vs Glos (Home)

[ytsejam]

Well, having been out last evening, have just watched the TV recording of the match. That must rank arguably as one of the worst EVER T20 performance from Essex. Utterly embarrassing, unprofessional and an insult to the paying crowd.
The batting was (once again in the T20) far too pedestrian and insipid. With the ridiculously small boundaries at Chelmsford, then a MINIMUM of 60 runs must come from the powerplay when you are trying to set a target. The bowling was, one paced, one dimensional and lacking in any class. BUT the piece de resistance was the SCHOOL BOY (and that's an insult to most school boys!) disgraceful fielding.
An utterly pathetic and shameful performance from a team who has been so good in the 50 over game, so there really is no excuse for it.

[CostaDelEssex]

After a god(ish) performance against Kent, I was expecting a home win against a Glouc side who are no mugs (apart from the obvious star names, likes of Dent and Norwell really are top players)

Fielding was a shambles as was the bowling. But, we just don't have the top order players for T20; if Ryder or Tendo don't come off we have no-one capable of scoring 50 of 25, that includes Westley and Ravi.

Loss of Petinni in this format is absolutely massive.

[IlfordEagle]

It was really embarrassing being there last night watching the utter dross served up by Essex with just a few exceptions - Westley, Zaidi, Quinn at least had some fire/passion, the body language of the rest spoke volumes & many of us were amazed/shocked when Gloucs actually lost 2 wickets!!
The fielding was generally poor exemplified by Velani but mostly sloppy despite half the side being relatively young, poor strokes by the batsmen culminating in Tendo, arguably the quickest between wickets in England being run out - not sure if he or Ravi was at fault, Gloucs were generally much sharper & 'up for it', which we definitely weren't!!
The crowd was well down & also very subdued (apart from the usual idiots who seemed to think it was clever continually haranguing Marshall - that's how it looked from where I was)l either due to the weather,Euro 2016, our poor T20 form or being on a Thursday (almost exactly as last year which was also a Thursday) . Lose by all means but at least go down fighting .
Amazing to think that next week v Hants is a bottom of the table game whereas it's usually top of the table!!

[JasonP]

After a god(ish) performance against Kent, I was expecting a home win against a Glouc side who are no mugs (apart from the obvious star names, likes of Dent and Norwell really are top players)

Fielding was a shambles as was the bowling. But, we just don't have the top order players for T20; if Ryder or Tendo don't come off we have no-one capable of scoring 50 of 25, that includes Westley and Ravi.

Loss of Petinni in this format is absolutely massive.

Pettini is a loss no doubt, although he's actually performed no better than our batsmen in the comp so far.  Westley scored two T20 100s a couple of years ago (105 of 58 and 109* of 58) so he's more than capable of scoring quickly.  Ravi is aswell although he often seems to want to play himself in first.  I think with him the captaincy is inhibiting him.  He doesn't seem to want to take any risks at all.  He's always been one of these players that is better chasing a score.

I think we do have the players.  We have been a good T20 side for a few years now, atleast until it gets to the knockouts!  Pettini is a loss but he can't be that big a loss surely that changes us from a good side to a very poor one.  We are just playing very passively.  Last night was the perfect occasion to go out there and play positively flat pitch, very small boundaries and an average at best bowling attack.

[frank21]

we need to try browne in t20, and maybe be take out Lawrence .f

[Andy]

I agree with JasonP that it is a wider malaise influencing our t20 and 50 over really. Ravi has to come to terms with the captaincy, although he's not been quite the player for a season or two now.

This was going to be a difficult season as we are trying to revamp the team after losing 3-4 younger players recently, whilst our more senior players are inevitably not quite able to hit the highs, so they can't carry (for example) our bowling.

I am v worried that Velani's was so poor. He's usually included in these matches for his fielding. Is there trouble behind the scenes?

[Stringbok]

Does anyone have any theories as to the discrepancy between our T20 and 50 over form. Same captain, only slightly different teams but very different results.

[JasonP]

Does anyone have any theories as to the discrepancy between our T20 and 50 over form. Same captain, only slightly different teams but very different results.

I think they're very different games.  In the 50 over stuff they have chased three scores of between 265 and 310 and chased them well.  300 is not a massive score to chase these days.  You can almost do it pretty risk free.  The Kent game the other day we chased 285 without having to hit too many boundaries but with good running.  We had it under control.  I think we have been very lucky with the toss as well.  Having to set totals I would suspect we would find a lot more difficult as other teams would fancy chasing 300+ against our attack aswell.
T20 is a lot more about boundries.  Our batting powerplays have not been going well.  At Chelmsford you should be able to get 60 from the first 6 overs hopefully losing a couple of wickets max.  Ryder has come off once in 5 innings and we've struggled to find an opening partner which has meant poor starts.  The likes of Bopara, Westley and Lawrence have then come in and tried to rebuild the innings with ones and twos rather than looking to hit fours and sixes.  If you're scoring at a run a ball in 50 over cricket you're doing well, if you do in twenty20 you're not.

[Mick]

Does anyone have any theories as to the discrepancy between our T20 and 50 over form. Same captain, only slightly different teams but very different results.

Top of two leagues and bottom of the other one (thanks to Hampshire's rained off match). I'll happily take that at the end of the season !

[Mog]

Can't believe how many empty seats there are.

Bad weather in the afternoon but even so.

Well frankly, if No Change Essex are incapable of filling their rickety 5,000 seat home for the one form of the game they have been so desperate to win, then I'd suggest they're in serious trouble. It should be an irrelevance if it's on TV or not.
The reality is that they can only 'sell-out' if it's on a Friday night. Any one have any clue what the connection is?
It's high time the Club and their leaden-footed marketing/propaganda department, started thinking of some new tag-lines.
The only 'Fortress Chelmsford' is for opposition success.

[Mog]

Well, having been out last evening, have just watched the TV recording of the match. That must rank arguably as one of the worst EVER T20 performance from Essex. Utterly embarrassing, unprofessional and an insult to the paying crowd.
The batting was (once again in the T20) far too pedestrian and insipid. With the ridiculously small boundaries at Chelmsford, then a MINIMUM of 60 runs must come from the powerplay when you are trying to set a target. The bowling was, one paced, one dimensional and lacking in any class. BUT the piece de resistance was the SCHOOL BOY (and that's an insult to most school boys!) disgraceful fielding.
An utterly pathetic and shameful performance from a team who has been so good in the 50 over game, so there really is no excuse for it.

There was one shambolic display at Southgate ten years ago or so that springs to mind for its' awfulness. That was dire!

[afinetickletoleg]

I am v worried that Velani's was so poor. He's usually included in these matches for his fielding. Is there trouble behind the scenes?

I heard that he is upset as he is not getting a please and thank you when being directed where to field.

[Stringbok]

Does anyone have any theories as to the discrepancy between our T20 and 50 over form. Same captain, only slightly different teams but very different results.

I think they're very different games.  In the 50 over stuff they have chased three scores of between 265 and 310 and chased them well.  300 is not a massive score to chase these days.  You can almost do it pretty risk free.  The Kent game the other day we chased 285 without having to hit too many boundaries but with good running.  We had it under control.  I think we have been very lucky with the toss as well.  Having to set totals I would suspect we would find a lot more difficult as other teams would fancy chasing 300+ against our attack aswell.
T20 is a lot more about boundries.  Our batting powerplays have not been going well.  At Chelmsford you should be able to get 60 from the first 6 overs hopefully losing a couple of wickets max.  Ryder has come off once in 5 innings and we've struggled to find an opening partner which has meant poor starts.  The likes of Bopara, Westley and Lawrence have then come in and tried to rebuild the innings with ones and twos rather than looking to hit fours and sixes.  If you're scoring at a run a ball in 50 over cricket you're doing well, if you do in twenty20 you're not.

Thanks for replying Jason ...makes a lot of sense especially about the opener, having Browne in the 50 over format where his slow but sure approach is not a problem is a big difference.  Possibly also the momentum from one form is not being carried over another.  It looked on Thursday as if we are going into T20 games expecting to lose. Ryder's first baller seemed to set the tone of here we go again.

[nat]

Yep body language was poor. A team always reflects its leader and this doesn't reflect well on Bopara at the moment.

[IlfordEagle]

When Ravi was shown being interviewed prior to the game he looked very subdued & low key (not necessarily a bad thing ) but he didn't really look up for it anyway & was low on confidence which must filter through to the team. If Browne can go the same way as Westley ie learn his 1 day trade in the 50 over form & then adapt to T20 then we should look much better & more solid.
With the news that Milne won't now be coming we need to decide quickly whether to replace him or just use our existing bowlers (maybe more experience for Beard & Moore), tbh the sooner Riaz goes the better as he has contributed little so far.