Leicestershire County Cricket Club

[Voll Blau]

That is some serious battling low down.

 

Likely still lose this but that should give is confidence against the best bowling attack we've faced so far.

[Ted Maul]

Quite glad they've enforced the follow on to be honest- a lot of overs in their legs over 2 days already.

[katieakita]

Looking very good at 99-0 104-2 not so good. Hope Hill and Holland do not go all negative and let them get on top, need to keep the scoreboard moving and reduce their lead.

[Wsl]

A good start but let's hope losing both openers is a blip and not the start of a procession. Good bowling for Patel's wicket. Not so great from Weatherald.  

[katieakita]

Good solid cricketer but Holland is not a number 3, scores a few very slowly draining any momentum we have, would put him behind Cox 

[SMX11]

4 minutes ago, katieakita said:

Good solid cricketer but Holland is not a number 3, scores a few very slowly draining any momentum we have, would put him behind Cox 

Agreed, I can only assume no one else wants to bad three because Holland clearly isn't at the level to bat there.

[Sunbury Fox]

1 minute ago, SMX11 said:

Agreed, I can only assume no one else wants to bad three because Holland clearly isn't at the level to bat there.

Rehan will come back at 3, I guess. 

[dmayne7]

Dreadful shot from Hill. Averages aren't everything but you look at the batting lineup and it's pretty poor in that regard. Not really a 'prize' wicket for opposition teams to get

[katieakita]

lost 4 for 30 in 12 overs after such a positive start

[Harpenden Fox]

Our 3 and 4 averaging 22 apiece. Clearly the weak links

[DezFox]

Compete collapse, oh dear 

[Wsl]

We could even lose it today. No way this is anything other than a Notts win now. Still we should fight to take it to the 4th day. 

[James and his giant peach]

Very strange start to the season. Why did we choose to bowl first? And to play well and post big scores away but lose both home games comfortably is a bit odd and a bit worrying. Clearly we will be in a relegation battle and just hope we can pluck a couple of loans to help us. We are a bit short of quality. 

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

2 hours ago, James and his giant peach said:

Very strange start to the season. Why did we choose to bowl first? And to play well and post big scores away but lose both home games comfortably is a bit odd and a bit worrying. Clearly we will be in a relegation battle and just hope we can pluck a couple of loans to help us. We are a bit short of quality. 

Probably over thinking by the coach for the decision to bowl first on a lovely sunny day. 
He has the final say on pitch matters etc  so the buck stops with him if we lose this game.

 

[Sunbury Fox]

Very odd game, this. Losing 6 wickets for 60 in the first innings was bad enough but losing 6 for 32 this afternoon after totally battering them to reach 99-0 at about a run a ball is really poor. I know they're a good team but it feels disappointing to lose comfortably, as I'm sure we will. After all, they even lost one of their key bowlers to injury. Some big lessons to learn moving forward eg not putting teams into bat when the conditions are perfect for batting, for a start! Disappointing to see that Glamorgan are set for a victory. Need to make sure we stay in touch with the other teams likely to be at the bottom. 

Edited 3 May by Sunbury Fox

[Voll Blau]

Bizarre game that we'll have lost at the toss. But I will say it's good to see us fight three times (twice with nat and once with ball) in situations that have really looked completely lost. That's what we need to take from this.

 

Look at the two XIs and who of ours gets in a combined one? Cox maybe as the better keeper and Weatherald over Slater (if only on paper - in reality you'd rely on Slater every day of the week to deliver in the Championship for you). The reality is we're up against a team whose players could mostly make some kind of case for England recognition at the moment.

[Walshy5]

Can't see us winning a game in the CC this season. Bowling simply not good enough at this level. Holland is not a number 3 and Hill is out also out of his depth.

[RizLCFC]

I feel like we’re trying to be a bit too clever and straying from the foundations we built last season. They’ve got to stop overthinking the coin toss and use a bit more common sense. Holland coming in at three is such a daft move. Eskinazi and Tattersall need to be regulars and bat higher, the former is quality but often finds himself batting with the tail, even if that means Hill goes lower, or is dropped for Budinger and Patel moves to three. Not overly impressed with Hull or Davey, Scriven and Alex Green need a look in over them two.

Edited 3 May by RizLCFC

[SemperEadem]

Scriven’s old man us not happy about the news regarding Richard Rae.

[Voll Blau]

1 hour ago, RizLCFC said:

I feel like we’re trying to be a bit too clever and straying from the foundations we built last season. They’ve got to stop overthinking the coin toss and use a bit more common sense. Holland coming in at three is such a daft move. Eskinazi and Tattersall need to be regulars and bat higher, the former is quality but often finds himself batting with the tail, even if that means Hill goes lower, or is dropped for Budinger and Patel moves to three. Not overly impressed with Hull or Davey, Scriven and Alex Green need a look in over them two.

Agree with a lot of that and I'm a Budinger fanboy, but the current opening partnership is the thing in our batting that's delivering right now. It'd be daft to change that while we have Weatherald.

 

Holland below Cox and everyone else up one. Gives Hill a purpose as the calming presence after Patel and Weatherald too, rather than just being the backup for Holland doing that job.

[Mark 'expert' Lawrenson]

14 hours ago, Walshy5 said:

Can't see us winning a game in the CC this season. Bowling simply not good enough at this level. Holland is not a number 3 and Hill is out also out of his depth.

They must of thought the quick bowlers were going to be good enough for Division One hence the signing of a spin bowler even though Grace Road rarely produces anything for spin bowlers. 
 

[Walshy5]

18 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

They must of thought the quick bowlers were going to be good enough for Division One hence the signing of a spin bowler even though Grace Road rarely produces anything for spin bowlers. 
 

I reckon the thinking behind signing Ajaz Patel was because of Ahmeds Limited availability and Trevaskis being injury prone. But yes the seam attack is nowhere near good enough to be competitive at this level.

Edited 4 May by Walshy5

[everton carr]

25 minutes ago, Walshy5 said:

I reckon the thinking behind signing Ajaz Patel was because of Ahmeds Limited availability and Trevaskis being injury prone. But yes the seam attack is nowhere near good enough to be competitive at this level.

Glad you worded it seam bowling attack and not pace bowling attack.

[everton carr]

14 hours ago, SemperEadem said:

Scriven’s old man us not happy about the news regarding Richard Rae.

Probably because Rae said Scriven was a future England player last year.

[Beagle]

Richard Rae says goodbye to the airwaves today and I for one will miss him. I should like to thank him for his excellent service over the years and wish him well for the future (and hopefully for an unexpected return to the mic).