable to go for plenty if it's not their day. JimBob is probably right that Dernbach should have played, could have done with some more experience with the ball - of the six bowlers, four are aged 19 or 20. MDV said at the AGM the other week that,''Kids don't learn off kids.'' A bit of a cliche but probably true which makes this eleven seem the more surprising. As I posted earlier, Batty would have been another possibility in place of one of the seamers. He could have provided an extra spinning option and some nous.

Tea. Worcs 350/5 from 109 overs. Two late and I would guess deserved wickets for Virdi towards the end of the session. However - warning for JimBob! - Worcs have won the battle of the bonus points. They have 6 to our 4. We could get to 5 but will need a wicket in the first over of the next session.

All in all, pretty disappointing as the draw looks strong favourite.

Not too much of a surprise that we didn't get the 6th wicket first over after tea and so had to settle for one measly bowling point to go with the 3 for batting. In fact, Worcs are still only 5 down as they approach 400.

I just wonder if they might declare tonight to give us an uncomfortable 5 or 6 overs before stumps. I doubt it and personally I wouldn't (I was too cautious a skipper) but there might be an outside chance of a declaration. It's unlikely Worcs could lose now given the limited time left and it would move the game on.

After enjoying a day at The Oval yesterday - thanks again , guildford   (I stayed right to the end , by the way , but afraid I couldn't engineer another wicket    )  -  I've been in and out of churches and art galleries today ...and not entirely shocked to get back to my hotel and discover Worcestershire closing in on the Surrey total late in the day with only five down : it did look a very benign surface.  
Bit disappointed to see McKerr has apparently gone around the park today ...I was impressed with his energy and aggression in that rather unlucky first spell but it seems he hasn't been able to back up today. Ah well he is young - will be interested to see how he develops. I do think you ought to persevere with him.  Virdi was on a hat trick this afternoon when he finally broke through ? I quite liked what I saw of him ; but it does look as if the pitch will have the last word on this match unless there are a couple of very enterprising declarations...I can see why there were a lot of runs made here last year !

157 for Joe Clarke before he’s trapped LBW by McKerr. He’s had a torrid start to the season, so good to see him get runs on the board. Hopefully he can kick on now and really put the pressure on for that England slot.

Given the start Worcs have had to the year I would be shocked if there was a generous declaration! Even a draw would be a much needed result. Plus hopefully Barnard can kick on in the morning and further show the nonsense of him batting outside the top 6 in this side.

16 wickets across three days...another bore draw Oval pitch it seems

I'm not surprised Worcs didn't declare tonight. I was really just putting it out there as a possibility. Worcs now lead by 35 with 4 wickets and one day left.

From where we are now, I reckon Worcs will want to ideally extend their lead to 120+ and declare or be all out to give us 15 minutes to bat before lunch. Then hope that debutant spinner Twohig can work some magic in the afternoon. It all seems a very tall order but at least the visitors are virtually certain to end their losing sequence.

As for Surrey, they'll want to take those last 4 wickets pronto and then bat out the day or at least bat until 4:50 when hands can be shaken on the draw. Sam Curran could do with a couple of poles in the morning - he's definitely got talent but his recent performances have been rather underwhelming. Stoneman certainly needs a score when we bat as well.

Alfie - Dan Norcross in his report on cricinfo refers to McKerr as ''promising'' and his ball which got Clarke lbw as having ''considerable pace''.

jimbohammers wrote:

SimonofSurrey wrote:

jimbohammers wrote:A question to Surrey supporters... Rory Burns... Good enough to play for England? Worth a shot?

Hi jimbob,

The answers IMHO are unequivocally 'yes' and 'yes'. While others (Stoneman, Westley - remember him?) seem a tad fortunate to attract media then national selectors' attention, others seem inexplicably to slip 'under the radar'. Rory Burns is one of the latter. Given that he's scored more CC1 runs in this innings than others apparently in the England frame have managed all season, why not?

Cheers for the reply, Simon. Big tons will certainly help his cause! I remember him playing well against my team, Hampshire, last season so I've always kept an eye out for his scores. One to watch I'm sure

I was puzzled last year about all the hoohah surrounding Stoneman, which got him picked ultimately for the Ashes tour. To my mind, he has far more apparent weaknesses - as our Australian bowling friends identified last winter - than Burns. The latter'll never be one of those effortlessly eye catching left handers, far more the nuggety, compact John Edrich kind of opener. And, sadly, below the radar so far of the England selectors.

So I guess that's his low score, out to a dreadful shot, confirmed for today then

rocky dropped on 0

25 minutes before we can be put out of our misery and head for a long cold one in the officers' mess courtesy of the Corporal.

Been a bit absent the start of this season, good to see Worcs finally ending the losing run, although it seems as if even we'd have done well to lose this!

Nice to see Clarke get some runs on the board, hopefully this will be the start of a decent run of form now. And Tom Fell too, who has been in desperate need of runs.

Guildford, Olly, Simon etc al, how has Josh Tongue bowled in this match? Was really impressed last year, haven't been able to get down to New Road as yet this season, although we've only had the 1 match there anyway. Figures not been as impressive thus far this season, although he does seem to have had a few dropped off his bowling.

And finally, got to concur with JDizzle, Barnard needs to batting higher up the order. He's done more with the bat this year than I can ever remember George Rhodes producing.

Hi Mat - I hadn't seen Tongue before this match (I went on days one and two). He's got some pace about him but his direction was a bit wayward in his first spell and cost a few boundaries. That was unfortunate for him and Worcs as the track was probably then at its most helpful to seamers during the first session of the first day (not that that's saying much!). After that, his direction improved and he deserved the consolation of his one wicket, last man Virdi.

To be fair to him and all your bowlers, Worcs stuck at it with the ball and never let Surrey get completely away. Whilst we would have settled for 430 odd at the start, I never thought it was an outstanding total on that track and in the conditions ... and so it proved, albeit we helped your batters with some poor bowling at times. Your top bowler in this match without any question was Leach - accurate and astute.

guildfordbat wrote:Hi Mat - I hadn't seen Tongue before this match (I went on days one and two). He's got some pace about him but his direction was a bit wayward in his first spell and cost a few boundaries. That was unfortunate for him and Worcs as the track was probably then at its most helpful to seamers during the first session of the first day (not that that's saying much!). After that, his direction improved and he deserved the consolation of his one wicket, last man Virdi.

To be fair to him and all your bowlers, Worcs stuck at it with the ball and never let Surrey get completely away. Whilst we would have settled for 430 odd at the start, I never thought it was an outstanding total on that track and in the conditions ... and so it proved, albeit we helped your batters with some poor bowling at times. Your top bowler in this match without any question was Leach - accurate and astute.

Hi Guildford, picking this one up a tad late! Cheers for the update.

Yeah it was always his pace that was impressive. Think a lack of direction is probably why he doesn't see more use of the new ball at Worcs. Players like Leach/Barnard/Magoffin can't match his speed but are generally pretty metronomic with line and length, hence Leach's tremendous record over the last few years.