Durham Match Thread 2019

[westoelad]

Play recommended at 4.15pm. 211 in 35.5 overs. So 15 overs less to score 33 less runs. Absolute farce.

[captaincolly]

Play recommended at 4.15pm. 211 in 35.5 overs. So 15 overs less to score 33 less runs. Absolute farce.

Yep!

[Durhamfootman]

Forecast for tomorrow suggests the dreaded DL might rear its ugly head again - looks like showers throughout the afternoon.

this time we'll win the toss and insert them. The rain will hold off for the full 50 overs and our chase will be hampered by constant rain delays, and endless DL recalculations

hope I'm wrong about the rest of the prediction

They did bat 50 overs and now the first rain interruption comes after one ball of our reply!

of course

anyone would think I'd watched this sport before

from now on every rain delay will reduce our target by a tiny bit and reduce our available overs a lot, but will also lead to another wicket falling (doesn't it always) and so a big spike in the DL par score.

We'll be a couple of runs behind the par score when they finally decide to stop play for the day

[captaincolly]

Going by Martin Emmerson's comments it seems that 10 overs constitute a match. I know it changes for the knockout stage so ( assuming he's right ) 20 overs must be required after the group stages.
We were on course to be ahead after 10 overs ...until the inevitable wicket.

[Aidan11]

Jeez who set our initial target?

D/L or Colin Graves?

[captaincolly]

Jeez who set our initial target?

D/L or Colin Graves?

It's probably in the small print of the sanctions!

[Durhamfootman]

just to compare, after Hants completed their 50 overs, a rain delay saw Gloucester's target reduced by 13 runs, and their available overs reduced by 3

[Durhamfootman]

Hi Aidan

[Durhamfootman]

10 overs completed

do we know what the DL par score is for the end of this over?

[captaincolly]

just to compare, after Hants completed their 50 overs, a rain delay saw Gloucester's target reduced by 13 runs, and their available overs reduced by 3

Baffling. I wonder if the dramatic changes in scores ( from some teams anyway ) is a factor. Hampshire were 60 odd for 4 and not so long ago an end total of 330 would have seemed impossible. Not sure though how that would apply to the Warwickshire game where they ended up with a steady/modest score and still seemed to benefit from DL.
That said I think our target is one that should be achievable - if it was virtually any other team I'd back then to do it but our lineup looks overly reliant on one batsman.

[Durhamfootman]

what I find odd, in a match where only 3 overs have had to be shaved, is why 13 runs? Any team needing 13 runs with 3 overs to get them in (in a 50 over match), would be pretty much home and dry. Unless the chasing side were 8 or 9 down, nobody would give the fielding side a hope.

It's obviously too complicated for dullards like me to understand........ perhaps intentionally so

[Durhamfootman]

100 up

[Durhamfootman]

now in the Yorkshire game, Derby have had their target set at 225 in 22 overs which would be a huge ask in a T20 game let alone a rain affected 50 over game

In our game with Worcs they were set 152 in 24, and the only difference that I can see is that Yorks had 40 overs to compile their score whereas we only had 27.

Okay, Yorkshires RR was much higher than ours, but they were given more time to get into the meat of the game.... we might have scored at 10 or 12 an over had we had those extra 13 overs and finished on 250-275 instead of 114 and Worcs would have been set a wholly different target. Who can tell..... who would ever know? This algorithm seems completely arbitrary to me.

DL will never please all of the people all of the time, but this is the sort of disparity that will find England out in the WC later in the year and then everyone will be jumping up and down about what a bad system it is. While it only happens to Durham and Derby and GLoucs nobody cares. Wait until Surrey get set a target like Derby's today..... but we all know how likely that is

[Durhamfootman]

Clark out for 66

he needed a score, so I'm glad he's starting to get some runs

[captaincolly]

Clark out for 66

he needed a score, so I'm glad he's starting to get some runs

Yes, vital for him. Lees with runs in the last two games as well.