Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

captaincolly wrote:Will Smith has taken his chance today, a century for him and 74 for Lees. Not much else but it's by no means the first choice lineup. Probably defeats the purpose of the game but never mind!

Yes, we're in no ways strong enough to afford to be able to discard Smith. Once again Poytner and Pringle waste opportunities to cement a place.

westoelad wrote:

captaincolly wrote:Will Smith has taken his chance today, a century for him and 74 for Lees. Not much else but it's by no means the first choice lineup. Probably defeats the purpose of the game but never mind!

Yes, we're in no ways strong enough to afford to be able to discard Smith. Once again Poytner and Pringle waste opportunities to cement a place.

No surprise there! Those two are not ones I'd rely on.

how did Smithy look, capt.... were you there?

And here's what the rest were up to
https://www.websports.co.za/livecricket ... &sportid=1
Not very challenging opposition we can assume.

westoelad wrote:And here's what the rest were up to
https://www.websports.co.za/livecricket ... &sportid=1
Not very challenging opposition we can assume.

Mustn't be. 4 50's and a century in the top 5 from that line-up is the proof we need!

81-4 with Rushy taking 3 early wickets and Raine picking up the 4th

Quite a bit in the Guardian about Durham CCC currently. Not sure why. Including this report from the ground.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/ ... eason-2019

And this about the controversial new captain.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/ ... ft-captain

Think its a dreadful move to make Bancroft captain i really do, surely Smith or Lees would have been better options..? hell anyone would have been

Arthur Crabtree wrote:Quite a bit in the Guardian about Durham CCC currently. Not sure why. Including this report from the ground.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/ ... eason-2019

And this about the controversial new captain.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/ ... ft-captain

Interesting articles, I guess the first one might be just to highlight the cold weather up North in March, although it's relatively mild this week!

andy wrote:Think its a dreadful move to make Bancroft captain i really do, surely Smith or Lees would have been better options..? hell anyone would have been

Lees and Raine turned it down because they wanted to focus on their own games. Smith would have been an option but isn't certain to be in the team - although he would be if I was picking it!

andy wrote:Think its a dreadful move to make Bancroft captain i really do, surely Smith or Lees would have been better options..? hell anyone would have been

Undoubtedly Bancroft made a serious error of judgement, the stigma attached to it no doubt will remain with him for many years, but the fact is that he has fully served the punishment imposed by the relevant authorities and should therefore be free to return to the game without further sanction. There was no restriction to captaincy in the sentence imposed as there were with the other 2 miscreants.
Durham CCC have already explained the wholly rational decision to make the appointment.
Marcus North is probably the best qualified to make a character call on Bancroft having been a playing colleague of him when he was a youngster. Also,Durham had no real alternatives for captaincy with both Lees and Raine declining the position for valid reasons -it's also should be noted that Stoneman, Coughlin and Jennings were being groomed for captaincy but left the club as a consequence of ECB sanctions.
It would have been easy for Bancroft to have slid in quietly as a player but instead he has recognised the club's need and accepted the responsibility of captain fully aware that his every action is to be fully scrutinised.
Perhaps his action should be commended more than condemned.

westoelad wrote:

andy wrote:Think its a dreadful move to make Bancroft captain i really do, surely Smith or Lees would have been better options..? hell anyone would have been

Undoubtedly Bancroft made a serious error of judgement, the stigma attached to it no doubt will remain with him for many years, but the fact is that he has fully served the punishment imposed by the relevant authorities and should therefore be free to return to the game without further sanction. There was no restriction to captaincy in the sentence imposed as there were with the other 2 miscreants.
Durham CCC have already explained the wholly rational decision to make the appointment.
Marcus North is probably the best qualified to make a character call on Bancroft having been a playing colleague of him when he was a youngster. Also,Durham had no real alternatives for captaincy with both Lees and Raine declining the position for valid reasons -it's also should be noted that Stoneman, Coughlin and Jennings were being groomed for captaincy but left the club as a consequence of ECB sanctions.
It would have been easy for Bancroft to have slid in quietly as a player but instead he has recognised the club's need and accepted the responsibility of captain fully aware that his every action is to be fully scrutinised.
Perhaps his action should be commended more than condemned.

Absolutely agree with this. He's served his ban, for what was beyond the hyperbole, a stupid, and farcically carried out transgression. He's an international cricketer, who should be better than any of our other batsmen (in theory!), and in a team short of captaincy options is surely the obvious choice, especially as Lees and Raine have chosen (rightly in my opinion) to concentrate on getting their game in order.

well said, WL

Durhamfootman wrote:well said, WL

I agree!

Anyone know anything about this-claim in comment of GAS in N. Echo.
why has Botham not been sacked as chairman after all the controversy regarding his so called 'charity' events, where him and his daughter just pocketed the lot

That's a big claim and actionable without proof.

westoelad wrote:Anyone know anything about this-claim in comment of GAS in N. Echo.
why has Botham not been sacked as chairman after all the controversy regarding his so called 'charity' events, where him and his daughter just pocketed the lot

That's a big claim and actionable without proof.

Yep. Is it not potentially libellous?