• 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.

Durham v Hampshire 12/08/2021


GordonMuchallNo1Fan said:
Marty reckons it's Surrey or Gloucs
Click to expand...
Well he's wrong unless the format from 2019 is different.

N1 played the winner of S3 and N2

So apart from the group's being not region based I can't see any difference.
wayne entwhistle no9 said:
Surely it has to be Surrey or Gloucestershire.
Click to expand...
I messaged my dad saying we were playing yorkshire. Completely forgetting about the quarters.

It's them or Essex based off 2019 competition rules
 
Last edited:
A great day at the Riverside. Thought Hants would get around 180 when they were in dire straits as the remaining batsmen only had one thing to aim for and that was to not take any risks and just bat the overs out. Loose bowling from Salisbury and an odd decision by Badger to bring him back let them get to over 200. Must admit got a bit jittery when Lees was out early on but Clarke and Badger got us back on track and romped home. Was hoping we would improve this season and today again proves we have. No where near being strong again but we are on the right path.
 
And just think, if we hadn’t faffed around in the last few overs batting at Scarborough, it would have been straight victories in the group games which went ahead. Phenomenal.
 
Dorlonco said:
A great day at the Riverside. Thought Hants would get around 180 when they were in dire straits as the remaining batsmen only had one thing to aim for and that was to not take any risks and just bat the overs out. Loose bowling from Salisbury and an odd decision by Badger to bring him back let them get to over 200. Must admit got a bit jittery when Lees was out early on but Clarke and Badger got us back on track and romped home. Was hoping we would improve this season and today again proves we have. No where near being strong again but we are on the right path.
Click to expand...
“Loose bowling from Salisbury” - his first seven overs went for 24 which is decent enough and kept up the early pressure very well. True it went a bit pear shaped at the death but not surprising that Hants started to have a go at the end of the innings given the dire straits they were in and they got lucky for a couple of overs. It happens. Don’t think anyone should be singled out for criticism on such a great day.
 
bumble2 said:
“Loose bowling from Salisbury” - his first seven overs went for 24 which is decent enough and kept up the early pressure very well. True it went a bit pear shaped at the death but not surprising that Hants started to have a go at the end of the innings given the dire straits they were in and they got lucky for a couple of overs. It happens. Don’t think anyone should be singled out for criticism on such a great day.
Click to expand...

Hampshire had to have a go, only a, win would have seen them progress. Had nowt to lose.
 
bumble2 said:
“Loose bowling from Salisbury” - his first seven overs went for 24 which is decent enough and kept up the early pressure very well. True it went a bit pear shaped at the death but not surprising that Hants started to have a go at the end of the innings given the dire straits they were in and they got lucky for a couple of overs. It happens. Don’t think anyone should be singled out for criticism on such a great day.
Click to expand...

Well his last 3 overs went for 39 runs and you can chuck in a couple of wides and a no ball with that. I call that loose bowling. To reiterate I was not being overtly critical but merely pointing out that the main contributory factor to Hants getting above 180 runs was Salisburys "loose bowling" and Badger deciding to continue bowling him when Doneathy, 11 runs off 3 overs, appeared to be a more viable option.
 
well pleased that we trounced trampshire and their lizard of a chairman bullshitter Bromsgrove.
Were you watching you backstabbing blaggard ? Your boys took a hell of a beating.
Essex will host Yorkshire on Saturday for the right to go to Glamorgan in Monday's last-four tie, with Durham to face a home semi-final on Tuesday against the winners of Sunday's quarter-final at The Oval between Surrey and Gloucestershire.

The final takes place at Trent Bridge on Thursday.
Essex will host Yorkshire on Saturday for the right to go to Glamorgan in Monday's last-four tie, with Durham to face a home semi-final on Tuesday against the winners of Sunday's quarter-final at The Oval between Surrey and Gloucestershire.

The final takes place at Trent Bridge on Thursday.
 
Last edited:
Dorlonco said:
Well his last 3 overs went for 39 runs and you can chuck in a couple of wides and a no ball with that. I call that loose bowling. To reiterate I was not being overtly critical but merely pointing out that the main contributory factor to Hants getting above 180 runs was Salisburys "loose bowling" and Badger deciding to continue bowling him when Doneathy, 11 runs off 3 overs, appeared to be a more viable option.
Click to expand...
Evening, captain Hindsight. He'd previously bowled 7 overs for 24,that's why he was asked to bowl at the death. Rushy went for 16 off 3 balls to lose a game. It can happen to any bowler at the death.
 
Parkside said:
Evening, captain Hindsight. He'd previously bowled 7 overs for 24,that's why he was asked to bowl at the death. Rushy went for 16 off 3 balls to lose a game. It can happen to any bowler at the death.
Click to expand...

You're totally missing the point. Yes his first 7 overs were decent. When brought back on his 8th over was what I would term "loose". Badger took him off, but then bizarrely brought him back a couple of overs later where more "loose" bowling was served up in the remaining 2 overs. From memory van Meekeren bowled also bowled at the death, but only conceded 33 runs in 9 overs.
 
bumble2 said:
“Loose bowling from Salisbury” - his first seven overs went for 24 which is decent enough and kept up the early pressure very well. True it went a bit pear shaped at the death but not surprising that Hants started to have a go at the end of the innings given the dire straits they were in and they got lucky for a couple of overs. It happens. Don’t think anyone should be singled out for criticism on such a great day.
Click to expand...
Like Rushy, he isn't a death bowler. The lack of one is our main weakness in this competition.
 
bumble2 said:
“Loose bowling from Salisbury” - his first seven overs went for 24 which is decent enough and kept up the early pressure very well. True it went a bit pear shaped at the death but not surprising that Hants started to have a go at the end of the innings given the dire straits they were in and they got lucky for a couple of overs. It happens. Don’t think anyone should be singled out for criticism on such a great day.
Click to expand...

My own slight criticism was was didn't bowl Van Meekeren out and again I feel we under used Doneathy........... but we won so all good
 
GordonMuchallNo1Fan said:
My own slight criticism was was didn't bowl Van Meekeren out and again I feel we under used Doneathy........... but we won so all good
Click to expand...
Doneathy got some tap against Essex TBF.

He looks a cracking prospect though.
Parkside said:
True, but Doneathy could equally have got tap as any bowler can at the death. As you say, we murdered them.
What do people want? A sympathy vote for Mr Bransgrove next?
Click to expand...
We haven't got a seamer available can keep it tight at the death. We tried Rushy and Van Meekeren and they got hammered all over, same with Salisbury today.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top