• Registered: 05-01-2008
  • Posts: 707

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

I may be wrong but virtually all of the other counties have their spin options covered anyway.  Tom Smith left but is generally only second choice behind Udal, although he will most likely be first choice next year.

Anyway, probably Sussex's most dominant performance of the summer so far and promotion is all but guaranteed now.  Very pleased with Hatchett and Brown, who should improve further if they get a consistent run in the team between now and the end of the season.  Well done to Corey too, who has been a good asset for the club these past few years.

  • Registered: 31-05-2009
  • Posts: 640

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

KE -dont see this as any big deal at all, even if true, which it probably isnt

Sweatysock - when the management uses an official website - and deliberately pushes out information that isnt true - to gain advantage in a match - it moves gamesmanship to an unaaceptable level.  If you dont think it is a big deal I wonder how far we have to sink to worry you.  This is not players ball tampering or sledging - this is the management. on this site.

Im totally mystified what advantage Sussex could get from making Leicester think Monty wasnt playing

.

Its not that difficult KimJones - you tell everyone that your spinner who is coming off a 5fer is very unlikely to play due to injury - so that they dont go to so much trouble to prepare a wicket that wont take spin.  Leicester probably worked it out - after all we werent clever enough to draft Beer into the squad as cover and didnt bother to invent what might be wrong with Monty.  Great result - and it made no difference in the end - but if Surrey or Hampshire had done that trick we would have called them all sorts of things.  We dont need to behave like that - this is cricket after all - some would say its not.

Sore shins SPSL11 - read your own comment about the things you see in the press.

  • Registered: 05-01-2008
  • Posts: 707

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

He could just have had sore shins KE.  Maybe they should have put up his medical examination for all to see but perhaps they thought that life is too short and nobody would jump to silly conspiracy theories

  • Registered: 30-06-2008
  • Posts: 2,365

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

daveshark wrote:

I may be wrong but virtually all of the other counties have their spin options covered anyway.  Tom Smith left but is generally only second choice behind Udal, although he will most likely be first choice next year.

Anyway, probably Sussex's most dominant performance of the summer so far and promotion is all but guaranteed now.  Very pleased with Hatchett and Brown, who should improve further if they get a consistent run in the team between now and the end of the season.  Well done to Corey too, who has been a good asset for the club these past few years.

Theres one who doesnt  mad

Last edited by KimJones (01-08-2010 15:48:38)

The Kookaburra Man
  • Registered: 05-11-2009
  • Posts: 4,296

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

mike-by-the-sea wrote:

great stuff.  delighted for nash. top bloke. lovely batsman and so pleased he has turned so many promising starts into a big 'un.

q: out of interest, what sort of pace / style is hatchett (compared to someone we all know or knew) ???

thought:  if we lose yards, wright and mattie to england again (as seems likely) i wonder if we can borrow a batsman from one of the first division counties for a month ?  an exerienced bladesman who might have fallen out of favour elsewhere???  we are a bit short me thinks.  or time to dust off hoppo?

Mike,
           sample the delights of Sussex Tv and you will see interviews with Paperboy AND of course Hatchett and his bowling...looks like a young Jason Lewry...not got the control but does have the late inswinger which got the wickets

  • Registered: 29-05-2010
  • Posts: 2,247

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

We're more than covered in the spin department, that's the problem.  Beer looks quality and he needs to play, we're talking about his career.  How's he gonna get in? 

If true, the Panesar thing is a bit low.  Doubt it made any difference though.

  • Registered: 30-06-2008
  • Posts: 2,365

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

Kent Exile wrote:

KE -dont see this as any big deal at all, even if true, which it probably isnt

Sweatysock - when the management uses an official website - and deliberately pushes out information that isnt true - to gain advantage in a match - it moves gamesmanship to an unaaceptable level.  If you dont think it is a big deal I wonder how far we have to sink to worry you.  This is not players ball tampering or sledging - this is the management. on this site.

Im totally mystified what advantage Sussex could get from making Leicester think Monty wasnt playing

.

Its not that difficult KimJones - you tell everyone that your spinner who is coming off a 5fer is very unlikely to play due to injury - so that they dont go to so much trouble to prepare a wicket that wont take spin.  Leicester probably worked it out - after all we werent clever enough to draft Beer into the squad as cover and didnt bother to invent what might be wrong with Monty.  Great result - and it made no difference in the end - but if Surrey or Hampshire had done that trick we would have called them all sorts of things.  We dont need to behave like that - this is cricket after all - some would say its not.

Sore shins SPSL11 - read your own comment about the things you see in the press.

But Henderson is Leicesters most effective bowler with 38 wickets at 21 (better figures than Monty). Why would they want to hamper him - whether or not Monty was playing? Also, if Sussex supposed plan had worked and Leicester had been "duped" into leaving a wicket that did take spin, they'd have picked Naik in addition to Henderson. Naik has 20 wickets in 5 matches at a better average than Henderson or Panesar - so I dont see how this would have helped Sussex at all.

What am I missing here?

Last edited by KimJones (01-08-2010 15:49:41)

The Kookaburra Man
  • Registered: 19-06-2008
  • Posts: 858

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

softandfluffy wrote:

jakarta,

Often, there is no smoke without fire.

If you're Will Beer in 2009 and you read in the media how much potential you have; listen to the 'Sky' commentary team and hear their rosy comments about you. Then, come 2010, you are playing less first team games than the previous year, because Sussex have signed a former "star spinner"; how must you feel? Add to that the comments from family and friends, asking the question: "Why aren't you playing more for Sussex?"

It is a delicate balancing act Robbo is presently playing between 3 spinners, who all deserve more 1st XI appearances. Monty gets the championship; Beer gets the T20; Rayner the Pro40 and the odd championship match; but now the T20 is over, what happens to Beer?

One can understand how these unsubstantiated rumours start.

You said it so why perpetuate it? This would be the same Will Beer who signed a three year contract in the winter and who Robbo is nurturing for a long career at Sussex as Mushy's successor? roll  He is a fabulous talent and as a spinner has his best years way ahead of him. If he is to go the distance, he should be left alone to develope in the right way without the distraction of silly rumours and media hype.

"Imagine - me reprimanded for NOT appealing.  The irony!" Matt Prior after 'stumping' Sachin Tendulkar
  • From: Hove
  • Registered: 04-12-2009
  • Posts: 2,423

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

LTLH,

"As rumours grow of Will Beer's disenchantment and his desire to find a new club..."

If I had known this sentence might cause a hornets' nest amongst some posters, I wouldn't have written it. I had been reading through the Sussex 606 posts and came across a particular thread discussing the possibility. Also, this lead me to consider why Panesar was signed by Sussex, given we already had two promising young spinners; that Monty needed to gain at least 50 wickets this season to make this signing justified.

As you state Will Beer signed a 3 year contract in December last year. He commented at the time, "I am very excited about the next three years at the club and continuing the club's recent success. I want to build on my first year of first-team cricket and am really looking forward to working with Monty Panesar - using his experience as a spinner to drive my game forward."

"Now the stumps have asked for pads!"
(Aussie radio commentator Kerry O'Keeffe as Rahul Dravid, bowled six times in seven innings during the present series, walks out to bat at the Adelaide Oval)
  • From: Arundel
  • Registered: 25-08-2004
  • Posts: 4,438

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

i hope we play beer, brown, aga,  rayner, gatting and thornley in all the remaining pro-40 matches.  they all need the experience.

life member - you're stuck with me!

mike-by-the-sea's Website

  • Registered: 12-04-2006
  • Posts: 909

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

I was interested in Robbo's comments about the pitches in div 2: that there are far more results pitches and Leicester was a three day pitch. It's worth factoring this into how we assess the batsmen this season (and we are doing relatively well on bonus points).

  • Registered: 15-04-2007
  • Posts: 1,260

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

KimJones wrote:

But Henderson is Leicesters most effective bowler with 38 wickets at 21 (better figures than Monty). Why would they want to hamper him - whether or not Monty was playing? Also, if Sussex supposed plan had worked and Leicester had been "duped" into leaving a wicket that did take spin, they'd have picked Naik in addition to Henderson. Naik has 20 wickets in 5 matches at a better average than Henderson or Panesar - so I dont see how this would have helped Sussex at all.

What am I missing here?

Maybe Leicester weren't clever enough to realise that Henderson is their most effective bowler.  wink

  • Registered: 08-04-2007
  • Posts: 4,102

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

mike-by-the-sea wrote:

i hope we play beer, brown, aga,  rayner, gatting and thornley in all the remaining pro-40 matches.  they all need the experience.

If you substitute the name Aga with Hatchett I would agree with you.

  • Registered: 05-07-2008
  • Posts: 985

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

Rags should be given whats left of the season to either prove his worth at first class level as i think thornley has played well enough to show what he can do over the first half of the season so now lets see if rags has what it takes to play at this level or not,SHARKEY how else do you find out ,or you would only give certain players a chance Thank god its robbo and yards and not you.

Last edited by wiseman (03-08-2010 07:07:48)

  • Registered: 13-10-2007
  • Posts: 1,105

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

going back to the monty thing......is this really a big deal????

we're told monty was an injury doubt with sore shins. would Leicester have had time to alter their strip or the inclination to do so with two/three days' notice? unless they use a completely different one, the only thing they can do is decide how green it is going to be. well, apparently it was pretty green on day one, so no advantage for Monty anyway. And, remember, we also had Ollie in the squad as well so, even if Monty hadn't played, we would have had cover.

secondly, the only 'evidence' to suggest Monty wasn't injured is Kent Exile's comment that a mate who knows a bloke who works part-time at Bexhill told him so. A mate of mine with good contacts at the club tells me he was a fitness doubt. But, hey, who do you believe? He may be right, I may be wrong.

even if it was misinformation, so what. It made no difference to Leicester or the result. And if Surrey or Hampshire do it, I couldn't give a hoot.

I believe in sport you play to your strengths not the opposition's. And, right now, I'm basking in the glory of another Sussex victory rather than trying to find negatives out of what is clearly a positive, and hopefully pivotal, moment in our season.

Last edited by BananaRana (03-08-2010 09:43:05)

  • Registered: 05-11-2009
  • Posts: 4,296

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

BananaRana wrote:

going back to the monty thing......is this really a big deal????

we're told monty was an injury doubt with sore shins. would Leicester have had time to alter their strip or the inclination to do so with two/three days' notice? unless they use a completely different one, the only thing they can do is decide how green it is going to be. well, apparently it was pretty green on day one, so no advantage for Monty anyway. And, remember, we also had Ollie in the squad as well so, even if Monty hadn't played, we would have had cover.

secondly, the only 'evidence' to suggest Monty wasn't injured is Kent Exile's comment that a mate who knows a bloke who works part-time at Bexhill told him so. A mate of mine with good contacts at the club tells me he was a fitness doubt. But, hey, who do you believe? He may be right, I may be wrong.

even if it was misinformation, so what. It made no difference to Leicester or the result. And if Surrey or Hampshire do it, I couldn't give a hoot.

I believe in sport you play to your strengths not the opposition's. And, right now, I'm basking in the glory of another Sussex victory rather than trying to find negatives out of what is clearly a positive, and hopefully pivotal, moment in our season.


BananaRana...surely we read it in the Argus written by Bruce.Conspiracy theorists must believe that the club made it up and got Bruce to publish it,when they know it wasnt true.I dont believe that is likely and Monty was always in the squad(Doubt Leics read the Argus anyway ).To deliberately mislead they would give a false squad excluding Monty and pick him at the last minute.

Bruces Blog

Good morning everyone. It's Thursday so this must be Leicester and welcome to coverage of Sussex's Championship tussle with Leicestershire here at Grace Road. Teams and toss to come at 10.30am but it looks as if Monty Panesar, who had been a doubt because of sore shins, is going to play. He is bowling on a practice pitch as we speak. Ben Brown doing keeping drills so he looks as if he has got the nod ahead of Andy Hodd. All to be confirmed shortly

  • Registered: 13-10-2007
  • Posts: 1,105

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

exactly TC. couldn't agree more. If you wanted to fool someone, just tell them he's not travelling.
even then, i'm not sure how much leicester would change their plans anyway.

  • Registered: 05-11-2009
  • Posts: 4,296

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

Derbyshire obviously dont learn from us either...they have won the toss and batted...eight down at lunch with Noddy"Imran" Malik 7-5-7-4

  • From: Sunny Bognor Regis
  • Registered: 23-08-2004
  • Posts: 7,748

Re: CC Leics vs Sussex 27July

Anyone who's been to Grace Road will realise that this must have been a massive hit......

From George Dobell's Cricinfo Leicester v Surrey report:
The most impressive batting of the day, however, came from 20-year-old debutant Jason Roy. He became the first Surrey man to score a Twenty20 century when he thrashed 100 from 56 balls against Kent earlier this season and here hit three sixes and nine fours in his 76 from just 65 balls. One of the sixes, a lofted on drive off the left-arm spin of Claude Henderson, cleared The Cricketers pub.

From 2014 I have doubts that being a Sussex fan will continue to be the best sporting pleasure on the planet.