Rudolph and the Red Faced Panthers
Scollay promising debut
By Dingy Bags
July 25 2010
Dingy Bags reports on an embarrassing defeat to Yorkshire thanks to a fine knock by Rudolph leaving us red faced. Our usually more optimistic reporter captures his disappointment and raises concerns for now and future. This report carries a MTWD health warning, but worth a read as some pertinent points are raised that need to be addressed.
RUDOLPH LEAVES MIDDLESEX WITH RED NOSES (AND FACES)
This won’t be pretty, I’m afraid. Tonight, I feel more depressed about the state of Middlesex County Cricket Club than ever before. Today’s performance was abject - and miserable entertainment for a goodish crowd, unless they were dyed-in-the-wool Yorkshire supporters. But I can’t believe that even they enjoyed this much. Yes, we had to do without our three England men, while Yorkshire could pick from all their fit staff, including Shahzad who is in the test squad. But we also didn’t pick Toby R-J. So, given OB’s injury, that meant five changes from Uxbridge. It showed.
It was yet another used and tired wicket and we seemed to be putting our faith in spin. There was a debut for Tom Scollay which was partially successful, as we shall see, but it does beg the question as to why a new signing is preferred to all those we’ve been working with for years – Housego, Davey, Robson, London, Toor...
I was meeting someone in the Pavilion – and bumped into a few others. All were sad about the omission of Ben Scott. It seems we do not want him even in one-day stuff. Two months after our last game in the competition (yet more nonsense from the ECB) we chose to bat first. I know the idea was that a used track would get worse but the downside is that it’s hard to know what kind of score you should be setting.
Newman was soon out, caught behind from a cramped defensive shot, but Dex looked in good touch, hitting Shahzad for two fours in the sixth over. In the next, Ace was badly dropped at mid off by the captain, off Bresnan, but we didn’t make them pay because Dex pulled one up in the air a few balls later and Patterson made no mistake. Nor did we learn our lesson: in the ninth over, Ace, having mis-pulled one close to mid on, tried the shot again and was caught behind. 38-3 and game already looking lost. At no stage did we suggest we could pull it round which was not the least disappointing aspect of the day. True, Malan and Berg, forced to consolidate, put on 61 but they did so slowly – at one point Berg had 3 from 22 deliveries. It was likely that he was playing only as a batsman and at the drinks break (yes drinks break), taken at 22 overs, he called for a pain-killer. Soon Malan clipped Wainwright tamely to mid-wicket, Simpson chopped one down onto his boot and up into Bairstow’s gloves and Bergie top edged a sweep to Gale, who now remembered how to catch. He had hit only two 4s in his 40. The one high point (and I am clutching at positive straws here) now emerged. By sensible batting Scollay and Smith put on 46 good runs and it was only in the last three overs that the partnership was broken as Scollay was yorked by Shahzad after two fours in the over. Smith only perished trying to hit over the top in the last over.
At the interval I chatted with Lower Pavilion (depressed) and found Kev, Beefy, Ken and Kimmy in the Middlesex Room (depressed, but nice to meet Kimmy’s husband). I also chatted with Keith Mein (depressed). Still 183 on an old track, a couple of early wickets, the spinners turning the ball and the screw.......Never a hint of this.
We opened with Shaggy who did well in his first over but was hit by Rudolph for a six and a four in the third of the innings and Yorkshire were off. Every time we exerted a bit of pressure – Murts and Ped kept things tight for a few overs for instance – the Yorkshire openers took the initiative and found the boundary. At this stage – and I found this significant – they did so by hitting along the ground. Only later, with the match as good as won, did they lift it again. We fielded badly – usual suspects – and Smith had a few issues with wides (until he came around the wicket). It got gloomy, the weather catching me up because I’d got gloomy a few hours earlier. Eventually, Scollay – who turned the ball considerably further than anyone else in the side – was brought on and got Gale stumped at once. A smart bit of work this, by Simpson, who continues to improve. He’s too quiet as a keeper, however. There were three figures on the board by then and Rudolph made it his business (I use that term deliberately) to ensure no collapse occurred. Collins was rewarded for a decent effort with a caught and bowled late on but Yorkshire could have won the game much earlier than over 37 had they wished.
When we have a bad day I make it a policy NOT to post my comments. I try not to be negative. But I am reporting here, so I can hardly help it. As a report, perhaps I shouldn’t end with some personal views but I’m going to anyway.
• This score might not have been good enough for a T20 game.
• Rudolph did the job of a senior professional batsman - I hope those of the Middlesex side take note (though I am despairing of that ever happening).
• It does no good to have to chop and change the side – I think we should aim for a degree of consistency in selection from now on and now that this is in our own hands.
• Tom Smith should get a run in the side.
• Sam Robson should get a run in the side.
• We need to decide which of our fringe players are worth playing in the final third of the season. Those that are not should not be at the club next year.
• We need a short-term plan for next season. This obviously involves changes in personnel. We need to discount the England men almost entirely from calculations. I hope we have been given plenty of ‘compensation’ for the games they have missed. This, and what should be better income from the T20 this year, can finance those changes.
• That plan should include a long look at our catching and fielding.
• We need a medium-term plan for, say, 4-6 years.
• We need a long term plan, involving a base away from Lords (what is the state of play with Radlett?).
• As the continuing popularity and existence of this site shows, Middlesex has some loyal and passionate fans. Our patience is being stretched beyond reasonable limits.
• I am dreading the next match.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010:07:28:23:00:48 by Ged.
I am really depressed this evening.I got into my car after the game and had to sit in the car to compose myself before driving away.
I know a win against that team from across the river, will make things feel a whole lot better but at the moment I am in despair.
Still,I will be at Lords on thursday hoping and praying for the best.
Some interesting points raised. Thanks Dingy
Barmy Kev
I'm only here for the tele
Apologies, too, that I did not chat to people from this site as I had intended.
I was depressed.
Being in Park Road in Uxbridge, Park Lane in Wembley and Park Road in St. John's Wood all in the space of 24 hours also does little favours to my state of mind.
Something has to be done about Middlesex's performances, so it is great that dingy bags has come up with some suggestions.
Click here to read why I sensationally sacrificed the big bucks of Chelsea for the adventure of Watford
(image on left not representative of how relative my support of Watford is to my support of Middlesex)
Lets hope the "powers" to be read your piece.
All very sad ,but very very true....
I was as low as anyone else with yesterday,just couldnt get to enjoy it much(Kimmy witnessed it!).
I am not sure how this one started but it does seem to have become a bit of a holy grail to some MTWD ers.
In reality it would be a distraction on a massive scale to the solution of on field problems. The financial burden would be considerable both in raising the initial finance and servicing the inevitable loan.
Even MCC are reliant on income from their shops, hotels, flats plan to finance the new Lords development.
The county would need to employ its own ground staff both pitch and general maintenance, and the management this would require. All day to day maintenance costs would have to be met by the club.
It would not attract any more members and in all likelihood there would be some falling off in membership.
The numbers just don't add up financially and the net result would be less money to spend on the playing staff.
Talk to anyone at the club and they will tell you of the 'issues' with trying to prepare a squad at Lords.
As you said and I concur. Rudolph batted the 37 overs to get the oppo over the line. That is the sort of batting application that wins matches.
The ECB bowlers they had helped wivahtadaht. However,despite that, our performance was abysmal to say the least.
I'm so gobsmacked that I can't find the words to sum it all up. Perhaps it's time everyone realised that we are the 18th best county side around.
Paul
What we require more than that, are a steady opening partnership to build a platform for the later order to capitilise on.
Plus get 5 batting points on the board which should give the side an uplift.
At the mo, too often the middle order are facing the new ball with bowlers still fresh.
A touch of the Rudolph would'nt go amiss.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010:07:26:19:37:53 by Seaxe_Man.
However from a supporter's point of view, it would be more of a consolation to if we received cricket-related rewards. Three suggestions I have heard from various supporters are being given extra competition points, extra runs or being able to field a couple more high-quality overseas players. This would certainly give other counties incentive to follow our lead and produce players for England.
Not much can be done about Middlesex supporters having to sit and watch under-strength Middlesex sides play full-strength opponents (aside from Middlesex producing/acquiring more quality players, the ECB making their player-release policy more consistent or the ECB simply no longer selecting Middlesex players), but the sense that the club seem to no longer be able to win trophies is a situation than can be solved as receiving cricket-related rewards would boost our chances of winning trophies.
Click here to read why I sensationally sacrificed the big bucks of Chelsea for the adventure of Watford
(image on left not representative of how relative my support of Watford is to my support of Middlesex)
"183 was not a desparate display"...."slightly disturbing to see Ajmal Shazad playing...."
Apparently it was at least as much our spinners fault that we didn't win as the slightly below par total.
Sorry I can't paste a link as this site won't let me.
The match analysis for the Sussex match can be found here
It is great to see that Angus Fraser is taking note of some of the issues surrounding Middlesex, such as our batsmen's difficulty in going on to make the big scores that our opponents are making (v Sussex: Sussex first innings Nash 46, Joyce 85, Goodwin 80, Prior 30, Wright 134, Middlesex first innings Simpson 58, Shah 38, Malan 51, Morgan 58, Dexter 43, Sussex second innings Goodwin 35, Thornely 53, Wright 62, Middlesex second innings Strauss 37, Morgan 58 not out, Dexter 46, v Yorkshire: Middlesex innings Dexter 25, Malan 28, Berg 40, Scollay 32, Yorkshire innings Gale 39, Rudolph 86 not out, Lyth 34) and the inconsistency of the ECB's player-release policy.
Apart from that, he didn't mention any other points that I wish to comment on.
Click here to read why I sensationally sacrificed the big bucks of Chelsea for the adventure of Watford
(image on left not representative of how relative my support of Watford is to my support of Middlesex)
Now do you reckon Shots, had either worn the Three Seaxes on their shirts, that either would have played on Sunday? No I thought not.
Flower's and Moores record on the Blue Seaxes is about the same.
Now when you start talking about Red Seaxes, suddenly Flower morphs into an ok guy.