I'm definitely there the Friday too - just had a feeling when I decided to take the plunge, book the day off work and buy tickets!

Well if you manage to sneak into the pavilion I'll be found stood by the bar most of the day!

Starting to get a wee bit nervous about tomorrow now.

Lancs win the toss and are 67-6. Title going up in smoke.

The one and only time a Lancashire choke isn't funny.

Lancs 161 ao. Worcs 77-5 in reply. We'll know by this time tomorrow if the title is still on at this rate!

209/6 at close, already 58 ahead. And with Warwicks and Durham doing well....

Lancs 9-0 after bowling Worcestershire out for 237. Currently trail by 67.

25/2

Spineless c**ts.

If this is all a ruse in order to get Yorkshire to beat Warwickshire then it's a major gamble!!
Two wins against an already relegated Hampshire and a nowt-to-play-for Somerset and it could still happen

FWIW, We only have one game left against Hants.

Well that's us done for, might even finish bottom too. If Lancs go on to win it after today I'll be even more miffed than I thought possible.

I meant 2 wins in total, not 2 against Hampshire. Didn't quite word it correctly!!
The dream scenario is still on, just....Lancs top, Yorkshire bottom!!

Yorks are doing us a huge favour though by thwarting Warwicks, them drawing will be a huge let-off. Somerset are being tonked too so can all but rule them out, Durham well on the way to a win but will only be a few ahead with just one game left, while us and Warwicks have two.

It'll be tight this

Bizarre that Yorkshire are batting on after Rashid and Ballance both went this morning, it's a long shot as it is but we need to give the bowlers a chance to steal the win.

Is it wrong to root for the Yorkies? Do feel a little dirty doing so....

Kent beat Essex by 6 wickets

That's us gone then, now all that's left to hope for is anyone but Lancashire to win the thing.

I'd root for a Pol Pot select XI if it meant winning that b*stard Championship...

I think we can safely say that, whoever wins the title this year will be the worst Champions since Warwickshire won it with only 5 wins to Kent's 7 in 2004.

Whilst that Warks side was not a vintage one, I think it's only fair to mention they were undefeated champions, consistently scored 400+ in the first innings - a facet Lancs (and Surrey) might benefit from adding to their game - and accrued more bowling bonus points than Kent. I think there have been poorer champions since.

Two of the Championships since 2004 were won by Sussex with Mushtaq Ahmed, who was Warne/Murali class at Championship level with around 450 wickets in five seasons from 2003-2007. The rest of their bowling attack consisted mainly of James Kirtley, Jason Lewry and Robin Martin-Jenkins.

I reckon Notts were pretty mediocre champs last year - 7 wins & 4 or 5 defeats? They banked a load of early season wins, then stumbled over the finishing line.

Everyone has lost at least four games this year, so it's not a vintage year, but it's often been similar in recent years.

There was a particularly strong series of champions from 1999-2002, when Surrey won it three times despite having several top players regularly missing on England duty and Yorks secured the title with something like 9 wins & 1 defeat from the first 14 matches in 2001, before losing the last two when it didn't matter. (Then got relegated the next year!)

I found myself agreeing with a lot of that, I have to say.

The one thing that got me about that Warwickshire side was that most of the time they played for the draw and a win was a bonus. That doesn't make for good cricket and that side were not good to watch when they were doing that. At least when you get teams winning a lot of games and losing a few you know they're going for a result. Durham at Hampshire this year being a prime example. Warwickshire in '04 would've gone for the draw in that game. The bonus points system has struck the right balance now, I think, although I'm still not keen on the system.

Which brings me round to the point you made about Lancs, Surrey and batting points. In 2008 Surrey finished bottom of the table with 45 batting points. Lancashire finished 5th with 24 batting points and a grand total of 170 points. If Lancashire had managed to gain the same batting points as Surrey that year we would've won the title with 191 points to Durham's 190! (5 wins, 9 draws, 2 defeats...) It does show that we're seriously behind other teams in the batting department, but then again it also shows up flaws in the bonus points system, albeit there's been changes made since then.

I have heard the suggestion that bonus points should only be awarded if a team wins, which would cut out people shutting up shop for the draw. Whether it's feasible in reality or not is another matter.

Think Lancs are 2nd bottom of the batting bonus points total this year with a woeful 28 points.

It looks like our old friend, the weather, might have its say over the destination of the title....



This week's fixtures look seriously threatened by a rotten 5 day forecast.....Lancs' ability to play 2-3 day matches due to that bowler-friendly track at Aigburth, might yet come in handy if they can be on the right end of a low scoring game.

Correct. Worcestershire also have 28 points, Hampshire 24.

Typical for Lancs that the weather closes in AFTER we get knocked off the top of the league



Not looking good anywhere this week rain wise but the early forecast for Taunton next week is a lot brighter. Maybe we can pinch it down there....