• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Sussex vs Durham

Status
Not open for further replies.
brandon said:
I don't think batting first or second comes into this......? The other games for me have no bearing on our game. What does have a bearing is the fact we had the opposition needing 97 with only 3 wickets left and conspired to abosloutely throw it away.

What more, the other two games were an exact carbon f***ing copy. So for me it's got nothing to do with the decision at the toss. We should be top of the table with 4 wins for fuck sake :rolleyes:.

I've watched the game tonight on a delay as I had to nip out and with Scotty bowling like Mushtaq Ahmed and having them on the canvas taking a long 9 count it thought we were a f***ing shoe in, sending texts about left right and centre on how well we were playing - no doubt the recipients thought I was a right f***ing mug knowing what they knew in real time.

What's that what Einstein said about Insanity......? Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results......? For that see our captain and our bowlers.

Oh and we should've pissed 320 on that wicket too.

So who or what part of our game is to blame?? Take your pick.
Click to expand...

If you go through the results of this years 50 over comp so far you'll see that more games have been won by the team that bats second. There seems to be an advantage to batting second, out of 4 games we've batted first 3 times and lost, the one game we bowled first we won, it's not rocket science.
 

Harry Lime said:
If you go through the results of this years 50 over comp so far you'll see that more games have been won by the team that bats second. There seems to be an advantage to batting second, out of 4 games we've batted first 3 times and lost, the one game we bowled first we won, it's not rocket science.
Click to expand...

It's not rocket science that in all 3 defeats we've been in ridiculously strong positions and not been able to finish teams off.

We should have 4 wins, simple as that. Other games have no bearing on how our lot have pissed away an almost certain victory three games out of 4.
 
willo said:
So that's Somerset 106/5 and chase 315 to beat us

Kent 154/6 chase 274 to beat us

And Sussex 191/7 chase 288 to beat us.

It isn't a coincidence. A mixture of poor captaincy and dire bowling is killing us.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone can argue with you on that one, but I will say that we didn't score enough last night, we should have broken 300 easily.
 
brandon said:
It's not rocket science that in all 3 defeats we've been in ridiculously strong positions and not been able to finish teams off.

We should have 4 wins, simple as that. Other games have no bearing on how our lot have pissed away an almost certain victory three games out of 4.
Click to expand...

You've given 3 excellent examples of why batting first doesn't suit Durham, you've proved my point perfectly. :)
 
viccarlton said:
I don't think anyone can argue with you on that one, but I will say that we didn't score enough last night, we should have broken 300 easily.
Click to expand...

we haven't scored enough in any game we've lost. sounds obvious but its true, im amazed we've made these games close with scores i wouldn't consider close to competitive.
 
Twisted said:
we haven't scored enough in any game we've lost. sounds obvious but its true, im amazed we've made these games close with scores i wouldn't consider close to competitive.
Click to expand...
The one thing I found frustrating was the lack of communication coming from the coaching staff to support Rocky in his decision making. When Hastings and Rushy were bowling like idiots Rocky should have been talking to them, telling them what the team wanted and to certainly calm Hastings down. It was all very frustrating, but all too predictable following Taunton and Kent.

As our innings progressed we could see that the lack of boundaries was going to be telling in the latter run chase - the Sussex supporters knew that Beer was a good batsman and as long as he was at the crease they knew they'd score runs and be in with a chance. That confidence proved correct, but why did we set a field allowing the new batsmen to settle in and keep the scoreboard ticking over with singles? L0t's of debating points, but I feel absolutely nothing has been learned from the mistakes at Taunton and Canterbury .... rant over ....
 
Harry Lime said:
You've given 3 excellent examples of why batting first doesn't suit Durham, you've proved my point perfectly. :)
Click to expand...

I haven't proved your point at all. We - batting first - SHOULD have won all three games. You can make stats suit whatever argument you want to put forward. Which is obviously what you've done there. We had enough chances last night to put the game away and to go against that norm though.

It's like on the Championship match threads when people say "Oh well actually 70-5 isn't a bad score when you look at the other games going on today.......". When in reality, what's going on in say Canterbury has fuckall to do with the wicket at Chester-le-street.

Batting second may statistically be the best formula, but no excuse can be made for our lot snatching defeat from the jaws of victory time after time. When Sussex needed 97 to win last night with 3 wickets remaining I doubt our lads would've been saying "Oh fuck, we've batted first, we're doomed to lose this one". OR perhaps they did, because that's the only thing I can think of as to how the fuck we lost that game last night :lol:
 
brandon said:
I haven't proved your point at all. We - batting first - SHOULD have won all three games. You can make stats suit whatever argument you want to put forward. Which is obviously what you've done there. We had enough chances last night to put the game away and to go against that norm though.

It's like on the Championship match threads when people say "Oh well actually 70-5 isn't a bad score when you look at the other games going on today.......". When in reality, what's going on in say Canterbury has fuckall to do with the wicket at Chester-le-street.

Batting second may statistically be the best formula, but no excuse can be made for our lot snatching defeat from the jaws of victory time after time. When Sussex needed 97 to win last night with 3 wickets remaining I doubt our lads would've been saying "Oh fuck, we've batted first, we're doomed to lose this one". OR perhaps they did, because that's the only thing I can think of as to how the fuck we lost that game last night :lol:
Click to expand...

So you agree, batting second is statistically the best formula, I knew you'd see sense eventually. :)
 
brandon said:
I haven't proved your point at all. We - batting first - SHOULD have won all three games. You can make stats suit whatever argument you want to put forward. Which is obviously what you've done there. We had enough chances last night to put the game away and to go against that norm though.

It's like on the Championship match threads when people say "Oh well actually 70-5 isn't a bad score when you look at the other games going on today.......". When in reality, what's going on in say Canterbury has fuckall to do with the wicket at Chester-le-street.

Batting second may statistically be the best formula, but no excuse can be made for our lot snatching defeat from the jaws of victory time after time. When Sussex needed 97 to win last night with 3 wickets remaining I doubt our lads would've been saying "Oh fuck, we've batted first, we're doomed to lose this one". OR perhaps they did, because that's the only thing I can think of as to how the fuck we lost that game last night :lol:
Click to expand...

TBF in my mind it has been more like us nearly snatching victory from the jaws of defeat as i don't think we've put enough runs on the board in any match bar perhaps the 311. the score at canterbury never looked enough and i was saying we weren't getting there from about 20 overs in [during our innings] barring fireworks. the fact it was as close as it was shocked me. same against sussex
 
Durham aren't the only side finding it hard to close out games bowling second, of the 9 games played this week on Tuesday/Wednesday, only 2 teams that batted first went on to win. There's a pattern forming that's getting harder to dismiss, even Tim Wellock mentioned it in his post match report yesterday.
 
T20 cricket may be partly responsible. There was a time when 10 an over required towards the end of the match was virtually game over. Now players seem to have a different mindset and 50 off the last 5 is gettable.
 
Aidan11 said:
T20 cricket may be partly responsible. There was a time when 10 an over required towards the end of the match was virtually game over. Now players seem to have a different mindset and 50 off the last 5 is gettable.
Click to expand...
Talking of different mindsets looking at old one day international cards before the T20 era is an eye opener. especially if you go back to the early 90s & before... 250 off 50 overs was seen as a massive total in them days. :lol:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top