GLAMMY

[TWGL1]

Re: GLAMMY

Yeah that was enjoyable. Shows how hard the job of umpires really is.

Bumble is hilarious in that clip

[the other bob wilson]

Re: GLAMMY

It’s a nice problem to have when you consider our batting in recent seasons, but Root, after a fine knock, is the latest batsman to be out between seventy and ninety nine - think we still only have one hundred this season.

Labuschagne is one of cricket’s real enthusiasts - the number one batsman in the world and he’s acting as a runner for Ven Der Gugten.

Fifty ahead, but Van Der Gugten’s surely not going to bowl in Durham’s second innings.

[Pearcey3]

Re: GLAMMY

It’s a nice problem to have when you consider our batting in recent seasons, but Root, after a fine knock, is the latest batsman to be out between seventy and ninety nine - think we still only have one hundred this season.

Labuschagne is one of cricket’s real enthusiasts - the number one batsman in the world and he’s acting as a runner for Ven Der Gugten.

Fifty ahead, but Van Der Gugten’s surely not going to bowl in Durham’s second innings.

Really disappointed with the commentary. The Durham guy as well as Nick Webb talking about Durham letting Glamorgan off the hook. Total nonsense as Root, Neser and Van Der Gugten batted really well. Shame that Webb didn’t mention this at all in commentary.

[cyril evans awaydays]

Re: GLAMMY

Durham 2 down already. Good stuff

[Pearcey3]

Re: GLAMMY

Durham 2 down already. Good stuff

Excellent stuff. Need to get Stokes out quickly tomorrow. All to play for.

[Father Dougal]

Re: GLAMMY

Durham still 15 behind with 8 wickets left. Should be 2 good days now. Glamorgan had some cracking games this season and this is shaping up to be another.

[Pearcey3]

Re: GLAMMY

Durham still 15 behind with 8 wickets left. Should be 2 good days now. Glamorgan had some cracking games this season and this is shaping up to be another.

Good to see you posting on the cricket Father D. It’s a very competitive division and we are not reliant on Labuschagne like we were three years ago.

[The Bloop]

Re: GLAMMY

What a genius selection in bringing Root in but without the pressure of opening 😜

I notice elsewhere that Surrey scored 671-9, with no batsman getting to 3 figures. Is that some sort of record?

[Pearcey3]

Re: GLAMMY

What a genius selection in bringing Root in but without the pressure of opening ��

I notice elsewhere that Surrey scored 671-9, with no batsman getting to 3 figures. Is that some sort of record?

Yes it’s a record and around 60 runs more than the previous highest score without there being a centurion.

[Hot Shot Hamish.]

Re: GLAMMY

Yes it’s a record and around 60 runs more than the previous highest score without there being a centurion.

Some serious jug evasion going on there though. Three getting out in the nineties.

[Undercoverinwurzelland]

Re: GLAMMY

Good day for us

[The Bloop]

Re: GLAMMY

Yes it’s a record and around 60 runs more than the previous highest score without there being a centurion.

Cheers Pearcy. I not surprised to be honest. It's the sort of question that gets posed on the Ask Steven column on cricinfo. Worth a read if you like that sort of stuff.

[Seabird]

Re: GLAMMY

Slow down lads, don't get too excited yet. Great to see the fightback yesterday does wonders for morale and team spirit. we have been known to roll over in this situation lately.

[the other bob wilson]

Re: GLAMMY

Slow down lads, don't get too excited yet. Great to see the fightback yesterday does wonders for morale and team spirit. we have been known to roll over in this situation lately.

An important bowler light as well - more of Labuschagne's seamers I wonder?