I get where you're coming from, and I've never decided whether I agreed with what we did in 2011 or not. But I do think there is a difference. We prepared something that suited our bowling attack. Yes we would prefer to bat first on it, given the chance. But we would still back ourselves to win on it when chasing. Whereas with used wickets, where there's no pace and the balls keeps low, the match is pretty much decided by the toss. Bat first, win the game; pretty much regardless of your bowling attack. Plus, even in just seven years, the game has moved on a lot.
If Abbott isn't fit for Monday, I do think we should be pick Wood ahead of Fidel. They'll both go for about a run a ball, but Wood can bat and field. It's a little embarrassing that we've basically got three no.11s in the hutch here, waiting to bat.
And that point is even more relevant, after that great over from Berg. Alas it was the last over of the middle powerplay.
63 needed off 10 overs. If we had 2 more wickets in the bag I'd fancy us. However, we don't so I fancy Sussex.
There's actually an argument that even if Abbott is fit, Wood could still come in. Would Abbott and Wood for Fidel and Taylor really weaken our batting that much?
It's annoying, because a RR of around 6 an over means that singles are still valuable. It's not like we need 10 or 12 an over, and only boundaries will do. But we can't really afford for Berg to take singles, because Mason is just using up dots.
What is the point of Crane hitting a single with the last ball of the over? Please explain that to me.
