a good point, Nick. If you are one of 5 or 6 batsmen you can get away with a dry patch. If you're the only spinner you can't hide as much. It would be nice if we got back to the days where two spinners could survive in a team. I remember Surrey with Salisbury and Saqlain. Not sure if it will happen this year, even with the push to promote spin, but i can't help thinking teams will go the Essex direction (as Sussex did) and play a batting all rounder who spins it a little
by dave7/12/2016 1:28:52 PM
Dave - can't help thinking the same thing. Teams seem to only want a couple of bunnies max in the team, the pressure is therefore on keepers and to a lesser extent spinners to be able to bat.
by Haystack_Jnr7/12/2016 1:32:36 PM
Ironically a decent spinner is often the best placed to prise out stubborn tailenders.
by Haystack_Jnr7/12/2016 1:33:44 PM
Think some sides will pick two spinners for some games as the summer hits August, problem is with such little Yorkshire are playing two at the moment although I doubt they would be if they had more batting options.
by nickcricket7/12/2016 1:33:49 PM
Would be interesting to look year on year how many runs the designated keeper scores because would suspect its lower this year than in some recent years but maybe I think that just because Hodd isn't scoring any for Yorkshire
by nickcricket7/12/2016 1:35:39 PM
Both are almost playing as batsmen for Yorkshire. I do hope that a) the weather improves (for many reasons!) and b) teams take the gamble and play two spinners. Actually, i suppose Surrey still do with Batty and Ansari
by dave7/12/2016 1:36:06 PM
dave - They have bowled 20% of the overs so far
by nickcricket7/12/2016 1:37:18 PM
Dave - would they play Ansari if he was Chris Martinesque with the bat ?
by Haystack_Jnr7/12/2016 1:38:30 PM
No, probably not, Haystack. Nick, or 10% each which doesn't suggest they are there as bowlers first.
by dave7/12/2016 1:40:22 PM
Allenby gets a life
by Geoff Eisenhauer7/12/2016 1:44:27 PM
UPDATE: Match start delayed (Inspection at 3:30pm), Warwickshire 131/3 (42.2 ov, trail by 400 - 1st inns) v Hampshire
by ESPNcricinfo Live7/12/2016 1:45:07 PM
Rhodes could have played ahead of Rafiq and probably would have if he was a bunny but Yorkshire clearly wanted his bowling, he has bowled 6 overs and only Willey has bowled more
by nickcricket7/12/2016 1:45:54 PM
@GeoffEisenhauer What happened?
by Yaacov7/12/2016 1:46:52 PM
TEAM 100: Somerset 101/3 (30.1 ov, trail by 44 - 2nd inns) v Middlesex J Allenby 24* (46) ME Trescothick 42* (87)
by ESPNcricinfo Live7/12/2016 1:47:09 PM
@Yaacov C&B chance to Podmore. Medium difficult.
by Geoff Eisenhauer7/12/2016 1:47:49 PM
Big noises that bat size regulations are going to come in, personally I don't care about bat sizes I agree with Warner its about the pitches.
by nickcricket7/12/2016 1:48:01 PM
UPDATE: Match delayed by rain (Further inspection at 3:30pm), Surrey 164/5 (49.4 ov, won the toss) v Yorkshire
by ESPNcricinfo Live7/12/2016 1:48:23 PM
@GeoffEisenhauer Ok, not a regulation chance then.
by Yaacov7/12/2016 1:49:11 PM
UPDATE: Match delayed by rain (Play due to start at 3:05pm), Northamptonshire 16/1 (4 ov, target: 454) v Worcs
by ESPNcricinfo Live7/12/2016 1:49:32 PM
@Yaacov No but he had a few grabs at it.
by Geoff Eisenhauer7/12/2016 1:54:33 PM
i don't really have an onion on bat size, other than it seems to follow the trend of rules going in batsmen's favour. It does make me think though, how utterly unbelievable it would be if the bowlers union decided that they should change the balls and make them bigger/harder/bouncier etc