Window Cleaner

Still's reputation is built basically on one season at Reims. He had two lightning fast wingers, both Japanese and Balogun to finish it off. Then he went and got coaching certificates and the magic disappeared.

Shit keeping at it's zenith.

Well of course you did. For our two seasons in League 1, particularly the second, we had one of the finest teams ever to grace that division, only some inept management stopped us winning the title by a wide margin. A side stuffed full of potential internationals, some of whom would go on to play in World Cup competitions, and top sides..

So, business as usual then! I actually saw the game yesterday, bit of a rarety nowadays, it was on BeIn. We did pretty well early on and then City started pressuring us. The rest is history. Bristol defend pretty well and their numbers 10 and 11 are pretty handy. Got the impression that Still doesn't know what to do with the players that he has. Doesn't surprise me, saw his Reims side at Clermont once, two Japanese wingers that he just had to point in the right direction, but it was pretty good stuff really. Saw his Lens side as well, wasn't pulling up any trees there really. I'd say that him getting his coaching certificate changed his style of play, didn't have it at Reims, they got fined 25000 euros a match for it.

Turner never plays, think he's a sort of permanent injury case. Baker is an England contract case and might not be available much. Wheal, don't know why he's still here. Doubt it's possible but i'd like to see us try to tempt that young fella from Worcs, Brookes. Bowls well, bats well.

This is right, we need an opener, for me Middleton isn't good enough and a number 3 or 4, Gubbins can drop down one place if needs be. Also a decent bowler, I just don't want to see Wheal opening the bowling come next april.

We'll have to see, but I saw most of the game and the low scores looked to be due to shîte batting and a brilliant leg spinner who'd played virtually no recent cricket, thus not worn out or jaded, on a helpful wicket rather than any fundamental pitch defect.

Yes they can, thanks to the Tykes, I'll not criticise that dump at Harrogate for a while !!

But soft ! Durham have collapsed, 2 wickets left, will Yorkshire finish them off, we'll see.

Wouldn't mind so much if we, as they, got points docked for spending money they didn't have to try to create a good side. We got points docked for a crap pitch, something we've also done in the recent past. Now if we'd gone out ground for some of the girl's games or had an Isle of Wight festival or something that might not have happened. It's pretty clear to every man and his dog that there are too many matches being played at the Utilita. 7 CCC, 7 T20 plus eventual knock outs, 4 ODC, 4 Hundred games, all the girl's equivalents, don't think they played routine games on the main pitch before , plus the internationals. So probably about 35 games? in a dry summer.

Practically, Yorks don't have a big enough lead to make whatever happens up there of any importance. Serves us right, poor management and poor performances from all but a couple of players throughout the season. When you're not up to scratch in D1 you get found out sooner or later. Still doubt it makes much difference to the owners, no money to be made in County Championship cricket and players of the correct level no doubt cost quite a lot, probably why we've had 10 different overseas players in the 3 formats this year.

What like Barker you mean ? Probably didn't want to stay though after we ballsed up his TUA (or so they said) Some vintage Barker would have been handy in this match. Better bowler than Wheal and Currie, better bat than both as well.

Ah right, cos if a certain amount of games was a pre-requirement then Surrey couldn't play Chahar. That would have been handy. Still doesn't explain Barker though, perhaps he's not fit. Currie hardly bowled and looked crap with the bat this afternoon.

Because they can't handle a really good bowler like Chahar on a wicket that suits him. Dawson decided he was going route 1 which didn't help. Gubbins and Brown aren't top level batters any more. They couldn't handle Jack Leach last week either.

That's the difference between red ball and limited overs cricket. If a bowler has got his hooks into you he can just keep bowling over after over until you do something stupid rather than be taken off to bowl later as in the limited overs stuff.

Barker might have been a better option than Currie. Perhaps he just didn't fancy it, not looked great since he came back.

We can only hope for a sudden alteration in the weather, some continual drizzle punctuated by a tropical storm or two. Seriously though this is down to the senior players, Gubbins,Brown and Dawson. We had a start and then the 3 of them contributed virtually nothing. As for the rest, we just proved once more that we just cannot handle good bowling, be it pace or spin. That's a coaching problem and to my advice they should all follow Birrell out of the door.

So, 181 to get. Orr just has to stop following balls down the leg side. It's a new tactic, bowling across left-handers and it works a treat with him. Nearly got him again in the first over.

Averages, like all statistics, can be deceptive. He's only scored 753 runs in 22 innings but with 5 no's it boosts his average. When you take all the innings into account his average is a bit above 34, not bad in such but 753 runs including ac 165 not out (I think) brings him back to 588 runs from 21 innings, so an average of 28, nowhere near good enough for a high-order batter. Mind you the others are no better. Our batting is a disaster zone and 12 bonus points from 14 just goes to prove that.

With Brown batting at 5 instead of his correct place at 7 or 8 it just goes to show how short of real middle order batters we are. Because the great hopes like Prest just haven't developed correctly. Too many all rounders really. Nothing much for our spinners on this track today.

Doubt it, not our fault if Surrey couldn't be arsed to bat correctly, they chose to bat first. Quite a good start for us, Gubbins has just been bowled though. Lawrence's action should be banned for impersonating a carnaval nut job !!

Didn't see the game on Saturday but batting first in a rain reduced limited overs game rarely leads to success. Seems to be the same problem we've had all season, we're a decent bowler short for one reason or another. As I said during the first game actually played of the season, my preferred dose of Wheal is absolutely none whatsoever. A very undisciplined bowler, short and wide most of the time. He should be cut loose to go and play for Scotland second XI or something. As far as the point's deduction is concerned, well we've got previous as they say in some circles. I think we may need to reassess the number of matches played at the Utilita. There are obviously far too many for a quality wicket each time.

Who knows if Vince would have done any better, pretty poor season he's had. We went cheap options everywhere and now we may pay the full price of that in the 4 day game. Still we'll probably win on Sunday. .

Started well, Somerset 5 down for less than 100 but now they're piling on the runs. Bowling now looks painfully inadequate.

Well up to a point. But as there was no way that England were going to win this match it made sort of sense to let him keep plugging away to see if there were any possible grounds to select him at any time in the near future. There are far better and more consistent bowlers available than Baker and I doubt he'll be bowling much in the near future for England, well not against any serious batting side anyway. This was just an old school tie, maybe selection. On a different note, weather at Durham tomorrow doesn't look too bad, bit nippy in the evening perhaps.