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

CC :: Durham v Warwickshire


The Rat said:
its transformed him

he’s the quickest bowler in the world

that’s not hyperbole

he should be England’s number 1 “fast bowler”

its thst simple for me

he doesn’t get the respect in the media thst archer gets, I don’t get if

also, his figures before this run up should be totally ignored, he’s just a different bowler now
Click to expand...
Meh, that is hyperbole. Some of his best bowling was before he changed the run up, e.g. WI 2018/9.

He was always a great bowler but England would give him the old ball and expect him to perform miracles with it. Durham give him the new ball on a pitch that is doing a bit and, surprise surprise, he's a different prospect.
 
Excellent first day - let's ram it home with the bat.

One weird aspect of yesterday;

If you'd said we'd have the Bears at 30-8 just after lunch & bowl them out for 87
- would anyone think that our only wicketless bowler (and our most expensive) would be Rushy!!
 
smoker said:
Meh, that is hyperbole. Some of his best bowling was before he changed the run up, e.g. WI 2018/9.

He was always a great bowler but England would give him the old ball and expect him to perform miracles with it. Durham give him the new ball on a pitch that is doing a bit and, surprise surprise, he's a different prospect.
Click to expand...

no mate West Indies was after his run up change

sorry but you’re wrong on this he used to 85-88 for England

how he bowls every ball over 90mph

he’s the fastest bowler in the world

the 2nd fastest is njorte (spelling) but he can’t do it consistently

You must be logged on to see external links

changed it before the World Cup, well before west indies

he couldn’t bowl that quickly before it

he’s a totally different bowler
 
Last edited:
The Rat said:
no mate West Indies was after his run up change

sorry but you’re wrong on this he used to 85-88 for England

how he bowls every ball over 90mph

he’s the fastest bowler in the world

the 2nd fastest is njorte (spelling) but he can’t do it consistently

You must be logged on to see external links

changed it before the World Cup, well before west indies

he couldn’t bowl that quickly before it

he’s a totally different bowler
Click to expand...

Sorry, you're right, it was October 2018. I've also checked your assertion that he is consistently quicker since he changed the run up and that also seems to be correct, with his five fastest deliveries since then.

I do maintain a lot of his early struggles were down to misuse however. Bowlers like Wood, and Carse for that matter, should be used in short brutal spells and given every benefit, I.e. their best end, the new ball, bowling directly from fresh, which is exactly what Durham did yesterday morning and Bayliss never did with Wood, using him as a run of the mill old ball reverse swing bowler.
.
Where Durham have dropped the ball in this regard imho is letting Matty twofer consistently have the new ball with Rushworth. I like Salisbury but he is a comfy suv compared to Carse's Ferrari or 1000cc race bike. He should be bowling long, steady spells after Carse has finished 2-3 overs of Harum scarum roughing up the openers.

On rare occasions where Carse had the new ball, I.e. in the RLC and Blast, he was taking wickets in the first over.

You must give these impact bowlers every advantage to make an impact.
 
Last edited:
BATTED YOUNGY!! GDL*

51* from 150 balls with 5 fours.

Durham 96-0
smoker said:
Sorry, you're right, it was October 2018. I've also checked your assertion that he is consistently quicker since he changed the run up and that also seems to be correct, with his five fastest deliveries since then.

I do maintain a lot of his early struggles were down to misuse however. Bowlers like Wood, and Carse for that matter, should be used in short brutal spells and given every benefit, I.e. their best end, the new ball, bowling directly from fresh, which is exactly what Durham did yesterday morning and Bayliss never did with Wood, using him as a run of the mill old ball reverse swing bowler.
.
Where Durham have dropped the ball in this regard imho is letting Matty twofer consistently have the new ball with Rushworth. I like Salisbury but he is a comfy suv compared to Carse's Ferrari or 1000cc race bike. He should be bowling long, steady spells after Carse has finished 2-3 overs of Harum scarum roughing up the openers.

On rare occasions where Carse had the new ball, I.e. in the RLC and Blast, he was taking wickets in the first over.

You must give these impact bowlers every advantage to make an impact.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on the Carse point to an extent, but I’m not sure Salisbury would have much of an effect coming in first change.

*Gan Double It ;)
_
Durham 100-0 (51 overs) Lees 43*, Young 55*.
 
Last edited:
brandon said:
BATTED YOUNGY!! GDL*

51* from 150 balls with 5 fours.

Durham 96-0

I agree with you on the Carse point to an extent, but I’m not sure Salisbury would have much of an effect coming in first change.

*Gan Double It ;)
_
Durham 100-0 (51 overs) Lees 43*, Young 55*.
Click to expand...
He bowled well against Nott's but his usual fare is 2 or 3 wickets a match which just isn't enough for a new ball strike bowler. (Iirc 2 of those Nott's wickets were with the old ball). He looks best bowling across the batsman on a nagging length, looking for a nibble: does he really need a brand new ball for this? If he bowled a bit more accurately rather than losing his line and length as he tires he would be very effective in that third seamer role.

Put it this way, would you be happy with him leading the attack if Rushy retired or if we were pushing for the title?
.
These are not easy batting conditions, these two have done well to dig in
 
Last edited:
smoker said:
He bowled well against Nott's but his usual fare is 2 or 3 wickets a match which just isn't enough for a new ball strike bowler. (Iirc 2 of those Nott's wickets were with the old ball). He looks best bowling across the batsman on a nagging length, looking for a nibble: does he really need a brand new ball for this? If he bowled a bit more accurately rather than losing his line and length as he tires he would be very effective in that third seamer role.

Put it this way, would you be happy with him leading the attack if Rushy retired or if we were pushing for the title?
Click to expand...

I’m generally in agreement with you to be honest. I think the problem we have currently is that all of our bowlers with the exception of Rushy are inconsistent. They’re also all very similar. Carse has the extra pace, Coughlin looked quick last week too but the others all tend to need to rely on a bit of swing or seam movement taking an edge or beating a bat in and around a spell of accurate and economical stuff.

On the Rushy question, absolutely not based on his current body or work but then I don’t think I particularly trust any of our current crop of bowlers in that scenario - Rushy is irreplaceable quite frankly and I hope he can go on long beyond 40 like Darren Stevens!

The thing is, ultimately I think our bowling attack is still in a rebuilding phase. We’ve never been able to replace Bunny, which comes as no surprise given his talent and his haul of wickets. The same issue will befall us when Rushy eventually goes.

BATTED LEESY LAD!! GDI!!

50* from 164 balls with four fours.

109-0.
WishyWashy said:
Aye the outfield is very slow too so anything we do get away isn't bringing up a boundary.
Click to expand...

Both games we’ve played at home have been played on a wicket closer to the old scoreboard which has mean the boundary up to the pavilion is massive.

Marty mentioned that boundary is about 80 metres and the rope is still a good 15 metres or so in from the pavilion fence. Most grounds on the county circuit aren’t 105 metres across the whole playing surface :lol:
 
Last edited:
brandon said:
I’m generally in agreement with you to be honest. I think the problem we have currently is that all of our bowlers with the exception of Rushy are inconsistent. They’re also all very similar. Carse has the extra pace, Coughlin looked quick last week too but the others all tend to need to rely on a bit of swing or seam movement taking an edge or beating a bat in and around a spell of accurate and economical stuff.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see potts get a nod, can't be long til he features. And hopefully Trevaskis added to the mix to give us more options.

Problem is both carse and Coggers seem suited to short sharp bursts (through both technique and fitness) which leaves us short of bowlers who can bowl long spells, Rushy and raine - Salisbury is really useful as he's one of the few you trust not to break down
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top