Agree, but will he be given further opportunities with the middle order cluttered up with Saffers?
Durham New Contracts
- Thread starter Tongey
- Start date
A 3yr contract, I wonder what durham offered him...a 1yr extension?
Bri
Striker
They seem pretty pleased.
Not sure that lack of opportunity is his problem, he has been given them but the scores haven't come. I hope next year they do. Given the current situation and unless there's a sudden massive change no one will be going abroad to play club or grade cricket, so it's going to be nets, lots of nets.
Last edited:
Twisted
Striker
If you're for one second suggesting Burnham hasn't been given the necessary chances he deserves you're absolutely bonkers
I've neither suggested nor implied that he hasn't been given plenty of chances. Pot, kettle springs to mind.
partly as there no wasn't enough money to go around
Good to see Johnson hijacking another post under his alias and still failing to answer a direct question
Pardon? was a perfectly reasonable discussion, don't ruin the thread
I believe so
Last edited:
Twisted
Striker
If Burnham had showed any signs of beating a reasonable cricketer or being committed to cricket perhaps the middle order wouldn't be 'cluttered up with saffers' aka signings that have improved the team. I wonder if the same accusations were leveled at the likes of benkenstein in years gone by
Last edited:
No one would be bothered if it was the odd one who was quality. It’s the glut and blocking of chances for young local lads that’s the issue.
It boils down to whether you think DCCC should be measured purely on results or whether it should be a flagship for the region’s best players and platform for the young ones. There’s no right or wrong answer to that one though, personal preference.
Yes, there needs to be a balance between youth and experience and at present there doesn't appear to be any youngsters on the cusp of 1st team. Both Steels,Burnham and Coggers jnr are of an age where they should have established themselves but haven't for a variety of reasons hence the need for experienced imports just as there was for Benks and Divo. Can't see the need for Dickson though nor would I give up on Burnham,baggage withstanding.
Just hope this influx of SAffers hasn't discouraged likes of Bell and S.Steel and others to follow.
Totally agree with Northcountry boy,others are entitled to disagree and I certainly wouldn't label them bonkers.
Last edited:
Steak Pie
Striker
If you look at the 2008 and 2009 sides DiVo, Benks and the overseas (Shiv, McKenzie etc) scored about 60-70% of the runs. There's only really Will Smith's (import from Notts) golden summer of 2008 who was a reliable bat. Typically in that side you would only have one or sometimes two of Kyle Coetzer, Muchall and Harmison Jnr from the academy in the top 6.
Kiwi Paul Wiseman was the spinner, replaced by Blackwell from Somerset with Gaz Breese filling in. Aussies Thorp and Claydon were regulars in the seam attack.
So the majority of the side were imports, not hearing many people complaining about that side though.
chopsfc007
Striker
yes and it's no coincidence that we won the championship in 2013 with a team of local youngsters brought on by the likes of Divo and Benks.
brandon
Striker
chopsfc007
Striker
In good shape of Bancroft comes back
Twisted
Striker
nor complaining about the influence they'll have had on all the juniors who otherwise would be playing week in and week out and getting a tonking
bearing in mind potts and trevaskis are 21 and played decent sized roles this year, given the reduced cricket, also steel played the bulk of the t20 and was probably earmarked for a big role in the 50 over game i'm not sure that's fair. we've been bemoaning the lack of great youngsters coming in with the bat as long as i can remember, but you can't magic them out of thin air.
there's no point playing youngsters just for the sake of it if they aren't good enough, it doesn't help develop them if they aren't anywhere near the standard and it doesn't help the players who are good enough if they're in a team half full of those only making up the numbers, its not fair on them. Given our most promising youngster' in recent years is now well into his career and isn't even close to the sort of averages that got the likes of coezter, smith, richardson, pringle etc etc bombed out for not being good enough maybe the likes of bell and those realeased aren't actually good enoughh to play for DCCC
i think it's a balancing act. as i said above, there is no point playing local players for the sake of it if they're going to get hammered every week. it wouldn't help them develop and they wouldn't end up sticking at durham for long, if they stuck at cricket at all
Last edited:
Agreed. But I think the current balance is wrong.
Steak Pie
Striker
That 2013 side was a thing of beauty, and if we had held onto Rocky, Keats and Badger we might have been able to continue to blood young players at the right pace
Indeed. I don't see the point in getting humped every week in order to protect some mystical ethos of having a side full of home grown players, when that isn't really true in the first place. And I don't see how setting the young players up to fail in a losing side will help them develop. Stoneman, Borthwick and Jennings all had time to develop with the pressure off in a winning side.
I see the signings of Dickson and Bedingham as a short term fix while we get the house in order, although Bedingham does have some pedigree in Saffer domestic cricket, he might a better addition.
Twisted
Striker
I think it's hard to say. Looking at the way the season panned out then yes i think that's understandable. Obviously we didn't sign the likes of dickson thinking they'd struggled. had he come in and played excellently and we had a great season would we say the balance was wrong? had steel been given more of a chance and he'd been terrible would the balance be right?
in trying to look up bob willis trophy averages to see how many chances people got and who took them i could only find the t20 blast stats. scott steel played ten matches, only batting 6 times but scored 40 runs total at an average of 6.66. the only batsman he was better than, ironically was dickson who only batted once. he had however the best bowling ecomony other than wood, who played once, and took 6 wickets - so whoever criticised the club for using him more as a spinning allrounder instead of a top order batsman maybe is beating the club for no reason.
is it a shame he won't be kicking on at durham? absolutely. would i like to see more locals in the side? yes. but the team has to be competent otherwise it serves little purpose, other than being a glorified academy for other counties
aye dickson seems a poor signing but that's with the beauty of hindsight. and he is far from the first opener to sign here and struggle. clearly we didn't feel anyone in the academy was ready to step in. shame cameron steel has gone backwards, i was really hoping he'd kick on after a good year a few back
Last edited:
wayne entwhistle no9
Winger
It's more the signing of Behardian than Dickson that puzzles me.
I will be very interested to see if Behardian starts in the championship team at the beginning of next season. I get a feeling we have signed him for the one day set up. So far we have got a 37 year old that bats at 6 or 7 and doesn't bowl and looks like he nurdles the ball about.
I will be very interested to see if Behardian starts in the championship team at the beginning of next season. I get a feeling we have signed him for the one day set up. So far we have got a 37 year old that bats at 6 or 7 and doesn't bowl and looks like he nurdles the ball about.
Twisted
Striker
i think that's fair. dickson hasn't worked but filled a need. middle order is somewhere i feel we're better stocked, as is also easier to plug youngsters in if we're warying of sticknig them in too early. i don't know much about either bedingham or behardian though.
