Dreadful analysis in that article.
Whether it's editorial or really what Scott Read (who has commentated on Lancashire every year from 2012) said, who knows.
- why would it be a major surprise to Lancashire fans, when you know he can't even buy a game in Lancs' 2nd team, been sent out on loan and been carrying the drinks in the Blast for the last four games. Even when he was playing he did not always bowl his full allocation of 4 overs.
- even Lancs fans would be aware that he has been dropped by his franchise (Read makes no mention of the ECB Franchise Comp)
- There was no loss of form last year (for Lancs). Evidence is against him being left out of Lancs' T20 games last year. He missed 5 games (2 because he was playing for England, 2 because Lancs repported he was injured, can't find any info on the 5th but would be unlikely to miss it due to form having played and taken wickets the night before. Being managed by England after his test, or picked up an unrecorded (historically) injury more like.
- Hartley has hardly developed with the ball this year.
Complete rubbish Scott.
More likely he's left simply because the club doesn't know how to manage players (think Hameed, Simpson). Lancashire refuse to make teh most of the talent they produce.
Whether it's good for both parties, depends on which parties you are looking at. Kent, Parkinson both yes, Lancashire depends on how the dressing room reacts. There has already been a lot of comments on selection and body language during the Blast this season. And who they replace him.
He joins Davies, Reece, Hameed, Guest, Procter, Mullaney, Simpson, Clark, Lilley, Kerrigan and that's only those who have played for the 1st team County Club never mind those lost to counties after playign age group cricket. Good luck Matt.