Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
Sods

Leicestershire County Cricket Club

By Sods, in General Football and Sport

Recommended Posts

Cake

Cake

Posted
Posted

Nixon is responsible ultimately. 

 

Rhodes has no form at all. Could have played Klein extra bowler and a better batsman than most. 

 

Poor management to put him in before Hill and Mike. What about Swindells?????

 

Mike in my opinion has way more potential than Taylor but never gets a decent crack at it.

 

If you batred Mike and Rhodes at 5 all season im betting Mike Scores more and quicker. 

 

Im still really pissed off to be honest. We put up with alot. Pay our money and on the whole take it on the chin. 

 

Last night was to much. 

  • Like 2
Guest Lako42

Guest Lako42

Posted
Posted

Just to say that Derbyshire did bowl and field well. They were tight. 

K1FOX

K1FOX

Posted
Posted

Tbf we were 4 down for 70 odd and I'm sure like the rest of us even Nixon didn't think these two would be in that long. Ideally one would have got out with three overs to go where 2 big blows from mike or hill would have comfortably seen us home.

Cake

Cake

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, K1FOX said:

Tbf we were 4 down for 70 odd and I'm sure like the rest of us even Nixon didn't think these two would be in that long. Ideally one would have got out with three overs to go where 2 big blows from mike or hill would have comfortably seen us home.

Fair enough but why pick Rhodes any way? He has no form? His stats are awful and he has probably got worse? 

 

Swindells not even in the side? I dont think anyone except his Father would say Rhodes is a better player than swindells? 

 

Evans would be a better bet, Klein even playing just as a batsman. 

 

Having Dearden and Rhodes on contract is poor management. 

Edited by Cake
CrawlingFox

CrawlingFox

Posted
Posted

I just don't know what Rhodes role is.

 

He's supposed to be an all rounder but we don't bowl him and his bowling record is terrible.

 

His batting record suggests a slow scoring first class batsman with a couple good knocks in List A cricket but a dire T20 record.

 

Dearden may have promise, but he scores so slowly and is yet to deliver.

  • Haha 1
Guest Lako42

Guest Lako42

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

Massive test tomorrow against Notts, can’t afford any mistakes against them, no slow scoring, bowlers have to be spot on and fielding needs to be sharp. It’s doubtful we can qualify but a win against the big time Charlie’s would make this week a little more palatable.

Really was looking forward to this one before the last calamity. Feel like it will be a wasted evening watching now.

Guest Lako42

Guest Lako42

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Mark 'expert' Lawrenson said:

I’ll watch it.

The Notts batting line up is ridiculous, Samit bats about 7 or 8! We’ll need 180+ to have a chance

No chance then

CrawlingFox

CrawlingFox

Posted
Posted (edited)

I don't know, the Delaney-Lilley-Ackermann axis of our batting only needs two out of three to fire to see us win matches given the ability of the three. Of course the nature of T20 is that this won't always happen.

 

Unfortunately the rest of our batting leaves little room for promise when the above three don't fire. I'd like to see a top 6 of:

 

Welch

Delaney

Lilley

Ackermann

Swindells

Hill

 

I think that's as good as we will get and is an improvement over any lineup containing Dearden and Rhodes who just aren't suited to the format.

 

Bottom 5 of:

 

Mike

Klein

Parkinson

Davis

Griffiths

 

Mike has looked ok with the bat this season, not sure he's ideal at 7 but at least he will swing. With Lilley and Ackermann able to bowl we could also drop a bowler from the above and include Dearden with a remit to hit out or get out at 7 though frankly if he's needed we will probably be on our way to losing anyway. Wouldn't mind a look at Bowley either but seems unlikely given we have 3 other spin options in the squad and certain to play.

Edited by CrawlingFox
Cake

Cake

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, CrawlingFox said:

I don't know, the Delaney-Lilley-Ackermann axis of our batting only needs two out of three to fire to see us win matches given the ability of the three. Of course the nature of T20 is that this won't always happen.

 

Unfortunately the rest of our batting leaves little room for promise when the above three don't fire. I'd like to see a top 6 of:

 

Welch

Delaney

Lilley

Ackermann

Swindells

Hill

 

I think that's as good as we will get and is an improvement over any lineup containing Dearden and Rhodes who just aren't suited to the format.

 

Bottom 5 of:

 

Mike

Klein

Parkinson

Davis

Griffiths

 

Mike has looked ok with the bat this season, not sure he's ideal at 7 but at least he will swing. With Lilley and Ackermann able to bowl we could also drop a bowler from the above and include Dearden with a remit to hit out or get out at 7 though frankly if he's needed we will probably be on our way to losing anyway. Wouldn't mind a look at Bowley either but seems unlikely given we have 3 other spin options in the squad and certain to play.

Think that makes sense. So probably wont do that. 

 

Klein is also a good striker of a ball 

  • Like 2
Zorrovolpe

Zorrovolpe

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, Cake said:

Think that makes sense. So probably wont do that. 

 

Klein is also a good striker of a ball 

Even though he's clearly on the decline, Cosgrove has been a real miss. Next year, it's essential that we recruit an experienced middle order batsman for all formats of the game. Currently, "certain players" are getting the no.5/6 spot almost by default, with no real competition.

  • Like 1
Walshy5

Walshy5

Posted
Posted (edited)

Klein in for Mike?????? Can anyone get their head round that one? It should be Rhodes dropped! He's barely Village standard.

Edited by Walshy5
  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...