|
Son of Sam
1:41 Thu Mar 9
Re: NZ v England
|
Some great shots from Shanto here, fantastic debut.
|
Far Cough
12:26 Thu Mar 9
Re: NZ v England
|
Yeah, I jinxed him didn't I?
|
Eerie Descent
12:21 Thu Mar 9
Re: NZ v England
|
Just stuck it on, first 2 balls I watch, 2 wickets. LOL
T20 is fucking shit anyway.
|
Far Cough
12:13 Thu Mar 9
Re: NZ v England
|
Buttler going mental with the bat as per against Bangladesh T20
|
BRANDED
12:42 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
I’d like to think that when the term “you lot” was used it was referring to the poofs in the team.
|
Westside
12:28 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
If we win this today, it will pretty much be down to Jason ROY.
Don't tell me the failure has got another ODI century?
A complete waste of space. Only 2 centuries in his last 10 knocks, with a strike rate approaching a 100.
|
zebthecat
11:55 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
Hoggard was on pretty shaky ground given he admitted using "pakis" and nicknaming Azeem Rafiq "Raffer the kaffir". Banter apparently.
|
Eerie Descent
11:42 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
Correction, Rafiq apologised for his racist tweets.
I didn't know that.
|
Eerie Descent
11:35 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
Westham67 11:17 Fri Mar 3
Yeah, you're right, it gives freedom to real racists, like Rafiq, to double down on those frivolous accusations.
|
Far Cough
11:24 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
Buttler is a slogging beast as well as Roy.
|
Westham67
11:17 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
The problem with these decades later frivolous accusations is they give ammunitions to the real racists
|
Eerie Descent
11:09 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
Sbbb, couldn't agree more. The whole thing is pathetic, but on Vaughan in particular, who has lost work over this, to have to go to court over the words 'you lot', whether he said them or not, over a decade ago, is beyond comprehension. There is not a single other accusation against him FFS.
It's utter madness, and a clear indication of where this country is currently at right now. Governing bodies are fucking terrified of being accused of racism, as are individuals, and lose all rationality when accusations are made.
|
Lee Trundle
10:56 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
If we win this today, it will pretty much be down to Jason ROY.
|
southbankbornnbred
10:54 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
I 100% understand why Brendan, McGrath and Hoggard refused to participate. It’s a kangaroo court.
|
southbankbornnbred
10:51 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
Been keeping a close eye on the Yorkshire “racism” proceedings.
In a wider world (including of sport) sometimes awash with racism, it is utterly remarkable that this has dragged on so long.
There is not a single, fully corroborated and uncontested shred of evidence that Vaughan said what Rafiq’s claims. Moreover, Rafiq’s own evidence is horrifically inaccurate, has changed over time (his official statements differ on key details), and is even flatly denied by one of the three other players (Shehzad) allegedly present. The other is Rafiq’s best mate and business partner (Rashid), who gave evidence with all the confidence of a dog running away from the smell of its own farts.
I don’t know Michael Vaughan, and he might well be a bit of a dick. But there is not a court in the land - criminal or civil - that would find him “racist”.
In all of this, the clearest example of racism - by any rational measurement of evidence - remains Rafiq’s antisemitic Tweet. And it isn’t even being discussed.
This whole process is basically a woke form of frontier justice. It’s a farce, and an enormous waste of time and money that is trashing reputations on the flimsiest of “evidence”.
|
Westham67
3:34 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
Maybe it's just me but I think test cricket is entertaining enough without the slogging . Stokes and Leach at Headingly will take some beating
|
Jonah Lomas
12:12 Fri Mar 3
Re: NZ v England
|
VH
In hindsight, maybe batting on and setting 500 might have worked. But, we scored nearly 500 in our second innings, so who's to say we wouldn't have chased it down anyway?
I just enjoyed a bloody good test match. Didn't think we had a chance, but pretty impressed with the bowling effort.
I love Wags....heart of a lion. He'd be a pain in the arse to face because he just comes straight at you all day.
As for the wide, as I said previously, it would be interesting to see how it compared to other deliveries that were called, or not called throughout the test. I thought it probably could have been called, but then if others the same height weren't called then you can't just look at that ball in isolation.
Anderson could still have hit it anyway. If he'd had a swing and got anything more that a slight feather, he'd have won the game for England.
The pussy.
|
MaryMillingtonsGhost
10:42 Thu Mar 2
Re: NZ v England
|
VirginiaHam 10:32
Exactly this.
As said earlier, if we'd batted and scored below par, with the kiwi's overtaking us in their second innings, then we should've enforced the follow-on.
Some (at the moment, most) you win, some you lose.
Makes for decent ENTERTAINMENT, whichever way you cut it.
|
VirginiaHam
10:32 Thu Mar 2
Re: NZ v England
|
Jonah Lomas 7:25 Wed Mar 1
The 'modern' approach is to bat again and make the other side chase 500, while losing 2 or so wickets per session over 5 sessions.
The problem with that is the Basin is renowned for getting easier to bat on as the game continues......so, I can see England thinking they can bowl NZ out for 300-400 and a short chase on a belter.
As it turned out, only an NZ collapse set England a relatively simple chase, right up to the point that 7 England batsmen got out to cross batted swipes, an insane run out and Pope giving the cordon catching practice.
No-one ever said Bazball would a comfortable ride, but, with my gracious hat on NZ got stuck in and a great game of cricket took place. Still not sure what to make of Wagner.
Of course, we could talk about the dodgy wide at the end.
|
BRANDED
8:42 Thu Mar 2
Re: NZ v England
|
I just looked at it again. It was a superb goal.
|
|
|
|
