• The first stage of the forum upgrades has now been completed but they remain in a degraded state and are still being worked on. Normal posting/reading should now be possible.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Quarter Term Report

smoker said:
The lack of pace has definitely been costly. Carse and Wood were fairly destructive this time last season.

I liked the look of Coughlin in spells against Glamorgan. I thought we could use him as a fast bowler in short bursts, but the lad is a walking injury, you can't depend on him.

Potts has found another yard of pace and is carrying the rest of them atm.

The flat, dry wickets last season should have been a warning sign we couldn't rely on RMF nibblers. It's criminal we came into the season with a team dependent on them.

Which poster was it said "we've got a left arm spinner, what more do you want?" 🤣
Click to expand...
We have Woods, Carse, Potts and Coughlin. If we're dependent on medium fast it's surely because we don't have more than one fit fast bowler.

Gibson looked reasonably quick, just inaccurate and there's that Campbell hanging around studying for his degree (how selfish can you get) who as I understand it isn't that quick, although he may develop but does generate bounce and bounce may be enough to unsettle batsmen, it was with Harmy who didn't bowl that fast, at least not always.
 

Bri said:
We have Woods, Carse, Potts and Coughlin. If we're dependent on medium fast it's surely because we don't have more than one fit fast bowler.

Gibson looked reasonably quick, just inaccurate and there's that Campbell hanging around studying for his degree (how selfish can you get) who as I understand it isn't that quick, although he may develop but does generate bounce and bounce may be enough to unsettle batsmen, it was with Harmy who didn't bowl that fast, at least not always.
Click to expand...

The thing with harmison is he could bowl fast and alot of the time the fear factor was enough to unsettle batsmen even if he wasn't that quick always
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bri
Bri said:
We have Woods, Carse, Potts and Coughlin. If we're dependent on medium fast it's surely because we don't have more than one fit fast bowler.

Gibson looked reasonably quick, just inaccurate and there's that Campbell hanging around studying for his degree (how selfish can you get) who as I understand it isn't that quick, although he may develop but does generate bounce and bounce may be enough to unsettle batsmen, it was with Harmy who didn't bowl that fast, at least not always.
Click to expand...

Every team gets injuries or international call ups. Only Durham think we don't need to do anything about it and can muddle through with academy players. Sussex are fielding Crane and Beard they brought in on month long loans to cover injuries.

We watched Campbell a lot in the RLC last season and he's only c.80mph and looked a bit slingy/skiddy for a tall lad to me. I didn't notice him generate that much bounce: Potts is better in that regard. He should improve with time, but isn't ready for the first xi imho.

Gibson looks about Rushworth pace but too many loose deliveries. He was OK against Leicestershire but his head went down against Notts. TBF to the lad he's not done too bad again here, the trouble is the rest of the bowlers aren't performing which makes him an expensive luxury. I can understand why he played over Salisbury in hindsight as Salisbury has been rusty as fuck.
Twisted said:
The thing with harmison is he could bowl fast and alot of the time the fear factor was enough to unsettle batsmen even if he wasn't that quick always
Click to expand...

Harmison was all about unpredictability imo.

He'd hoy down a full toss at 80mph. Next ball would be just short of a good length, 90mph and rear up at the batman's throat. Then a wide lol. He also seemed to generate some unpredictable late away swing.

Very little of it was deliberate, but it had the effect of unsettling batsmen.

England players said this is why Mitchell Johnson was also so difficult to face.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bri
smoker said:
Every team gets injuries or international call ups. Only Durham think we don't need to do anything about it and can muddle through with academy players. Sussex are fielding Crane and Beard they brought in on month long loans to cover injuries.

We watched Campbell a lot in the RLC last season and he's only c.80mph and looked a bit slingy/skiddy for a tall lad to me. I didn't notice him generate that much bounce: Potts is better in that regard. He should improve with time, but isn't ready for the first xi imho.

Gibson looks about Rushworth pace but too many loose deliveries. He was OK against Leicestershire but his head went down against Notts. TBF to the lad he's not done too bad again here, the trouble is the rest of the bowlers aren't performing which makes him an expensive luxury. I can understand why he played over Salisbury in hindsight as Salisbury has been rusty as fuck.


Harmison was all about unpredictability imo.

He'd hoy down a full toss at 80mph. Next ball would be just short of a good length, 90mph and rear up at the batman's throat. Then a wide lol. He also seemed to generate some unpredictable late away swing.

Very little of it was deliberate, but it had the effect of unsettling batsmen.

England players said this is why Mitchell Johnson was also so difficult to face.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Both were unplayable on their day, and a huge amount of their success was due to the fear they put into batsmen by having that devastating spell potential
 
smoker said:
Standard definition of an all-rounder is someone with a higher batting average than bowling average.
Click to expand...
Never heard that one before like.

I was brought up with the understanding that there were batting all-rounders, bowling all-rounders and genuine all-rounders.

Therefore your definition would only apply to one of the above tags.
Bri said:
it was with Harmy who didn't bowl that fast, at least not always.
Click to expand...

He could bowl over 90mph, that’s fast enough :o
 
Last edited:
brandon said:
Never heard that one before like.

I was brought up with the understanding that there were batting all-rounders, bowling all-rounders and genuine all-rounders.

Therefore your definition would only apply to one of the above tags.


He could bowl over 90mph, that’s fast enough :eek:
Click to expand...
He could but often didn't. He didn't need to, with his bounce he was more effective than most.
 
smoker said:
Every team gets injuries or international call ups. Only Durham think we don't need to do anything about it and can muddle through with academy players. Sussex are fielding Crane and Beard they brought in on month long loans to cover injuries.

We watched Campbell a lot in the RLC last season and he's only c.80mph and looked a bit slingy/skiddy for a tall lad to me. I didn't notice him generate that much bounce: Potts is better in that regard. He should improve with time, but isn't ready for the first xi imho.

Gibson looks about Rushworth pace but too many loose deliveries. He was OK against Leicestershire but his head went down against Notts. TBF to the lad he's not done too bad again here, the trouble is the rest of the bowlers aren't performing which makes him an expensive luxury. I can understand why he played over Salisbury in hindsight as Salisbury has been rusty as fuck.


Harmison was all about unpredictability imo.

He'd hoy down a full toss at 80mph. Next ball would be just short of a good length, 90mph and rear up at the batman's throat. Then a wide lol. He also seemed to generate some unpredictable late away swing.

Very little of it was deliberate, but it had the effect of unsettling batsmen.

England players said this is why Mitchell Johnson was also so difficult to face.
Click to expand...

I can only speak myself and I realise it’s not a popular view but I don’t wanna be signing bowlers on loan deals
 
The Rat said:
I can only speak myself and I realise it’s not a popular view but I don’t wanna be signing bowlers on loan deals
Click to expand...

Why not? Van Meekeren was brilliant for us in the RLC last season, took the most wickets after Rushy. Do you think we'd have got to the final with Ollie Gibson opening the bowling?

I hope we've got the sense to do it again this August when we lose most our best bowlers to the 100.

Other the length of the contract it isn't radically different to signing a 'permanent' player. Some of you clearly haven't thought this through.
brandon said:
Never heard that one before like.

I was brought up with the understanding that there were batting all-rounders, bowling all-rounders and genuine all-rounders
Click to expand...

You were brought up in the last 25 years though.

It's the old rule of thumb definition of a "genuine all-rounder" formerly known as "all-rounder", when "batting all rounder" and "bowling all-rounder" were "occasional (insert bowling type)" and "handy with the bat" respectively.
 
Last edited:
smoker said:
Why not? Van Meekeren was brilliant for us in the RLC last season, took the most wickets after Rushy. Do you think we'd have got to the final with Ollie Gibson opening the bowling?

I hope we've got the sense to do it again this August when we lose most our best bowlers to the 100.

Other the length of the contract it isn't radically different to signing a 'permanent' player. Some of you clearly haven't thought this through.


You were brought up in the last 25 years though.

It's the old rule of thumb definition of a "genuine all-rounder" formerly known as "all-rounder", when "batting all rounder" and "bowling all-rounder" were "occasional (insert bowling type)" and "handy with the bat" respectively.
Click to expand...

It’s just why I love Durham it’s about developing players for me

I’m sure most don’t agree
 
smoker said:
Why not? Van Meekeren was brilliant for us in the RLC last season, took the most wickets after Rushy. Do you think we'd have got to the final with Ollie Gibson opening the bowling?

I hope we've got the sense to do it again this August when we lose most our best bowlers to the 100.

Other the length of the contract it isn't radically different to signing a 'permanent' player. Some of you clearly haven't thought this through.
Click to expand...

agree. i'm assuming rushy won't get picked for the 16.4 but potts certainly will (think he, bedingham, carse and posibly raine? got selected last year)

personally i wouldn't want to go into a cc game with a 4 man attack of rushy, gibson, salisbury and doneathy
 
The Rat said:
It’s just why I love Durham it’s about developing players for me

I’m sure most don’t agree
Click to expand...

Things aren't so black and white.

The kids need experienced players they can learn from and will pick up the slack if the kids struggle to meet the standard at first. Otherwise they don't learn anything and just have their confidence destroyed. I bet if you looked at RLC averages for last season, Doneathy or Campbell wouldn't be in the top fifty, or even hundred bowlers, but they contributed and developed.

Rushworth and Salisbury's form could expose any young players in the RLC. I don't think Raine was picked up in the 100 draft but I could see him getting picked up at short notice with all the crocks and England players on the roster.
 
smoker said:
The kids need experienced players they can learn from and will pick up the slack if the kids struggle to meet the standard at first. Otherwise they don't learn anything and just have their confidence destroyed. I bet if you looked at RLC averages for last season, Doneathy or Campbell wouldn't be in the top fifty, or even hundred bowlers, but they contributed and developed.
Click to expand...

this is what gets overlooked by all the people who want a team of entirely local players. without the like of jones, boon, hussey, benkenstein, diva, breese etc we'd probably rarely climbed out of the bottom few places as alot of the great players we've developed woudn't have excelled as they have, joined in the first place, or stayed as long as they have
 
Twisted said:
agree. i'm assuming rushy won't get picked for the 16.4 but potts certainly will (think he, bedingham, carse and posibly raine? got selected last year)

personally i wouldn't want to go into a cc game with a 4 man attack of rushy, gibson, salisbury and doneathy
Click to expand...

I assume this is correct:

The Hundred 2022: latest squads as Draft picks revealed -
You must be logged on to see external links


Same players as last year with possibility Raine and Bedingham will get brought in as injury substitutes or wildcards.
 
smoker said:
I assume this is correct:

The Hundred 2022: latest squads as Draft picks revealed -
You must be logged on to see external links


Same players as last year with possibility Raine and Bedingham will get brought in as injury substitutes or wildcards.
Click to expand...

i've no idea how bedingham did after getting drafted it, although his form this season may be more of a factor than however he did in the one game he had last year, honestly i don't even know if he played in the end :lol:

i really thought raine did get picked up. maybe he just entered the draft or whatever it's called and never got picked up
 
Twisted said:
i've no idea how bedingham did after getting drafted it, although his form this season may be more of a factor than however he did in the one game he had last year, honestly i don't even know if he played in the end :lol:

i really thought raine did get picked up. maybe he just entered the draft or whatever it's called and never got picked up
Click to expand...

Not in the squads. He got a wildcard for Northern Superchargers last season. I don't think wildcards are announced till July.
 
smoker said:
He was picked up by London Spirit as an injury substitute for a couple of games last season and had a mare. Doesn't seem to have been signed up in the draft this year
Click to expand...

i thought he was drafted in just for the final tbh, maybe i'm confusing it with our final, was that when it was announced?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top