Positive draw - but not all positive

I've not been able to follow much of the match today so I won't presume to comment too deeply but if the Cricinfo report, and this passage in particular, are to be believed, Chris Adams has some issues:

"Surrey didn't really deserve the win. Tremlett's last spell apart, their bowling was toothless and their fielding quite awful. For young men, the likes of Arun Harinath and Tom Lancefield ('Lance-can't-field' as one comedian in the press box puts it) are remarkably ponderous and unreliable."

We have been told numerous times that the fielding is a real focus for the players, and rightly so, I've whinged on and on about the number of catches we drop a number of times.  So where is this improvement?  How many times do we have to drop a catch, or fumble in the field or let an easy stop turn into a boundary before some actual improvement is in evidence?

There is a sizeable coaching staff and yet our fielding is the butt of many jokes it would seem.  We will never close out games, like there was the opportunity to do today, if we can't take our catches or create pressure in the field.  All the best sides are on the money all the time in the field, and clearly we are not.  In some instances, particularly in the limited overs games this season our fielding has been better, but as in seemingly every other area its two steps forward and three steps back.  This has to be urgently addressed by Adams and his many underlings.

That aside, there were positives to take from this draw.  The batting was much improved from recent matches, OK we relied partially on another hundred from the irrepressible Ramprakash but Wilson showed real maturity and Roy showed a glimpse of the talent that he has with exactly the sort of innings that was needed at the time.