I think if Stokes has to miss an Ashes Test, they might have Jamie Smith straight in there
If they are going in without a bowling all rounder for Stokes then I'm sure Bairstow will move up one and Foakes will come in with the gloves. Equally, though, there is the other Ollie Robinson. Yes they are playing in different divisions but I'm sure Stokes has heard all about how well his new team mate is doing and how incredible his strike rate is in particular - the highest of anyone in the country who has scored 150 or more runs.
Foakes 408 runs at 51.00 average and 55.73 strike rate Smith 432 runs at 48.00 average and 60.08 strike rate Robinson 567 runs at 51.54 average and 90.86 strike rate
Has Sam Curran given up on red ball cricket? He would have been the obvious choice as a Stokes replacement, but hasn't played red ball for a year.
Not that it seems to matter, with Mooen called up.
Yes I mentioned Sam Curran as an obvious replacement for Stokes on the England thread particularly as he would be the 4th/5th seamer (depending on whether we play a spinner) but, as you say, he hasn't played a CC game since he came back from the IPL so perhaps he isn't interested in playing red ball.
Really poor from Kent. I am also not sure why they didn't mix the bowling up earlier in the day. Seamers bowled for too long.. Why didn't DBD have a go, and Leaning himself for a while.. They had time earlier in the day to try and force or buy a wicket. Poor capacity has cost us this game!
Yesterday was a bad day all round for Kent - the 50+ team got mullered against Middlesex, never recovering from 41-6, and 133 was never enough. Lost by 8 wickets at Brentham CC, where Mike Brearley and Graham Barlow used to play.
I see the over 60s got well beaten by Sussex as well, although at least the chap who'll be keeping to me on Saturday got a nice fifty opening up and pulled off a stumping
i know this isn’t a Surrey thread but I see they have just announced Dan Lawrence from Essex. Do they really need him? on a side note, I have this horrible feeling Jordan Cox will be going to Essex at the end of this season
i know this isn’t a Surrey thread but I see they have just announced Dan Lawrence from Essex. Do they really need him? on a side note, I have this horrible feeling Jordan Cox will be going to Essex at the end of this season
Lawrence to Surrey - wow.
Obviously wants to pad his average playing on the Oval Road
i know this isn’t a Surrey thread but I see they have just announced Dan Lawrence from Essex. Do they really need him? on a side note, I have this horrible feeling Jordan Cox will be going to Essex at the end of this season
I don't know if he's going to Essex but the fact that, as far as I'm aware, his contract runs out at the end of the season is a concern. Normally, we lock in those that we do not want to lose and with relegation on the cards I can't help thinking that Cox won't put pen to paper, even if we have offered a new one, without seeing how the land lies. If it isn't Essex I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't end up at Hampshire.
Is Cox that good? He's scored a few headline grabbing innings, but his overall record is nothing spectacular
I believe that was said of Ollie Robinson by some too, the argument being we have Billings even though his record over the previous three years was worse than that of Robinson. We don't know how good Cox might be because young players (and Cox is still only 22) take time to reach their full potential. England called him up for the Lions in the winter so they obviously see something in him.
Any county wouldn't just be signing him for the CC either. Ben Brown, at Hants for example, is soon to be 36 and only keeps in the CC. The Aussie Ben McDermott, does it in The Blast. So, if Hants signed Cox, they would get a keeper/batsman for potentially all codes but also someone who is a gun fielder if circumstances dictate that they don't need him to keep. And he would be staying in Division 1 too which he might not be doing if he stayed at Kent.
Apologies all. Wasn't avoiding this thread even with the terrible showing in our first innings. I've been incredibly busy having the absolute best time of my life being best man at and doing a bunch of organising a 5 day, 6 event, Hindu-indian wedding in Kenya with 600 people attending! Managed to squeeze in a bit of travelling and safari and a short stay at a beach resort.
You could have told me Millwall were promoted to the Premier league and it wouldn't have been able to affect my mood!
What a werid game of cricket that was. Real game of two halves. Redid the pitch flatten out? The weather change? Batsmen throw it away? or the bowling get worse?
On that run chase there has been a lot of chat about Sibley's innings and it being "anti-bazball" for me it demonstrated something a little different. The Bazball era has been defined by seemingly impossible runchases, whilst sibleys innings is a pretty extreme example for me it demonstrated that having someone provide the anchor role and a little bit of stability while others did the big hitting actually did more to demoralise the bowlers and ensure the win.
I am in no way saying thay England should recall Sibley but this is a role that Foakes played excellently a number of times last summer. He is the perfect foil for England's middle order whilst being capable of upping the tempo when needed.
Also how good is Jamie Smith. I've been saying it for a while but not sure even I appreciated how good he was. Now he's looking properly comfortable at this level and churning out runs like he should be. How long before awngland come calling either as a batsman (Stewart says long term he will bat 3) or keeper bat.
Hes even started to produce in T20 which I honestly didn't think was his format
Dare I suggest that to 'develop his career' he might have maybe thought about simply scoring more runs for Essex? Hopefully England move on to, idk, Jamie Smith or something and he ends up playing for Surrey as Smith's replacement.
Can't see how you have both Jacks and Lawrence in the same team either. Maybe the former is off? They've invested a lot in him though
Even I think this is ridiculous. He's a quality player and I really rate him but I don't get it.
We've been producing young batsmen for a while. Yes we've lost Pope to England for the foreseeable but Foakes is likely to play a fair amount for us. We are incredibly well stocked. Ryan Patel has a good season when we won the championship last year but can barely get a game this year. Cam Steel scored a ton and then got dropped for the returning Will Jacks. Ben Geddes is very young but came into the side at the end of last season, scored a ton and was impressive. Hasn't even made the squad this year despite them saying how highly rated he is. Not sure where this move leaves those and other young players.
I also don't think Surrey Hoovering up all the talent just below England level is good for the game. We want the top players spread around.
I think he will do great for us. But not sure it is the right move for the club.
The only reason I can think of that could justify this is if there is truth in the rumours that came out over the winter that Burns was considering jacking it all in. In that case maybe they are planning to push Patel up to open again and Lawrence to come in at 3 (and drop down to 4 when Pope may return?).
We're getting to the point where at full strength we could conceivably put out 2 sides which would be capable of challenging for the title.
The Surrey stament puts emphasis on his offspin too. That worries me even more. Given our seeming obsession with 5 seamers and a part time spinner then it suggests we might use his as such either alongside Jacks or maybe they're anticipating losing jacks to England and franchise white ball cricket. Either way it pushes Cam Steel further down the pecking order and doesn't bode well for Moriarty or Virdi. Or spin more generally in this country.
It feels odd when cricket transfers are announced so far before they actually happen. Lawrence still has most of the season to go, how will he play if Essex face Surrey again?
It feels odd when cricket transfers are announced so far before they actually happen. Lawrence still has most of the season to go, how will he play if Essex face Surrey again?
The perception might be that. The problem is that this sort of thing is usually agreed a long time before the end of the season. A player is allowed to officially talk to another county from 1st June but we shouldn't pretend that discussions haven't already taken place with the better players even if it is only an off the record discussion between players from different counties at England or franchise matches.
Announcing such a move is probably more honest than hiding the fact because the player is leaving himself open to criticism if he doesn't perform. Which is why I am concerned about the Cox situation - silence isn't always golden, He probably is keeping his options open but, equally, he could have already agreed a move and Kent might have asked him not to announce it yet for the very reasons you've indicated.
It feels odd when cricket transfers are announced so far before they actually happen. Lawrence still has most of the season to go, how will he play if Essex face Surrey again?
The perception might be that. The problem is that this sort of thing is usually agreed a long time before the end of the season. A player is allowed to officially talk to another county from 1st June but we shouldn't pretend that discussions haven't already taken place with the better players even if it is only an off the record discussion between players from different counties at England or franchise matches.
Announcing such a move is probably more honest than hiding the fact because the player is leaving himself open to criticism if he doesn't perform. Which is why I am concerned about the Cox situation - silence isn't always golden, He probably is keeping his options open but, equally, he could have already agreed a move and Kent might have asked him not to announce it yet for the very reasons you've indicated.
Players often go on loan to their future counties straight away, rather than having this conflict. Evison for example joined us on loan last season and ended up winning the 50 over cup at his "home" ground!
It feels odd when cricket transfers are announced so far before they actually happen. Lawrence still has most of the season to go, how will he play if Essex face Surrey again?
The perception might be that. The problem is that this sort of thing is usually agreed a long time before the end of the season. A player is allowed to officially talk to another county from 1st June but we shouldn't pretend that discussions haven't already taken place with the better players even if it is only an off the record discussion between players from different counties at England or franchise matches.
Announcing such a move is probably more honest than hiding the fact because the player is leaving himself open to criticism if he doesn't perform. Which is why I am concerned about the Cox situation - silence isn't always golden, He probably is keeping his options open but, equally, he could have already agreed a move and Kent might have asked him not to announce it yet for the very reasons you've indicated.
Players often go on loan to their future counties straight away, rather than having this conflict. Evison for example joined us on loan last season and ended up winning the 50 over cup at his "home" ground!
That's easier to do when they are considered surplus to requirement. I'd be surprised if Lawrence would be allowed to do that. The irony is that Robinson had at least four offers but ended up permanently at the county he went out on loan to - but was only allowed to leave a year short of his contract term because of the break clause which stated that he could if he didn't play for Kent in The Blast that season. Kent effectively facilitated his early departure.
Comments
Foakes 408 runs at 51.00 average and 55.73 strike rate
Smith 432 runs at 48.00 average and 60.08 strike rate
Robinson 567 runs at 51.54 average and 90.86 strike rate
Not that it seems to matter, with Mooen called up.
Obviously wants to pad his average playing on the Oval Road
Any county wouldn't just be signing him for the CC either. Ben Brown, at Hants for example, is soon to be 36 and only keeps in the CC. The Aussie Ben McDermott, does it in The Blast. So, if Hants signed Cox, they would get a keeper/batsman for potentially all codes but also someone who is a gun fielder if circumstances dictate that they don't need him to keep. And he would be staying in Division 1 too which he might not be doing if he stayed at Kent.
You could have told me Millwall were promoted to the Premier league and it wouldn't have been able to affect my mood!
What a werid game of cricket that was. Real game of two halves. Redid the pitch flatten out? The weather change? Batsmen throw it away? or the bowling get worse?
On that run chase there has been a lot of chat about Sibley's innings and it being "anti-bazball" for me it demonstrated something a little different. The Bazball era has been defined by seemingly impossible runchases, whilst sibleys innings is a pretty extreme example for me it demonstrated that having someone provide the anchor role and a little bit of stability while others did the big hitting actually did more to demoralise the bowlers and ensure the win.
I am in no way saying thay England should recall Sibley but this is a role that Foakes played excellently a number of times last summer. He is the perfect foil for England's middle order whilst being capable of upping the tempo when needed.
Hes even started to produce in T20 which I honestly didn't think was his format
Can't see how you have both Jacks and Lawrence in the same team either. Maybe the former is off? They've invested a lot in him though
We've been producing young batsmen for a while. Yes we've lost Pope to England for the foreseeable but Foakes is likely to play a fair amount for us. We are incredibly well stocked. Ryan Patel has a good season when we won the championship last year but can barely get a game this year. Cam Steel scored a ton and then got dropped for the returning Will Jacks. Ben Geddes is very young but came into the side at the end of last season, scored a ton and was impressive. Hasn't even made the squad this year despite them saying how highly rated he is. Not sure where this move leaves those and other young players.
I also don't think Surrey Hoovering up all the talent just below England level is good for the game. We want the top players spread around.
I think he will do great for us. But not sure it is the right move for the club.
The only reason I can think of that could justify this is if there is truth in the rumours that came out over the winter that Burns was considering jacking it all in. In that case maybe they are planning to push Patel up to open again and Lawrence to come in at 3 (and drop down to 4 when Pope may return?).
We're getting to the point where at full strength we could conceivably put out 2 sides which would be capable of challenging for the title.
You say it like Surrey won't sign Rehan Ahmed or whoever is the most promising young spinner in the South
Understatement of the year.
Surrey. The Chelski of English cricket !
Announcing such a move is probably more honest than hiding the fact because the player is leaving himself open to criticism if he doesn't perform. Which is why I am concerned about the Cox situation - silence isn't always golden, He probably is keeping his options open but, equally, he could have already agreed a move and Kent might have asked him not to announce it yet for the very reasons you've indicated.