SURREY VS KENT SPECSAVERS COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP

First topic message reminder :

Sam Curran is included in a 14-man squad to travel to Beckenham for the Specsavers County Championship fixture against Kent starting on 20th May.
Matt Dunn could make his first appearance of the domestic campaign, as he is Surrey’s second change from the squad that was announced to face Somerset in Taunton last week.
Stuart Meaker is left out completely from the last squad.
Jade Dernbach (calf) and Amar Virdi (side) are not yet fully fit and Jordan Clark is not considered due to his poor form.
FULL SQUAD
Rory Burns (c)
Gareth Batty
Scott Borthwick
Rikki Clarke
Sam Curran
Matt Dunn
Dean Elgar
Ben Foakes
Will Jacks
Conor McKerr
Morne Morkel
Ryan Patel
Mark Stoneman
Freddie van den Berg
Burger van, Dunn and Jacks to miss out
As said on the pervious match thread Patel as the 4th seamer is not advisable
Harsh on jacks but with baby face at 7 its hard to fit him in.
Over to you chaps  

hundreds today for Jamie smith and Jordan clark

from 197 for 1 to 294 all out another excellent comeback

3 overs left in the day

jimbobgooner wrote:from 197 for 1 to 294 all out another excellent comeback

That really is something, especially in good batting conditions at Beckenham. Dickson scored 300+ there a year or so back.

STUMPS 11 for 0 a lead of 156

jimbobgooner wrote:STUMPS 11 for 0 a lead of 156

We're in a good place.

My recipe for tomorrow:
Bat sensibly in the morning session, push on after lunch and give it some welly for an hour after tea to try and get the lead up to about 480. Then declare and have a dozen+ overs at 'em before stumps. What can go wrong?

Must say I'm really pleased by that. Only able to check in occasionally, and was feeling fairly depressed on checking shortly after tea to find that the Kent score was about 220 for 2. Even Stevens was dismissed cheaply - and that doesn't happen too often when he's playing against Surrey!

A lot of credit must surely go to Sam Curran for the control he exerted and to Batty for starting the collapse.

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:STUMPS 11 for 0 a lead of 156

We're in a good place.

My recipe for tomorrow:
Bat sensibly in the morning session, push on after lunch and give it some welly for an hour after tea to try and get the lead up to about 480. Then declare and have a dozen+ overs at 'em before stumps. What can go wrong?

Would agree with this - a long long way to go before we can entertain winning the match, you sense taking 10 wickets even on day 4 will be tough on this wicket, but we can take the loss out of the equation tomorrow at least...hopefully anyways!

300 lead 6 wkts left

now in danger of losing this

jimbobgooner wrote:now in danger of losing this

Nah. Just a question of whether you give yourselves enough time to bowl them out.

50 for baby face

Relax, JimBob. Very unlikely we'll lose from here.

At tea, we lead by 357 with 4 wickets left. In some ways I would have liked more wickets in hand to allow us go for a real blitz from the restart. However, it shows you can still take wickets on this track.

My suggested approach now: try and bat for another 16 overs to get the lead nicely over 400 and then declare to give 'em 14 tonight.

guildfordbat wrote:Relax, JimBob. Very unlikely we'll lose from here.

sorry Guildford it was Jacks getting out that made me nervous

426 to win

jimbobgooner wrote:426 to win

Think that gives 'em 17 overs tonight. Would settle for one wicket but two would be very handy ....

One wicket taken and a nightwatchman in to hopefully knock over early tomorrow. That'll do for now ... although not going to be easy, mind.

Hard fought day - at several points Surrey struggling to get any sort of momentum. But good to see Sam Curran contributing well as an all rounder. Useful to have dismissed one quality Kent batsman this evening.

Sam Curran has done his hamstring

Now Bell Drummond edges one behind off Clarke and is given not out

and now a very good looking LBW not given!!

and finally on the 3rd time he's out, Bell Drummond is actually given out by the umpire and Clarke gets his man

Good Golly I'm Olly wrote:Sam Curran has done his hamstring

If, as looks fairly likely now, Kent do managed to salvage a draw then Surreys season really is in a complete free-fall isn't . Even if Currans injury is fairly minor its yet another blow that makes it harder to see how they will turn this around.
Theres quite a few senior players, undoutably on big contracts, who just havent turned up this year in either format.

I know it's a long shot having seen him bowl, but has Borthwick give it up? Surely a bit of joke leg spin on a 4th day pitch is worth a go, especially with a bowler down

4 more wkts needed

Gooseberry wrote:If, as looks fairly likely now, Kent do managed to salvage a draw then Surreys season really is in a complete free-fall isn't .  Even if Currans injury is fairly minor its yet another blow that makes it harder to see how they will turn this around.
Theres quite a few senior players, undoutably on big contracts, who just havent turned up this year in either format.

"free fall"

A bit of an exaggeration, but certainly hasn't started as well as they'd have hoped. Of course, it is always difficult to replicate form of the previous year, and there does seem to be more injuries about the camp this year

At what point, if any, do Kent accelerate and see if they can win it.

And then it's our trip to Guildford next week

Afro wrote:At what point, if any, do Kent accelerate and see if they can win it.

And then it's our trip to Guildford next week

Hi Afro - having been well behind on first innings and lost 3 second innings wicket by lunch today, I'm sure Kent won't try to accelerate and will be happy to settle for the draw.

Yeah, the Guildford game is already looking very important. A draw would probably be fine for you (with 3 wins out of 4 so far) whilst we really have to win (with 0 wins out of 3 unless we produce some magic in today's final session). One thing I would say - you often get a positive result there.

Hi Goochie - Alec Stewart was bigging up Borthwick's leg spin a few weeks ago, saying he had been working on it in the winter. Especially with Sam Curran injured, I would have given him and Jacks a bowl this afternoon, if only to see if one of them could make something happen.

Kent go 6 down as Morkel gets skipper Kuhn!

4 more needed in 26 overs. Not in the bag by any stretch but doable ....

guildfordbat wrote:

Afro wrote:At what point, if any, do Kent accelerate and see if they can win it.

And then it's our trip to Guildford next week

Hi Afro - having been well behind on first innings and lost 3 second innings wicket by lunch today, I'm sure Kent won't try to accelerate and will be happy to settle for the draw.

Yeah, the Guildford game is already looking very important. A draw would probably be fine for you (with 3 wins out of 4 so far) whilst we really have to win (with 0 wins out of 3 unless we produce some magic in today's final session). One thing I would say - you often get a positive result there.

Hi Goochie - Alec Stewart was bigging up Borthwick's leg spin a few weeks ago, saying he had been working on it in the winter. Especially with Sam Curran injured, I would have given him and Jacks a bowl this afternoon, if only to see if one of them could make something happen.

I posted literally seconds before I realised the new ball was due and then Morkel took the 5th wicket. Pretty sure Kent will try and bat it out now. Just thought if they got to 150 needed with 6 wickets left and 2 set batsmen, they might have been tempted

Elgar strikes

sadly only 11 overs left

jimbobgooner wrote:sadly only 11 overs left

Yeah, overs running out. Stevens is often destructive against us but here it's his stickability that is the problem.

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:sadly only 11 overs left

Yeah, overs running out. Stevens is often destructive against us but here it's his stickability that is the problem.

yep the injury to baby face has stopped us from winning this game Guilford

8 down 4.1 overs left

jimbobgooner wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:sadly only 11 overs left

Yeah, overs running out. Stevens is often destructive against us but here it's his stickability that is the problem.

yep the injury to baby face has stopped us from winning this game Guilford

I can't say for sure that we would have won but Curran's injury most definitely has not helped.

If he's still crocked, it also makes selection tricky for the Warks game next week. He brings a balance to the side that no one else really does.

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:sadly only 11 overs left

Yeah, overs running out. Stevens is often destructive against us but here it's his stickability that is the problem.

yep the injury to baby face has stopped us from winning this game Guilford

I can't say for sure that we would have won but Curran's injury most definitely has not helped.

If he's still crocked, it also makes selection tricky for the Warks game next week. He brings a balance to the side that no one else really does.

with 8 down I think we can safely say it did Guildford

Match Drawn

jimbobgooner wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:sadly only 11 overs left

Yeah, overs running out. Stevens is often destructive against us but here it's his stickability that is the problem.

yep the injury to baby face has stopped us from winning this game Guilford

I can't say for sure that we would have won but Curran's injury most definitely has not helped.

If he's still crocked, it also makes selection tricky for the Warks game next week. He brings a balance to the side that no one else really does.

with 8 down I think we can safely say it did Guildford

JimBob - if you ever get to be as old as I am now, you'll understand that the only thing we ever know for sure about this game is that we never know!

Just to add - Kent battled hard today and deserve credit for that.

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:

guildfordbat wrote:

jimbobgooner wrote:sadly only 11 overs left

Yeah, overs running out. Stevens is often destructive against us but here it's his stickability that is the problem.

yep the injury to baby face has stopped us from winning this game Guilford

I can't say for sure that we would have won but Curran's injury most definitely has not helped.

If he's still crocked, it also makes selection tricky for the Warks game next week. He brings a balance to the side that no one else really does.

with 8 down I think we can safely say it did Guildford

JimBob - if you ever get to be as old as I am now, you'll understand that the only thing we ever know for sure about this game is that we never know!

Olly I'm not just talking about the CC which they were favourites for not just based on last season but also other squads generally getting weaker too. But also the RLC which was a total car crash for them.
Granted they have been hit harder by the world cup than others but even then they ooze quality.
Losing Pope has obviously been a huge blow but I look at those senior players like Morkel and Foakes who were massive last year but have stuttered a bit so far this season. Batty too isnt looking up to much, and whilst I guess the plan would've been to have vidri be the first choice they are being hit harder by that injury than might've been expected if he wasn't fadeing.

To be the second worst team in 50 over cricket and already be almost no hopes in the CC by this point is far worse than the biggest pessimists would've predicted.

And when I said freefall I was also indicating that things are continuing to slide rather than get better. Although they weren't far short in the end the loss of Curran is yet another blow, as is ( purely from a short term Surrey persepctive) Tom earning his world cup spot.
I cant imagine morale is too sharp either, and things could go very wrong if players lose faith in the team.

Doomed I tell yah!

Gooseberry wrote:

Batty too isnt looking up to much, and whilst I guess the plan would've been to have vidri be the first choice they are being hit harder by that injury than might've been expected if he wasn't fadeing.

Goose - can't see what that's all about.  Batty will be 42 just after the end of this season.  So who is it that might have been expecting him to show up to this match as a 36 year old?  

But I do agree that with all these injuries and international call ups Surrey are certainly being hit harder than might have been expected if we had been able to call upon Martin Bicknell in peak condition....

Martin Bicknell in any condition would improve matters


Throw in Darren too. 

LondonTiger wrote:Martin Bicknell in any condition would improve matters


Throw in Darren too. 

A more detailed analysis might link our decline in form to exactly the time that Yorks poached Mat Pillans from us.

guildfordbat wrote:

LondonTiger wrote:Martin Bicknell in any condition would improve matters


Throw in Darren too. 

A more detailed analysis might link our decline in form to exactly the time that Yorks poached Mat Pillans from us.

Fair point. We seem to be playing better since his arrival too. As he barely played for you, and has barely played for us he must make a mean cuppa