Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

All I could think about in the wee, small hours when I was drifting off to sleep, was how annoying the Australian commentators were. It's bad enough with the inflection at the end of every phrase/sentence but I guess that is the accent.


What was really peeve-inducing was the constant use of nicknames and acronyms. How hard is it to say Allan Border rather than AB? And when there is a standard acronym with some longevity behind it, namely LBW, they say "leg before"; not "leg before wicket", but "leg before". Churlish, I know, but I'm in a bad mood.


And yes, bloody well-played Faulkner.

  • 3 weeks later...

Very stange the way this has been done. Captain or not, no player should have a say in whether another player should play or not. I don't like the whole board of selecters thing either, they should just pay a coach to pick his team and get on with it.


I do think KP is a knob though.

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 months later...

Peckhamgatecrasher Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I love cricket. Great to see Sri Lankan players

> shaking Joe Root's hand after his 200. Proper gents.


Especially after all the hoo-har about the mankading incident. That was ridiculous - there should be more mankading in the game as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not entirely comfortable with mankading, but the lad was warned apparently.


Jonathan Agnew article on it was interesting, he reckons the umpire should apply a five run fine rather than the bowler being allowed to run batsman out. He also said:


"What I will say in balance is that Joe Root stood his ground when he knew full well he had been caught behind by Kumar Sangakkara off a huge glove.


He decided to stand there and hope he got away with it, eventually being given out following a successful Sri Lanka review. It's difficult to take the moral high-ground on a spirit of the game issue when your team has done that just a couple of hours earlier."



edited for split infinitive (grammar not good with a hangover)

I remember that Bodyline tv series where they showed Jardine doing it earlier in his career - just to show what kind of a bounder he is. I think a dismissal is more than fair after Buttler was repeatedly warned; he is, after all, trying to gain an unfair advantage - like a pitcher throwing to base when a batter (sic) tries to take a lead from one base to another; the batter/batsman has to learn to 'watch it' that' all.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • In what way? Maybe it just felt more intelligent and considered coming directly after Question Time, which was a barely watchable bun fight.
    • Yes, all this. Totally Sephiroth. The electorate wants to see transformation overnight. That's not possible. But what is possible is leading with the right comms strategy, which isn't cutting through. As I've said before, messaging matters more now than policy, that's the only way to bring the electorate with you. And I worry that that's how Reform's going to get into power.  And the media LOVES Reform. 
    • “There was an excellent discussion on Newscast last night between the BBC Political Editor, the director of the IFS and the director of More In Common - all highly intelligent people with no party political agenda ” I would call this “generous”   Labour should never have made that tax promise because, as with - duh - Brexit, it’s pretending the real world doesn’t exist now. I blame Labour in no small part for this delusion. But the electorate need to cop on as well.  They think they can have everything they want without responsibilities, costs or attachments. The media encourage this  Labour do need to raise taxes. The country needs it.  Now, exactly how it’s done remains to be seen. But if people are just going to go around going “la la laffer curve. Liars! String em up! Vote someone else” then they just aren’t serious people reckoning with the problem yes Labour are more than a year into their term, but after 14 years of what the Tories  did? Whoever takes over, has a major problem 
    • Messaging, messaging, messaging. That's all it boils down to. There are only so many fiscal policies out there, and they're there for the taking, no matter which party you're in. I hate to say it, but Farage gets it right every time. Even when Reform reneges on fiscal policy, it does it with enough confidence and candidness that no one is wringing their hands. Instead, they're quietly admired for their pragmatism. Strangely, it's exactly the same as Labour has done, with its manifesto reverse on income tax, but it's going to bomb.  Blaming the Tories / Brexit / Covid / Putin ... none of it washes with the public anymore  - it wants to be sold a vision of the future, not reminded of the disasters of the past. Labour put itself on the back foot with its 'the tories fucked it all up' stance right at the beginning of its tenure.  All Lammy had to do (as with Reeves and Raynor etc) was say 'mea culpa. We've made a mistake, we'll fix it. Sorry guys, we're on it'. But instead it's 'nothing to see here / it's someone else's fault / I was buying a suit / hadn't been briefed yet'.  And, of course, the press smells blood, which never helps.  Oh! And Reeve's speech on Wednesday was so drab and predictable that even the journalists at the press conference couldn't really be arsed to come up with any challenging questions. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...