Blown away in three days

It's difficult to know what to say after a game like that. You will see from my previous blog that we once were in a good position in this match, we'd knocked over Kent for what seemed like a below par 266 and already had 50 in the bank for the loss of no wicket. Thereafter, the numbers are staggering.

Having played out 12 overs on day one for 50 runs and no wicket, Surrey only batted a further 60 overs in the entire match, losing 20 wickets for 181 runs. Abject does not even begin to describe it. I accept that conditions weren't ideal but such was the brevity of both our innings, Kent cannot have had markedly dissimilar conditions to deal with and they came out on top by a margin of 266 runs - not a small victory by any standards.

So, I thought, if I was finding it hard to know what to say, maybe Chris Adams will do better, ladies and gentlemen I give you exhibit A:



Right then, what do we have: "there were some positives to take from the game." Check. "they're disappointed, I'm disappointed." Check. "we must move on, we can't dwell on defeats." Check. "we need to come back with a better plan next time." Check.

Anything about how disappointing performances like these must be for the members? About how frustrating it must be for the supporters to watch the team be crushed by a side we should at least be competing with, and probably beating? No, not a bit of it - am I just being naive? Some of the performances this year, this game and both innings against Middlesex at Lord's spring most immediately to mind have exposed a team with no shortage of ability but who at times seem to have lack of fight, apparently a lack of willing to knuckle down and play the situation. In Kent's first innings their batsman played out more balls than ours did in both innings. Just for good measure, the same applies to Kent's second innings as well. In fact, Rob Key on his own played out 33 more deliveries than our entire side managed in the second innings.

The match report on Cricinfo is a (almost exclusively) humiliating litany of milestones and records:

• Darren Stevens took a career best 7-21 in the first innings
• Stevens backed that up with 4-49 in the second innings to finish with his first ever 10 wicket haul.
• James Tredwell recorded season's-best figures of 5-35 in the second innings.
• In carrying his bat for the first time in four years Rob Key scored his 20th century for Kent at the St. Lawrence ground.
• Surrey capitulated inside two hours on the third day for 104, our lowest Championship total in a decade.
• To his enormous credit, Tim Linley bagged his 50th wicket of the season, a lone bright spot and incredibly the first Surrey batsman to achieve that feat in five seasons.

Of course we all recognise that this is a team in transition, a team full of youngsters bursting with promise but short on experience.  But the most frustrating thing about defeats like this is that it's not because we're not good enough, we are good enough and at times this season we have shown that but in the Championship nowhere near often enough.  How many times will we fall back on the same old excuse of not having experience and pledging to "go away and come back with a better plan next time"?  You have to now concede that promotion hopes look to be behind us for yet another year.  If Derbyshire knock off the remaining 80 runs they need to beat Gloucestershire we will drop to fifth and we're only 15 points from dropping behind Glamorgan to 7th place.  This cannot be allowed to happen.

Four games remain and as Adams says in the above video, we need to win at least three and probably four to maintain any promotion hopes - that would be an unprecedented (but not unwelcome!) run of form.  More realistically we need to give the table a veneer of respectability from Surrey's perspective, and give the members something to be proud of in four day cricket.

Surrey need to take their chance

Chris Adams has named a 12 man squad for the Championship game with Kent starting at Canterbury tomorrow, Chris Jordan maintains his place after being recalled for the CB40 game last week.

As I said in my last blog, this game has to be seen as a great opportunity to grab maximum points, being against a side who have won just two of their 11 Championship fixtures this season and who were knocked out of the Twenty20 Cup at the weekend. The squad and likely XI is as follows:

Hamilton-Brown
Davies
Ramprakash
De Bruyn
Maynard
Roy
Ansari
Batty
Arafat
Linley
Dernbach

12th man: Jordan

So, the same team as for the two wicket win at Gloucestershire. If the pitch has a touch of green there is a strong possibility that Chris Jordan may play instead of Zafar Ansari and he'll need to grab the chance with both hands if it comes his way. Again there is no one in the top six who looks horribly out of form, throughout the season everyone has looked in good touch but only de Bruyn has scored heavily and consistently. Davies hasn't scored the weight of runs we've come to expect but he always looks capable, Roy too is due a score.

The attack, short of Stuart Meaker who is still on Lions duty, could do with Jade Dernbach finding his best form. He's proved an excellent containing option much of the time this season particularly with the new ball but he has just 20 wickets under his belt, at almost 40 apiece. Contrast that with Tim Linley who has 44 at 21 - needless to say much will rest on his shoulders this week, again. I've given up trying to predict which Yasir Arafat will show, but we could really use the deadly version. Canterbury doesn't seem to have heavily favoured spinners or seamers particularly this season so I would expect Ansari and Batty to play, with de Bruyn to fill in where necessary. One thing notable about this season is that Dernbach, Arafat and Batty have had the odd good match here and there, while Linley has been consistently excellent he's not had consistently excellent back up. That's what we need in this game.

The man who tops Kent's batting and bowling averages, and Surrey tormentor-in-chief of late, Azhar Mahmood has not been named in their squad - he's only played four Championship games all season. But that doesn't make them a weak side, Robbie Joseph was poor at the Oval, returning 1-77 off 10 overs but he remains a threat, as do Wahab Riaz and Simon Cook. Rob Key likes to bat against us and in his last 4 Championship innings he averages 72 - including that special hundred at the Oval. Van Jaarsveld, Denly, Northeast and Stevens are also more than capable, although they have only returned three hundreds between them in 2011 (van Jaarsveld is yet to register a ton this season, don't count against him doing so against us!).

I think Hamilton-Brown will look at this game as an opportunity to attack. At the Oval we scored our runs at 4.6 runs per over and then blew away their top order, allowing their tail to cobble together 160 runs, while criminal, was the only thing prevented a more simple win than was eventually achieved. The captain would be ill advised to take Kent lightly of course, but if we want to maintain a chance of promotion, he will have to take some calculated risks - that doesn't mean throwing the bat at everything and sticking in seven slips for every ball - it just means sensible but positive cricket. Over to you chaps...

Heavy defeat looms for Surrey (get used to that sentence)

Perhaps I should just re-post the synonyms for "bad"?  Another woeful day for Surrey, They allowed the Sussex tail to put on over 130 runs, rapidly in the morning, comprehensively failing to finish them off quickly as I had kindly asked.

They then proceeded to lose three wickets before 50 runs were on the board, and but for an impressive partnership between Steve Davies and Usman Afzaal of 140 or so, the day would've been considerably shorter. Surrey did at least manage to avoid the embarrassment of a three day defeat, but barring a scintillating hundred from Rao or Dernbach, Sussex will finish this off tomorrow early doors for a thoroughly well deserved victory.

A particularly depressing stat from this game is that barely 7 of the 19 Surrey partnerships so far have reached double figures, that is incredibly poor.  The Davies-Afzaal partnership was the first time this season that two batsmen have taken responsibility to try and dig us out of a hole (it was only broken by a dubious Goodwin catch - sparking a collapse of 4 wickets for 30 runs).  This needs to be addressed by the batting coach, urgently.

I am also interested to know why Hamilton-Brown dropped himself down to number six in the order, I certainly hope he's not hiding himself down there!  This is another sorry performance from Surrey and if this continues much longer I shall start blogging about something else entirely, there's only so many times I can write the 'Surrey roundly trounced again' post.

In other news, Surrey are apparently chasing Dan Vettori to play at the start and end of the T20 Cup (New Zealand have a series against Sri Lanka right slap bang in the middle of it).  This would be extremely welcome!  As a batsman he'd easily slot into our top six, and he'd be our best bowler.  Does make it seem increasingly unlikely that young Chawla will be appearing at the Oval at all this summer though....watch this space!

Time for Chris Schofield to move up the order?

From the middle of last season, lets say the Essex game at Guildford in the middle of July, Chris Schofield has missed only one game (the game with Derbyshire last week), and has actually proved a pretty good source of runs.

Bear in mind that he's been batting down the order at 7 or 8, so with the tail the majority of the time, and not always with Surrey in the best of positions - his average since that game (including the knock of 46 against Sussex) has been 38.3. Only Afzaal, Ramps and Mark Butcher averaged more last season.

Schofield batting for England (yes, England).

Since he only managed 22 wickets at the poor average of 61, its fair to say he's more of a batsman these days than a bowler. Given the woes experienced by the Surrey top order, Afzaal in particular, would it be out of the question to move Schoey up the order? The batting stocks at Surrey aren't exactly overflowing with talent knocking on the door, I can think of worse ideas.

He has proved he can score big runs with that 144 against Essex, and the way in which he forced his way back into the side shows he has got the right sort of attitude. He dragged the tail along to a single batting point against Sussex, and he seems well liked among the players.

Maybe its something to experiment with in the limited overs stuff initially, but I wouldn't be surprised or disappointed to see him move up the order in any form of cricket.

County Cricket Twenty20: "a way to cash in on the IPL" - D. Gough

Witness this conversation between myself and Darren Gough on Twitter this evening (don't ask why I am on Twitter on a Friday night):

Gough: what about b c lara possibly making a comeback playing for surrey t20?god they need him
Me: Don't agree Goughie, we need him in our four day side! Getting him for the T20 sends the wrong msg and he was terrible in the ICL!
Gough: Disagree you got to redevelop your 4 day side you have ramps for that,need him for t20 with money thats at stake and crowds
Me: we are redeveloping it, but we've only got one bat - Ramps. Don't want Surrey to be a vehicle for Lara to sell himself to the IPL.
Gough: Get used to it thats the only reason hes playing,so obvious
Me: Doesn't mean I have to like it Goughie,is that how you see county cricket now,a window just for players to get into the IPL?
Gough: Get a grip lad,read what i say b c lara wants to cash in on the ipl is way in is to play county t20
Me: I don't think Surrey's Twenty20 campaign should be about getting Lara into the IPL,not right for the team.

Lets leave aside the apparent disdain Goughie has for a lowly Twitter user such as I, and instead focus on this: does he really think its ok for county cricket to be used as a vehicle for ageing retired internationals to put themselves in the shop window for a crack at some extra cash in the IPL? What about advancing young English players?

I could just be over reacting here, but as has been said elsewhere the money we could be set to splash on getting Lara in for a few T20s could be much better spent on a younger, more promising player who would genuinely enhance the future prospects of Surrey County Cricket Club. As it is, Surrey appear happy to bring Lara in to (maybe) fill the Oval and sell a few shirts...oh and along the way see if he can't enhance his chances of a contract with the new Kochi franchise in the IPL.

Maybe this is the future of county cricket, just a sort of feeder series for the IPL and all its riches, I'd be interested to know what others think of that, particularly Indian readers? Personally I find the prospect that any player would use county cricket just as a means to get themselves into the IPL a bit cynical, but maybe I just need to wake up and smell Modi's coffee!

How, in a cricketing sense, would Lara's presence help Surrey's progression? I would love to see him on board in some sort of coaching or consultative role, he has talent and experience that is unmatched by any other, but in cricketing terms I really believe he would add little to a Twenty20 campaign.

I will be the first to put my hands up and say I was wrong if he cracks a thrilling hundred for us, or even just wins us a match here or there, but I am genuinely concerned at the direction this appears to show Surrey going in.

Brian Lara and Surrey...no, seriously...

This story on the BBC has it that Surrey are considering a shock, and it really is a shock, bid for Brian Lara to play Twenty20 cricket this summer. As much as I believe Lara is one of the finest cricketers of his generation, nay one of the best ever, but the man is forty years old and hasn't played top level competitive cricket for some time.

Yes the likes of Warne, Hayden and Gilchrist are approaching forty years of age too, but they've at least kept their eye in with the IPL, and yet still in all three cases its clear that they aren't the players they used to be.

Surrey, and indeed county cricket as a whole ought not to be considered a vehicle for players to put themselves in the IPL shop window, that's what seems to be inferred by the BBC's story. Moreover, I'm just not sure this sends the right message - we all remember the last 40-something Surrey signed, and that ended in a 13 year jail sentence. I'm not suggesting Lara would be a failure of Lewis-like proportions, I just don't think it says the right things about the club.

Yes, Lara will bring in the crowds and might even sell a few shirts (I have to say, a Surrey shirt with Lara on the back would be nice...) and maybe that is part of the reasoning, but will he enrich our side? I seriously doubt that.

Now, if Lara was to be drafted in to fill a seriously large gap in our batting stocks for four day cricket, well that might elicit a different reaction!

They murdered us, they flippin' murdered us

To quote the irrepressible David Lloyd, Derbyshire flippin' murdered Surrey over the past four days. In the battle of the Star Batsmen Carrying His Side's Hopes, Chris Rogers comprehensively outscored Mark Ramprakash 340-102. Not to say that Ramps wasn't brilliant, he was, but Rogers was brilliant-er.

Of the two bowling attacks, only a fool would look at the scorecard and suggest that Surrey had done a half decent job. The collective average of Surrey's bowlers? 43. Derbyshire's run rate across their two innings? 3.7, compared with Surrey's 2.8. We were comprehensively outplayed here, and Rogers fully deserved to come away on the winning side after a virtuoso performance with the bat.

Five of Surrey's top seven were clean bowled. I saw a hint of uneven bounce in the pitch yesterday, and that may have played a part, but it doesn't look good. You have to credit the Derbyshire attack, they bowled sensible lines and lengths, the spinners stopped the flow of runs (largely) and the wickets duly followed.

Surrey's bowlers on the other hand were woeful. Meaker and Dernbach in particular failed to keep the run rate down to any degree. The only bowlers to keep the run rate below three in their overs were Afzaal and Spriegel, and they only bowled 24 overs between them out of a total of just under 200 overs (taking four wickets in the process - only one fewer than Meaker, Linley and Dernbach combined).

This might seem like an odd proposal, but I would be tempted to go with a four man attack for the Sussex game, and it simply has to include Rao Ifthikar and Chris Tremlett. The reason for this? Well our top six isn't good enough to be picking up 400+ regularly. Aside from Ramps, and to a lesser extent Davies, no one looks like they're about to hang around, and let's face it even if Brown comes back in, he's not exactly Dravid-esque in his crease occupation. So an extra batsman is required. There might even be a case for Walters after Spriegel and Harinath's less than convincing performance. And I'd wager that Rao and Tremlett offer more of a wicket taking threat than Linley, Meaker and Dernbach combined - at least on the strength of this performance they do. I'm sure Dernbach will come back stronger, probably in the limited overs stuff.

I would suggest a top six of Brown, Harinath, Ramps, Afzaal, Hamilton-Brown and Spriegel. Davies slots in at seven which is where I've always liked to have the WK-bat, Batty is a very capable number 8, likewise Nel at number 9, Tremlett is no Chris Martin (not the Coldplay one) with the bat and then Rao.

There's a temptation to go right into the doldrums here and write off another season, and believe me I'm struggling to fight that temptation. Several of our players need to stand up and be counted at Hove - Ramps and Davies cannot be expected to carry this side all season.

Setting the tone? I hope not....

So Derbyshire finish the day on 306-5, with the imperious Chris Rogers still there on 178 not out from 282 balls. Couple of wickets for Batty, couple for Afzaal and one for Linley.

I am reluctant to be too negative, and I'm sure this pitch is a cracker for batting, but Derbyshire aren't the best side in the division and its a bit worrying that despite a clearout from last season, we're still managing to field the same seam attack from the end of last year. A seam attack which never seemed capable or likely to take 20 wickets in a game.

Where is Tremlett? His fitness might be being 'managed' but he played no pre-season and I've heard no report of an injury, so what's the reason for his absence? And Rao, our overseas replacement for Chawla - I thought he'd been signed for three championship games and he's missing this one, where is he?! Some explanation is needed from Surrey here.

I would expect the likes of Afzaal, Davies and of course Ramps to make hay on this pitch, Derbyshire look like setting a big total so we'll need them to. With our tail starting at seven, the burden weighs heavily on our top order. Here's hoping Surrey come out with a bit of fight tomorrow morning and bowl us back into the match.

Oh and also, I'm hearing word that at least two catches were dropped - this is inexcusable (unless of course they were impossible chances), Adams said that a lot of work had been done on fielding over the winter. Last two seasons drops have cost us far too dear, and we can't afford to have that happen again.

UPDATE: According to the Cricinfo report, Rogers was dropped on 46, Borrington dropped on 7, drops have already cost us a grand total of 146 runs and the season is one day old. Bad omen!

Surrey squad for Derbyshire game tomorrow

Chris Adams has named the squad for the first County Championship game starting at 11am tomorrow (at long last!), few names missing very disappointingly, no Rao yet, no Tremlett and no Michael Brown:

Rory Hamilton-Brown (c)
Arun Harinath
Matthew Spriegel
Mark Ramprakash
Usman Afzaal
Steven Davies (wk)
Gareth Batty
Stuart Meaker
Jade Dernbach
Andre Nel
Tim Linley
Chris Schofield

I maintain that I don't think Linley offers enough of a wicket taking threat. He keeps it nice and tight, but just doesn't take wickets, and wickets is what we need people! I fear that squad could be a batsman light, thought I suppose if Schofield and Spriegel continue their form of the last part of last season we might be ok.

To hear that Tremlett's workload is 'being managed' is a bit worrying at such an early stage, I'd have thought a good start to the season to give some momentum would be the priority. Clearly Adams doesn't think he's up to a four day game just yet, I'd like to know a bit more on that situation.

The Derbyshire squad looks pretty evenly matched with our lads too:

Chris Rogers
Wayne Madsen
Paul Borrington
Garry Park
Greg Smith
Dan Redfern
Robin Peterson
Chesney Hughes
Graham Wagg
Lee Goddard
Tim Groenewald
Steffan Jones
Mark Footitt

Not world beaters, but some real quality in there. Rogers is a class act, pure and simple. Peterson has international pedigree and Graham Wagg is a threat. Depends on the pitch, but this one could be headed for a draw. Though with a few days sunshine forecast ahead we should get all the overs in, so you never know!