Wednesday, 14 April 2010

Still no sign of Tremlett....money well spent.

The squad for the game at Hove has been announced on the Surrey website. On the plus side, Rao Iftikhar Anjum is in the side, at the expense of Meaker who was woeful at the Oval. On the down side, they still clearly don't see Tremlett can play a role in the longer form of the game. Oh and Michael Brown is still struggling with a combination of arm and shoulder injuries.

I don't really think its fair to the members to just give "workload" as the reason for his absence, and then not reference it at all in the interview with Chris Adams. I presume we're paying him a pretty penny, and not on a pay-as-you-play basis, I'd appreciate some sort of word on whether they see that he'll ever be able to play a four day game, whether it be as part of a four or five man attack.

Anyway, the squad (and what I think will be the likely team will be) is as follows:

Arun Harinath
Matt Spriegel
Mark Ramprakash
Usman Afzaal
Rory Hamilton-Brown
Steven Davies
Gareth Batty
Andre Nel
Tim Linley
Rao Ifthikar Anjum
Jade Dernbach

12th man: Chris Schofield

Without wanting to be too hard on the players, this is the worst of both worlds. A tail that starts at 7, and Andre Nel is a half decent number 9, but a number 8 he is not. And yet, despite having a five man attack, it doesn't look likely to take 20 wickets! Dernbach is neither quick or consistent enough at the moment to take bunches of wickets and Linley isn't a threat at all in my opinion. Hopefully Rao will add some extra bite though.

I can't help thinking that the extra batsman is what is required here. We need to stave off defeat, however negative that might sound, and our batting lineup doesn't look capable of doing that at the moment.

11 comments:

Ceci Masters said...

Just wondering if the Tremlett "workload" is some Adams Machiavellian plot - get him raring to go and champing on the bit and then release him onto helpless batsmen... always struck me as a bit of a soft lad (Tremlett, not Adams!) and this is perhaps a way to get him stirred up? .... or perhaps Hants just conned you....

GreenJJ said...

I would love to think its all part of a magnificent plot, but I don't think it is. I think perhaps someone took their eye off the ball during his fitness test....

Rishabh said...

Wasn't Schofield > Batty?

Rich Abbott said...

The Tremlett situation is deeply frustrating.

Surrey are in a similar position to England last winter. With the batting looking a little fragile, England doggedly stuck to playing 6 batsmen. Negative? A little, but probably necessary, and justified by a 1-1 series draw in SA. Safety first. I agreed with the piece you wrote earlier in the week - Surrey should have adopted this slightly more negative but surely more sensible approach.

No pressure Rao! Good luck mate...

Rich said...

ARGGGHHHHHH 15/3.

Unbelievable.

i3rooker said...

Already 3 down going at just over a run an over. lol

Think the best thing we can do this season is get out of the T20 group stage and the same with the 40 over and hope for a mid table finish in the LV.

We certainly need another batsman.

Rich said...

How the mighty have fallen...now we're scrabbling around more a mid table finish in Div 2! What a disaster.

Clarkey said...

81/5 FFS. This is a nightmare.

GreenJJ said...

I am amazed, 15/3, now 83/5, I'm scared to refresh the scoreboard! Its a digrace, its embarrassing, how have we managed to get so much worse? I don't know where to look....

Rich Abbott said...

Think your call for an extra batsman have been justified...

GreenJJ said...

Credit to Batty and Schofield, they are partially attoning for the (many) sins of the top order, but I don't think they comprise a bowling attack which can take 20 wickets anyway - like I said before, its the worst of both worlds. Disillusioned!!!

ShareThis