Author Topic: Gloucester t20  (Read 9990 times)

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7909
Gloucester t20
« on: July 17, 2016, 03:49:20 PM »
Given their respective hissy fits, Will we be having both skippers banned for 'dissent'? If so, would we have Chef as stand-in if he's banned because of slow over rates in the test?

Offline IlfordEagle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2248
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2016, 05:24:43 PM »
I bet Sorry,Kent,Sussex & Middx were delighted we got beaten today as it looks a fight between these 5 for 2 places behind Gloucs & Glam. Klinger demonstrated his love for our bowling yet again & we never got going from the looks of it. Why do we always put the opposition in if we win the toss? It clearly backfired today & if we reached the 1/4s then our opponents would doubtless put us in as they know we are less comfortable batting first, we need to be versatile  ie be equally comfortable batting 1st or 2nd.
Looks like RTD may be in trouble for dissent, he does often swish his bat when out especially when he has given his wicket away, got out to a poor stroke.

Offline Niel01

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 188
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2016, 05:58:32 PM »
Completely out thought, outplayed and beaten by Gloucestershire yet again. Guess that they are just too good for us.

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7909
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #3 on: July 17, 2016, 06:10:35 PM »
Completely out thought, outplayed and beaten by Gloucestershire yet again. Guess that they are just too good for us.
Good job we are not playing Cheltenham Ladies college 3rd XI this season.

Offline JasonP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3227
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #4 on: July 17, 2016, 06:16:39 PM »
Completely out thought, outplayed and beaten by Gloucestershire yet again. Guess that they are just too good for us.

It certainly makes a difference when you have 2 good overseas players.  They always look twice the team when Klinger joins them, especially.

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7909
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #5 on: July 17, 2016, 06:17:46 PM »
Completely out thought, outplayed and beaten by Gloucestershire yet again. Guess that they are just too good for us.

It certainly makes a difference when you have 2 good overseas players.  They always look twice the team when Klinger joins them, especially.

...all the way from Korea, hate the dress, though.

Offline Can the Can

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 107
  • Absolutely plumb?
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #6 on: July 17, 2016, 07:38:33 PM »
Why no Ryder? In the squad for this one but not selected. Is he injured? Attitude issue? I can't believe Velani is in in front of Ryder even if the latter has hardly been firing on full cylinders recently.

Thoughts anyone?

Offline steve cardy

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #7 on: July 18, 2016, 10:31:01 AM »
According to the Essex report of game Ryder has a calf strain?

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7909
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #8 on: July 18, 2016, 10:54:30 AM »
According to the Essex report of game Ryder has a calf strain?

Yes, a common affliction amongst fast bowlers.

Offline holidave

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 54
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #9 on: July 18, 2016, 02:00:38 PM »
In the LVCC game we used 4 main bowlers, Porter, Napier, Quinn and Bopara, three of whom, who are currentley playing in virtually every match. Gloucester used 5 main bowlers in the LVCC but rested 4 for the T20 with only Norwell playing both. Other teams follow this principal.
Essex use the above 4 for most matches. They bowl Westley, Tendo, Lawrence, and Zaidi occasionally and Dixon, Nijjer, Taylor, Beard and Masters not at all.
In the past Grayson often bowled bowlers into the ground. Have we learnt nothing.

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7909
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #10 on: July 18, 2016, 05:15:46 PM »
In the LVCC game we used 4 main bowlers, Porter, Napier, Quinn and Bopara, three of whom, who are currentley playing in virtually every match. Gloucester used 5 main bowlers in the LVCC but rested 4 for the T20 with only Norwell playing both. Other teams follow this principal.
Essex use the above 4 for most matches. They bowl Westley, Tendo, Lawrence, and Zaidi occasionally and Dixon, Nijjer, Taylor, Beard and Masters not at all.
In the past Grayson often bowled bowlers into the ground. Have we learnt nothing.

Dixon, MAsters and Beard have bowled a bit. What has happened to Nijar???

Offline Mog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 417
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #11 on: July 18, 2016, 07:48:16 PM »
In the LVCC game we used 4 main bowlers, Porter, Napier, Quinn and Bopara, three of whom, who are currentley playing in virtually every match. Gloucester used 5 main bowlers in the LVCC but rested 4 for the T20 with only Norwell playing both. Other teams follow this principal.
Essex use the above 4 for most matches. They bowl Westley, Tendo, Lawrence, and Zaidi occasionally and Dixon, Nijjer, Taylor, Beard and Masters not at all.
In the past Grayson often bowled bowlers into the ground. Have we learnt nothing.

This is the Club who signed Scott Brant, a fragile but good prospect who'd played a mere five first class games in his career up to that point. Essex saw no issue in playing him in every format; CC, T20, NWT, Sunday League with no break. Then, held their collective hands up that he'd been injured (as it transpired one that effectively ended his first class career!) ;  - That was 13 years ago, under the alleged 'leadership' of a certain Irani.
What we have learnt is that it's No Change.....  As for what the Club have learnt? Go figure!  ::)
« Last Edit: July 18, 2016, 07:50:14 PM by Mog »

Offline Postman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #12 on: July 18, 2016, 08:37:34 PM »
The same Irani was also responsible for bowling Peter Such into the ground on unhelpful surfaces.

Offline JasonP

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3227
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #13 on: July 18, 2016, 10:36:05 PM »
The same Irani was also responsible for bowling Peter Such into the ground on unhelpful surfaces.

That wasn't Irani.  In fact Irani taking over as captain was when Such bowled less and less  and then dropped to allow the fantastic Tim Mason into the side.  He came back at one stage but retired soon after.  There was a game at Colchester when Prichard captained where he bowled 86 overs in one innings.

Offline Andy

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7909
Re: Gloucester t20
« Reply #14 on: July 19, 2016, 10:55:01 AM »
The same Irani was also responsible for bowling Peter Such into the ground on unhelpful surfaces.

That wasn't Irani.  In fact Irani taking over as captain was when Such bowled less and less  and then dropped to allow the fantastic Tim Mason into the side.  He came back at one stage but retired soon after.  There was a game at Colchester when Prichard captained where he bowled 86 overs in one innings.

Fletch mentioned angrily in his book how naughty members/people on message boards moaned about letting suchie go - so I'd guess it was his green-tinged glasses that influenced the underuse of our better bowler.