Essex Outfielder : The Unofficial Essex CCC Forum
Cricket => Essex Eagles T20 => Topic started by: ytsejam on July 09, 2017, 02:04:34 PM
-
Same team again today, apart from the expected change of Tamim for one of the openers (Lawrence).
We're going to set a target this time rather than chase (won the toss again) so lets hope for a better all round performance today as two straight losses will put us on the back foot before the competition has hardly even started!
-
Our new star opener seems to have spent most of the time at the non-strikers end, whilst Chopra farms the bowling. Clever stuff.
-
166 - 8, another poor batting effort I.M.O. which shouldn't cause Kent too many problems.
It seems like Essex havent quite realised its not the 50 overs competition yet!! Once again only 4 wickets down going into the 19th over yet no real effort was made to accelerate the scoring until the last 5 overs.
Its not all lost yet though as the powerplay is going to be crucial for this game. We must get 2 - 3 wickets in the first 6 overs to have any chance as we won't be able to stop them scoring at the required run rate.
-
Somerset getting battered by Surrey and we play them on Thursday. Lose that and we might as well give up in this competition. We've got the worst T20 bowling attack in the South Group.
-
Wrong team selected...again
-
Thanks Nat for your insight
-
porter shouldn't be playing t20. he's not a t20 bowled yet. he should be rested for the cc and given the odd run out.
why in earth is wheaters not playing. he should be at the top of the order and if he comes off he comes off if. if he doesn't no loss.
-
Well if Friday night was "poor", today was embarassingly poor!.
Inept use of the powerplay (again) and no urgency shown with the bat until the 16th over really is not good enough and Essex need to have a big re-think of their tactics before Thursday and realise you can't play the same way in the T20 as you do the 50 overs matches.
166 was never going to be anywhere near enough unless we fluked a few wickets in the first few overs and Kent showed us how to bat in a powerplay and overall were much too good all round for what is looking like a very poor Essex T20 side.
To think we have to endure another month and a half of this competition yet before the proper cricket starts again and I hope the almost inevitable knock on confidence these matches will have, does not affect our chances in the CC.
Lets hope it rains constantly for the next 6 weeks!!
-
Can't believe Wheater doesn't open its got to be worth a try.
-
Need to win the return leg otherwise the Mike Denness shield will be going over the bridge for the first time.
On a more serious note Amir has been a bit underwhelming so far. Let's hope he finds his form in time for the return of proper cricket in 29 days.
-
Need to win the return leg otherwise the Mike Denness shield will be going over the bridge for the first time.
On a more serious note Amir has been a bit underwhelming so far. Let's hope he finds his form in time for the return of proper cricket in 29 days.
He looked a class above Porter, Finn, Roland-Jones and Murtagh in the CC on a pitch that gave the seamers nothing. He bowled well against Surrey as well. Bowling in t20 cricket is always a bit of a lottery at times anyway.
-
He looked a class above Porter, Finn, Roland-Jones and Murtagh in the CC on a pitch that gave the seamers nothing. He bowled well against Surrey as well. Bowling in t20 cricket is always a bit of a lottery at times anyway.
For once, I agree. We might revise that judgement at the end of the tournament, but at the moment there are a number of issues with the T20. Providing the CC form remains reasonable (I.e. we fight hard and don't lose from silly situations) then if MA is putting in the overs in the right place, then I'd be happy.
-
The team worry too much about losing wickets when batting. Surrey showed that it doesn't matter how many early wickets you lose you can still post a good total because every team bats down to 9-10. I'd rather be 60-3 at the end of the power play than 40 without loss. We need to hit it from ball one and keep hitting it until they get us out. I respect us trying to keep a settled team but it's not working so changes in this format are needed. Wheater and Callum Taylor should get a chance and when are we getting an update on Quinn? He's one of if not our best T20 bowler.
-
We were 20/30 runs short on a decent batting track & a fast outfield, 166 was never enough to defend, tbh we should have fielded first. We again got bogged down in the middle & only sped up in the last 5 overs which was too late. Most of the bowling was poor although Harmer did bowl well, Porter again showed T20 is not his game (not entirely his fault, edges etc don't help). Kent won far too easily with Bell Drummond playing very well.Nice day out, good weather & crowd probably 7/8k in a decent sized outground with reasonable facilities, have been to & seen many worse.
As others have said we need to rethink/revise our tactics or we will soon effectively be out of the reckoning, we need to win at least 1 of this week's home games or that may be it.
-
I couldn't care less about this competition but I don't want it to compromise their chances of lifting the County Championship.
-
Couple of interesting points on espn cricinfo
1. About this match Chris silverwood says that he accepts that the game has moved on, the players get going from the start
2. Surrey had 12 runs added due to slow over rate. Why was this enforced on Friday night is a mystery.
-
Agree totally Alex and Ilford Eagle with your points.
We had an issue with the powerplay batting a few seasons ago when the policy seemed to be to be 40 odd for 0 or 1 after the power play rather than 60 odd for 2 or 3.The opposition invariably scored 20 or 30 more in their powerplay overs which nearly always was the difference between the sides. After 3 or 4 early defeats we then noticeably changed tactics and started to hit out from ball 1 of the match and this is what you have to do in T20. We also seem too obsessed with pushing quick singles in the middle overs too, which is fine in the 50 overs competition but is no good in T20.
At least Silverwoods words tonight seem to indicate they know they need to change the mind set and tactics but I can't understand why this wasn't obvious to him from the start.
-
We've lost 4 players over the last couple of years, Ryder, Pettini, Masters and Napier who were all good twenty20 players and apart from Iqbal for Ryder the players we've brought in aren't as good. Iqbal and Westley are more than capable of scoring quickly in the powerplay. This is the format we miss Pettini in. He actually didn't make the Leicester squad for their match today.
-
I said to the chaps a couple of weeks back that we don't look suited to this format this year. Even with Iqbal for a few weeks. Wheater and Taylor need to come in, and sharpish.
-
No calls from the usual suspects to bring Pettini back yet?
-
haha. I spoke to Mark a few weeks back. He said he doubted he'd get anywhere near our team at the moment. As always, the man is honest. Shame The club couldn't do the same...(at the time. That's changed for the better)
-
Couple of interesting points on espn cricinfo
1. About this match Chris silverwood says that he accepts that the game has moved on, the players get going from the start
2. Surrey had 12 runs added due to slow over rate. Why was this enforced on Friday night is a mystery.
1. is worrying - since when did T20 ever start slowly?
2. Need you ask, we were playing Sorry...
-
Don't envy Kent much but it has to be said that Beckenham is a tidy out ground.
Shame Essex don't have similar facilities.
-
Don't envy Kent much but it has to be said that Beckenham is a tidy out ground.
Shame Essex don't have similar facilities.
It used to be the old Lloyds Bank Sports Ground (used it regularly when I worked for the Bank), it has changed a lot (for the better) over the years & is situated in a decent residential area as well, not difficult to get to by train or road, shows what can be done if you really believe & invest - Garon Park could have been developed like this - similar size etc but in a poor location & too damn windy!!
-
Kent are brassic as well.