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

CC :: Sussex v Durham

Status
Not open for further replies.
brandon said:
Erm, is that seriously all that's concerning you about today? So you'd have kept Jones in ahead of Collingwood? And Davies ahead of Poynter??
Click to expand...
I'm not the slightest bit convinced Collingwood is fit. Either way it's another crazy decision at the toss. Why have Ryan Pringle carrying the drinks, surely he would have been better doing T20 2nd xi games which I think were at Brandon? I said a couple of weeks ago keep Steel as captain, stand by that, give the younger lads a chance. Collingwood not having the best of times at the moment. Frustrating
 

GordonMuchallNo1Fan said:
I'm not the slightest bit convinced Collingwood is fit. Either way it's another crazy decision at the toss. Why have Ryan Pringle carrying the drinks, surely he would have been better doing T20 2nd xi games which I think were at Brandon? I said a couple of weeks ago keep Steel as captain, stand by that, give the younger lads a chance. Collingwood not having the best of times at the moment. Frustrating
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with any of that, but I don't see how any of it ties into your initial comment about not changing a winning team. Complaining about not changing a winning captain perhaps I could see that argument, but then it was the bowlers who served us so well last week and who did very little today - featherbed or not, incorrect decision at the toss or not.
 
brandon said:
I don't disagree with any of that, but I don't see how any of it ties into your initial comment about not changing a winning team. Complaining about not changing a winning captain perhaps I could see that argument, but then it was the bowlers who served us so well last week and who did very little today - featherbed or not, incorrect decision at the toss or not.
Click to expand...
Distraction technique - change the subject.

As a general principle to not change a winning team - fine, that's arguable but you can't apply that to all circumstances.
 
brandon said:
Need 403 to avoid the follow on.

Be 10 minutes batting or so before Lunch, fully expect us to lose a wicket before the interval.
Click to expand...
Yep, it's a big score to follow. This is where we see the placid surface start to pop and nip about, isn't it?! :lol:
 
Another wicket lost in the last fofteen minutes before an interval. 100-3 at Tea, long long way from respectability. We need a centurion, possibly two.

Coolingwood gets an absolute f***ing shocker from the umpire Burns.

Still 225 away from avoiding the follow on.
 
Last edited:
1 for 4 to start the morning and all of
it with a ball that is 70 odd overs old.

Is there a more obvious example of self destruction? We’re going to be following on 300 behind.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top