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

CC :: Derbyshire v Durham

Status
Not open for further replies.

103-6 - absolute f***ing shocker - ball was missing leg by some margin but the umpires finger shot up, cheating bastard.
 
GordonMuchallNo1Fan said:
Poynter just isn't good enough.
Click to expand...

Maybe he isn’t, but he got an absolute shocker that was missing a fourth stump outside of leg.

Burnham the latest to throw his wicket away. 143-7.

143-8 - Worst batting lineup in the country?

I’d love to have seen Durham bat against Durham bowlers on this pitch. They’d have been rolled for 60. We’re 154-9 on a blameless pitch against the leagues worst (or atleast second worst) bowling attack :rolleyes:

Derbyshire are 8/11 with bet365 if anyone fancies some free money.
 
Last edited:
Its awful being shit again, we are right back to where we were 20 years ago

f***ing ECB, how have they got away with doing this man
/
What did they gain by doing it
 
The Rat said:
Its awful being shit again, we are right back to where we were 20 years ago

f***ing ECB, how have they got away with doing this man
/
What did they gain by doing it
Click to expand...

They gained what Graves wanted - for Headingley to have zero competition for Test Matches North of Manchester. What you’re seeing now is purely the collateral from it.

We’ve started as I imagine we’ll go on in terms of batting bonus points. A big fat zero.
 
brandon said:
They gained what Graves wanted - for Headingley to have zero competition for Test Matches North of Manchester. What you’re seeing now is purely the collateral from it.

We’ve started as I imagine we’ll go on in terms of batting bonus points. A big fat zero.
Click to expand...

Twats

Raine is batting too low in this lineup for me.
 
The Rat said:
Twats

Raine is batting too low in this lineup for me.
Click to expand...

I’d agree, the use of the night watchman meant he was down at 9 - but even still, I don’t know why he didn’t go in before Trevaskis.

On the subject of nightwatchman, I’d actually get Raine to do it - he’s a proper batsman and he could quite easily build a proper innings the following day if he survives the night before. Salisbury did his job, but essentially it’s just a wasted wicket.
 
brandon said:
I’d agree, the use of the night watchman meant he was down at 9 - but even still, I don’t know why he didn’t go in before Trevaskis.

On the subject of nightwatchman, I’d actually get Raine to do it - he’s a proper batsman and he could quite easily build a proper innings the following day if he survives the night before. Salisbury did his job, but essentially it’s just a wasted wicket.
Click to expand...

Agreed, we an still win this mind
 
wayne entwhistle no9 said:
You could bat 1 to 9 in this side in any order you want they are all about the same standard. Lots of all rounders not enough quality.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that’s very true. Far too many ‘bits and pieces’ cricketers - Bancroft is going to have to score about 1,200 runs to get us challenging.

Umpire turns down an appeal from Rushy against Godleman - one things for certain, it was closer to hitting the stumps than the one Poynter was triggered for.

Next delivery - four.
 
Last edited:
Reece c Richardson b Salisbury 10. 25-1

Godleman c Poynter b Raine 19. 33-2 (59 ahead)

smoker said:
We're a weak team.... Not looking forward to sitting through this next week.
Click to expand...

Should have Bancroft and Wood next week atleast.

Getting away from us now, the lad Lace has his career best :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top