Gloucestershire v Worcestershire, CB40 Group A, Cheltenham July 17, 2012

Gidman leads Gloucestershire into top two

Gloucestershire 145 for 6 (Gidman 33* ) beat Worcestershire 144 for 7 (Hughes 64*, Gidman 3-20) by 4 wickets
Scorecard

Captain Alex Gidman led from the front as Gloucestershire moved into second place in Group A of the Clydesdale Bank with a four-wicket win over Worcestershire at Cheltenham.

First Gidman claimed 3 for 20 from eight overs after winning the toss to help restrict the visitors to a modest 144 for 7, Phil Hughes top-scoring with an unbeaten 64.

Then after Gloucestershire had plunged from 51 without loss to 81 for 5 in reply, Gidman steadied the ship with an unbeaten 33, sharing a key sixth-wicket stand of 47 with Ed Young (28) as his side won with 12.5 overs to spare.

Spinners Moeen Ali (three for 33) and Brett D'Oliveira (two for 35) had threatened to bowl Worcestershire back into the game, Moeen grabbing three wickets in his first three overs from the Chapel End to remove Benny Howell, Dan Housego and Ed Cowan.

But Cowan (29) and Hamish Marshall (26) had given the hosts a brisk start chasing down their modest target and Young's confident 22-ball innings, which included the only six of the game off Moeen, helped Gidman see Gloucestershire home.

Comments have now been closed for this article

  • hyclass on July 19, 2012, 6:46 GMT

    @CricketingStargazer...the use of the term 'largely scoreless' is a relative one.As the numbers show,there were 8 other batsmen at the crease who scored just 71 runs from 132 balls at a S/R of 53 or 6 runs per hundred balls slower.Of those Worcester batsmen,the next highest score was 20.Hughes is entitled to expect some kind of support from his team mates at which point,his approach may change.In its absence,his innings shows his understanding of his team and knowledge that given their recent history,his retaining his wicket in tough batting conditions was the best approach.In a particularly wet English summer,the conditions are far less conducive to stroke play as is shown by Worcester's spinners taking quick wickets.Gloucester's numbers 3,4 and 6 made 8 runs between them.While fortune favoured Gloucester on this occasion and regardless of their early run rate,their being 5/81 demonstrates that wickets were the key and that setting any total could pose a challenge.Congrats to Gloucs.

  • CricketingStargazer on July 18, 2012, 13:19 GMT

    @hyclass, maybe you are right, but by being largely scoreless he put a lot of pressure on the batsman at the other end. For 30 overs Phil Hughes was mainly pushing singles. Incidentally, when the target is so small there is no need for any single batsman to get a big score. In fact, it was the middle order who saw Gloucestershire home, having allowed themselves a goodly period of consolidation because the RRR was down to only about 2.

  • hyclass on July 18, 2012, 12:50 GMT

    @CricketingStargazer...what an extraordinary attack on Hughes.His innings of 64 took 108 balls a S/R of 59.The other 8 Worcester batsmen faced the remainder of the 132 balls for 71 runs,a S/R of just 53.Extras added the rest.The Gloucester openers may have scored more quickly but their combined scores were 9 runs less than Hughes total and their team was quickly reduced to 5/81 and could easily have lost.That the lower order got Gloucester home is as much good fortune as good management.The conditions were clearly not conducive to stroke play and Hughes seems to have summed it up as swiftly as anyone.He deserves credit and with similar support from his team mates to that which the Gloucester lower order provided,the result may well have been more interesting.

  • CricketingStargazer on July 18, 2012, 6:51 GMT

    Gloucestershire are really coming into a bit of form. The finished the T20 well and are now making a move in the CB40. Some of the youngesters have really steeped up well and some of the old hands (if Gliucestershire has anyone who can be counted as such) are having a pretty good summer. One thing that was obvious today was the contrast between the painful innings of Phil Hughes, whose score was barely staying ahead of the overs until his late spurt and the Gloucestershire openers. Whilst Hughes ate up overs pushing occasional singles, Marshall and Cowan had blasted Gloucestershire nearly half way to the target in the frst ten overs. It meant that when wickets fell there were overs in hand and runs in the bank. It really looked pretty one-sided from here and, unless the Worcestershire bowlers could produce a miracle, it was always going to stay that way, even at 88-5.

  • hyclass on July 19, 2012, 6:46 GMT

    @CricketingStargazer...the use of the term 'largely scoreless' is a relative one.As the numbers show,there were 8 other batsmen at the crease who scored just 71 runs from 132 balls at a S/R of 53 or 6 runs per hundred balls slower.Of those Worcester batsmen,the next highest score was 20.Hughes is entitled to expect some kind of support from his team mates at which point,his approach may change.In its absence,his innings shows his understanding of his team and knowledge that given their recent history,his retaining his wicket in tough batting conditions was the best approach.In a particularly wet English summer,the conditions are far less conducive to stroke play as is shown by Worcester's spinners taking quick wickets.Gloucester's numbers 3,4 and 6 made 8 runs between them.While fortune favoured Gloucester on this occasion and regardless of their early run rate,their being 5/81 demonstrates that wickets were the key and that setting any total could pose a challenge.Congrats to Gloucs.

  • CricketingStargazer on July 18, 2012, 13:19 GMT

    @hyclass, maybe you are right, but by being largely scoreless he put a lot of pressure on the batsman at the other end. For 30 overs Phil Hughes was mainly pushing singles. Incidentally, when the target is so small there is no need for any single batsman to get a big score. In fact, it was the middle order who saw Gloucestershire home, having allowed themselves a goodly period of consolidation because the RRR was down to only about 2.

  • hyclass on July 18, 2012, 12:50 GMT

    @CricketingStargazer...what an extraordinary attack on Hughes.His innings of 64 took 108 balls a S/R of 59.The other 8 Worcester batsmen faced the remainder of the 132 balls for 71 runs,a S/R of just 53.Extras added the rest.The Gloucester openers may have scored more quickly but their combined scores were 9 runs less than Hughes total and their team was quickly reduced to 5/81 and could easily have lost.That the lower order got Gloucester home is as much good fortune as good management.The conditions were clearly not conducive to stroke play and Hughes seems to have summed it up as swiftly as anyone.He deserves credit and with similar support from his team mates to that which the Gloucester lower order provided,the result may well have been more interesting.

  • CricketingStargazer on July 18, 2012, 6:51 GMT

    Gloucestershire are really coming into a bit of form. The finished the T20 well and are now making a move in the CB40. Some of the youngesters have really steeped up well and some of the old hands (if Gliucestershire has anyone who can be counted as such) are having a pretty good summer. One thing that was obvious today was the contrast between the painful innings of Phil Hughes, whose score was barely staying ahead of the overs until his late spurt and the Gloucestershire openers. Whilst Hughes ate up overs pushing occasional singles, Marshall and Cowan had blasted Gloucestershire nearly half way to the target in the frst ten overs. It meant that when wickets fell there were overs in hand and runs in the bank. It really looked pretty one-sided from here and, unless the Worcestershire bowlers could produce a miracle, it was always going to stay that way, even at 88-5.

  • No featured comments at the moment.

  • CricketingStargazer on July 18, 2012, 6:51 GMT

    Gloucestershire are really coming into a bit of form. The finished the T20 well and are now making a move in the CB40. Some of the youngesters have really steeped up well and some of the old hands (if Gliucestershire has anyone who can be counted as such) are having a pretty good summer. One thing that was obvious today was the contrast between the painful innings of Phil Hughes, whose score was barely staying ahead of the overs until his late spurt and the Gloucestershire openers. Whilst Hughes ate up overs pushing occasional singles, Marshall and Cowan had blasted Gloucestershire nearly half way to the target in the frst ten overs. It meant that when wickets fell there were overs in hand and runs in the bank. It really looked pretty one-sided from here and, unless the Worcestershire bowlers could produce a miracle, it was always going to stay that way, even at 88-5.

  • hyclass on July 18, 2012, 12:50 GMT

    @CricketingStargazer...what an extraordinary attack on Hughes.His innings of 64 took 108 balls a S/R of 59.The other 8 Worcester batsmen faced the remainder of the 132 balls for 71 runs,a S/R of just 53.Extras added the rest.The Gloucester openers may have scored more quickly but their combined scores were 9 runs less than Hughes total and their team was quickly reduced to 5/81 and could easily have lost.That the lower order got Gloucester home is as much good fortune as good management.The conditions were clearly not conducive to stroke play and Hughes seems to have summed it up as swiftly as anyone.He deserves credit and with similar support from his team mates to that which the Gloucester lower order provided,the result may well have been more interesting.

  • CricketingStargazer on July 18, 2012, 13:19 GMT

    @hyclass, maybe you are right, but by being largely scoreless he put a lot of pressure on the batsman at the other end. For 30 overs Phil Hughes was mainly pushing singles. Incidentally, when the target is so small there is no need for any single batsman to get a big score. In fact, it was the middle order who saw Gloucestershire home, having allowed themselves a goodly period of consolidation because the RRR was down to only about 2.

  • hyclass on July 19, 2012, 6:46 GMT

    @CricketingStargazer...the use of the term 'largely scoreless' is a relative one.As the numbers show,there were 8 other batsmen at the crease who scored just 71 runs from 132 balls at a S/R of 53 or 6 runs per hundred balls slower.Of those Worcester batsmen,the next highest score was 20.Hughes is entitled to expect some kind of support from his team mates at which point,his approach may change.In its absence,his innings shows his understanding of his team and knowledge that given their recent history,his retaining his wicket in tough batting conditions was the best approach.In a particularly wet English summer,the conditions are far less conducive to stroke play as is shown by Worcester's spinners taking quick wickets.Gloucester's numbers 3,4 and 6 made 8 runs between them.While fortune favoured Gloucester on this occasion and regardless of their early run rate,their being 5/81 demonstrates that wickets were the key and that setting any total could pose a challenge.Congrats to Gloucs.