Most visitors online was 2766 , on 14 Oct 24
Swanjaxs said:So Glamorgan drop David Lloyd for the Leicestershire game and his replacement, Tom Bevan cracks a blistering ton, so what do they do next, Drop the in form Bevan and bring back the hapless Lloyd for the Worcestershire match...
DL Lloyd c Haynes b Gibbon 4
It's the Glamorgan way see :lol:
JackSomething said:Swanjaxs said:So Glamorgan drop David Lloyd for the Leicestershire game and his replacement, Tom Bevan cracks a blistering ton, so what do they do next, Drop the in form Bevan and bring back the hapless Lloyd for the Worcestershire match...
DL Lloyd c Haynes b Gibbon 4
It's the Glamorgan way see :lol:
I see Lloyd is listed as a middle-order batsman, so it does seem strange that Glamorgan keep picking him as an opener. As you say, why not give Bevan more experience?
Swanjaxs said:JackSomething said:I see Lloyd is listed as a middle-order batsman, so it does seem strange that Glamorgan keep picking him as an opener. As you say, why not give Bevan more experience?
Spot on! Even more bizarre is Lloyd opening the batting today ahead of India opening Test batsman Shubman Gill, who came in after his dismissal :lol:
TheLoneRanger said:Swanjaxs said:Spot on! Even more bizarre is Lloyd opening the batting today ahead of India opening Test batsman Shubman Gill, who came in after his dismissal :lol:
Fvcking incredible thinking in such an important match.
Exactly the same with Durham away.
Needing 196 runs to win, Maynard decides to open with a No 9 and No 10 batsmen - Salter and Gorvin. ( Lloyd was injured)
Durham hadn't taken 20 wickets in a match until they played us. Tremendous bowling from Potts, but we certainly didn't help in persisting in using Salter as an opening bat, and then promoting Gorvin up the batting order.
Gorvin had been batting No 9/10 for the 2nd X1.
TheLoneRanger said:Screenshot_20220908-175953.png
dickythorpe said:The massive news is that as said earlier Labuschagne has signed for another 2 years.