GT wrote:
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!)
