Durham v Leicestershire 2nd XI

smoker said:
Do you follow what's happening at Durham?

He bowled well in the first innings against Notts but otherwise been disappointing this season. He's averaging 30+, whereas Rushy, Carse and Wood are sub 20 and Raine mid 20's. He has also been ineffective and expensive for the seconds in the last two games. I have no doubt he will walk back into the team when Wood returns to England, as he's a known quantity, but we are never going to see what Potts is capable of unless he is given a chance. He really should have replaced Carse when he was injured. He's the form bowler for the second XI and had just made 92 with the bat, batting with the academy wicket keeper.


f***ing hell, he played 11 first class matches, mostly when he was 18 and 19. Even then he held his own without taking loads of wickets.

White ball he's been brilliant and was named in the Wisden young team of the tournament for last year's blast.

You thought Carse was crap and should have been playing second xi cricket tbf.
Click to expand...
No I didn't think carse
Was was crap and I trust Durham staff to know what they are doing.
 


Both Potts and Trevaskis are outstanding prospects and should be in the 1st team. I base that opinion on watching 1st and 2nd team regularly. Potts is a better bowler than Salisbury; he's nippier and more accurate than Salisbury watching both bowling against the same opposition. Stars back that up.The attack,, particularly when the ball is old, need an alternative to relentless seam,Trevaskis provides that.
presumably the two youngsters will improve with experience, the two more mature ones aren't likely to.
The lack of experience argument is fatuos; if you're outstanding at the lower level,how do you improve unless you're given that experience at the higher level?
 
Last edited:
Scott Steel gets Bancroft out, you couldn't make it up. Tried a reverse sweep, got the top edge and lobbed up to slip. 86/2
.
165/2; Jones and Bushnell motoring along nicely.
 
Last edited:
Old school Durham collapse to 209/7. Another forgettable innings from Cogs after being brought up the order. Curiously no Clarke yet
.
Five fer for Steel after 86 in their innings.
 
Last edited:
First match of the season and I was disappointed Potts wasn't involved, thought that was odd and so assumed there was a fitness related reason. Anyhow and whatever, he seems fit now and he seems good enough, so get him in! That Scot Steel seems likes a good player (and we know he is). I don't know what the issue was between him and Durham but it's a shame we couldn't hang on to him.
 
smoker said:
he played 11 first class matches, mostly when he was 18 and 19. Even then he held his own without taking loads of wickets.
Click to expand...

collingwood spoke really highly of him back then with bat & ball, i've been surprised he hasn't been seen this season, surely he's earned a place ahead of coughlin & salisbury by outperforming them each time they've played in the seconds, much like trevaskis & thomson. might just stick with a good thing in red ball and when white ball comes those two should be the first name on the teamsheets

edit: scott steel certainly seems to have a bee in his bonnet in this match!
 
Last edited:
Twisted said:
collingwood spoke really highly of him back then with bat & ball, i've been surprised he hasn't been seen this season, surely he's earned a place ahead of coughlin & salisbury by outperforming them each time they've played in the seconds, much like trevaskis & thomson. might just stick with a good thing in red ball and when white ball comes those two should be the first name on the teamsheets

edit: scott steel certainly seems to have a bee in his bonnet in this match!
Click to expand...
He was at the other end when Colly made that big hundred Vs Derbyshire in his final season. Scored a fifty in the CC when he was only 18.

283 all out, Potts out for 62 (Steel the bowler again)
 
Potts 62 from 55 balls, I keep saying he can bat. More evidence he needs to be in the Firsts.
And he takes the first wicket as well.
 
Last edited:
RichardW said:
I would have Eckersley as WK and get an extra bowler in (Potts or Trevaskis). Leaving Poynter out doesn't weaken the batting IMO
Click to expand...

Agree. With Bancroft joining this week, we will have 3 wicket keepers..... Bancroft, Eckersley, Poynter. I read somewhere Bendingham can also play as a wicketkeeper, so for those reasons I'd not select Poynter.
 
Here's the team they should be picking:

Lees
Bancroft
Borthwick*
Bedingham
Burnham
Eckersley+
Carse
Trevaskis
Raine
Woods/Potts
Rushworth

You then have Salisbury competing for a seamer slot, Coughlin challenging Carse for the all-rounder slot and Poynter challenging for the wicket keeper slot. You also obviously have the likes of Dickson, Clarke and Jones challenging for batting positions.

The only controversial issue is the length of the tail. However you effectively have four bowling all-rounders between Eckersley and Rushworth which will be collectively better than 7-10 for most counties. The additional bowling depth also allows Carse to bowl shorter, more aggressive bursts and retain some energy for batting.

I don't think anyone other than James Franklin and chops would disagree with this.
 
smoker said:
Here's the team they should be picking:

Lees
Bancroft
Borthwick*
Bedingham
Burnham
Eckersley+
Carse
Trevaskis
Raine
Woods/Potts
Rushworth

You then have Salisbury competing for a seamer slot, Coughlin challenging Carse for the all-rounder slot and Poynter challenging for the wicket keeper slot. You also obviously have the likes of Dickson, Clarke and Jones challenging for batting positions.

The only controversial issue is the length of the tail. However you effectively have four bowling all-rounders between Eckersley and Rushworth which will be collectively better than 7-10 for most counties. The additional bowling depth also allows Carse to bowl shorter, more aggressive bursts and retain some energy for batting.

I don't think anyone other than James Franklin and chops would disagree with this.
Click to expand...
Don't have a problem with this
 

Back
Top