• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

CC : Durham v Warwickshire


Not sure what we are actually trying to do currently managed 24 runs in 13 overs for the loss of 3 wickets.

They just seem intent on getting through to the new ball and McKinney is being starved of the strike.
 
chopsfc007 said:
And not as good as the players in the team
Click to expand...
Fair enough if that's your view, but I very much doubt we signed Rhodes to replace De Leede.

A top 3 batsman playing at 7 is stupid. Not sure on the logic from Campbell there, seems a just pick everyone option rather than make a call over Gay/Rhodes at 3.
 
mackembhoy said:
Fair enough if that's your view, but I very much doubt we signed Rhodes to replace De Leede.

A top 3 batsman playing at 7 is stupid. Not sure on the logic from Campbell there, seems a just pick everyone option rather than make a call over Gay/Rhodes at 3.
Click to expand...
De leede averaging 31 isn't exactly good
 
mackembhoy said:
Fair enough if that's your view, but I very much doubt we signed Rhodes to replace De Leede.

A top 3 batsman playing at 7 is stupid. Not sure on the logic from Campbell there, seems a just pick everyone option rather than make a call over Gay/Rhodes at 3.
Click to expand...

It is stupid I agree but seems like we might have?

But who do you replace Rhodes with? We’d still be unbalanced
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top