V Surrey

[IlfordEagle]

great result for the boys again - pretty easy win again really. Looking good

Not so much slaughter of the innocents but slaughter of the arrogants.

KP, your boys one hell of a beating...   

You can do better than that Andy.  I would suggest 'Alec Stewart, Micky Stewart, John Major, Sir Bruce Forsyth, Mick Jagger, Charles Colville your boys took one hell of a beating.

No idea if Sir Brucie likes cricket but he lives in Surrey and Jagger, although an alumni of Dartford Grammar, is always at the Oval test so I'll tag him a Sorry supporter.

There were some stats in the Gloucs program on our T20 win records against each county.  Can't recall them exactly but our record against Sorry is very impressive - long may it continue.

Some great lines above & as always it was so satisfying beating Moneybags Sorry, Jason Roy endeared himself to all Essex fans with his drive that hit The Ego who of course got no sympathy. KP had another great night with just 1 before Phillips who bowled beautifully to him got him out - he still can't play slow left armers. can he?
I thought Sorry were 15/20 runs short, our bowlers did their job as always, Salisbury recovered well from 1 bad over & some solid contributions from the batsmen as we were well ahead of the run rate at all times. If my maths is correct we can't finish below 5th & need just 1 win to qualify, 2/3 will give us a home tie.
Well done boys ,another fine result COYE!!!

[stickyboy]

Yes 1 win more win would make sure but realistically top 4 is certain with others beating others etc. Top 2 for a home tie versus 3rd or 4th in North group should be well within our grasp. Apart from the Middlesex home match where we scrapped in with Phillips knock have looked a pretty class act in this format

[squarelegumpire]

A very good win. I was very pleased to see how well Salisbury performed. Home tie in the quarters looks very likely, but it also looks as though no team will want to bat first against us, so winning the toss could be important.

[stickyboy]

Home tie in the quarters looks very likely, but it also looks as though no team will want to bat first against us, so winning the toss could be important.

Very good point. Think nearly all the wins have been batting 2nd. The only defeat against Hampshire we batted first. Be interesting how we manage next time we have to bat first again.

[Andy]

We should've given Roy the MofM award for that exquisite stroke.

[honkytonk]

Home tie in the quarters looks very likely, but it also looks as though no team will want to bat first against us, so winning the toss could be important.

Very good point. Think nearly all the wins have been batting 2nd. The only defeat against Hampshire we batted first. Be interesting how we manage next time we have to bat first again.

Been thinking the same for a while.  Winning the toss and bowling is great for us but will come to an end soon.

[squarelegumpire]

Someone (?Brian) might know; what percentage of t20 games are won by the ten which bats second?

[Perov]

A good win, next match, Smith in for Foakes.

[squarelegumpire]

A good win, next match, Smith in for Foakes.

Never thought anyone would say Smith in for anybody! But might be a good idea!

[nat]

A good win, next match, Smith in for Foakes.

Agree. Foakes looks out of his depth in all 1st team cricket at the mo.

[stickyboy]

Someone (?Brian) might know; what percentage of t20 games are won by the ten which bats second?

I tried to do some research on the net but could only come up with this page on T20 stats for international cricket & IPL a few years ago.

There seems to be no real pattern. ie in the IPL
2008 - 62% by team batting 2nd
2009 - 53% by team batting 2nd
2010 - 47% by team batting 2nd

In T20 Internationals - 52% were won by team batting 2nd where as in T20 World Cups its 46%


http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/story/457858.html

[brianh]

The new ACS/Cricketarchive website may have something on this and I hope to have a look at it early next week. It may take a while as because it's new, I'm not used to it yet and List A and t20 events were only finished a couple of days ago.. It may take a while to come up with something but don't get your hopes up yet.
Here's hoping anyway.

[Stringbok]

Here is a bit of research based on the admittedly small sample of this year's T20 blast.  Errors may have occurred due to to my five bar gate system.  Ignoring ties and abandoned matches

54% of games have been won by the team batting first
46% of games have been won by the team batting second.
Essex accounts for 24% of the games won by those batting second.

[IlfordEagle]

One minor concern/observation - although we have won 8 out of 9 ,some very convincingly, our NRR is still only 0.388 & I would have thought it should be higher. I know only 2/3 Counties are plus on NRR but if we do falter & if placings come down to NRR then we may suffer in comparison to ,say, Sorry or Hants & possibly miss a 1/4 final home game.
I'm guessing the ideal scenario is for us to rack up 180-2 & bowl out the opposition for under 100, still we can hope for that, better still just keep winning like we have been doing so far!!

[stickyboy]

One minor concern/observation - although we have won 8 out of 9 ,some very convincingly, our NRR is still only 0.388 & I would have thought it should be higher. I know only 2/3 Counties are plus on NRR but if we do falter & if placings come down to NRR then we may suffer in comparison to ,say, Sorry or Hants & possibly miss a 1/4 final home game.
I'm guessing the ideal scenario is for us to rack up 180-2 & bowl out the opposition for under 100, still we can hope for that, better still just keep winning like we have been doing so far!!

Think your right, this is probably do with us batting and getting the total with an over or so to go which makes our NRR not go up a great deal even if it was an 8 wkts which is pretty much a hammering. Your scenario of batting first and winning easily would indeed improve the NRR, although the way we keep winning NRR will be irrelevant!