Just why did we sign Batty again?

I notice that Coughtrie is keeping wicket for the current 4 day game against Surrey. Considering all the youngsters - Coughtrie included - in the team and the challenge set by Bracewell for this season that the more experienced pros had to step up to the plate to score more heavily are we now to expect that we lured Batty away from Surrey so that he could play in our 2nd XI. With County Cricket finances tight, wouldn't it have made more sense to not sign him and retain the services of Snell whose stats were better than Batty's last season?

 

I think your thoughts are shared by everyone bar one....and that one calls the shots!!

 

ufc133 Batty was a good player but is well past his best now and the player we jettisoned for him - Snell - is younger, offers more with the bat and is just as good a gloveman (and on a smaller contract). If Batty is so good, why is the young lad Coughtrie keeping wicket for the 4 day team? He was a bad signing for us and is an expensive luxury for the 2nd XI. The sooner we're rid of him the better.