Just Dave now wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:10 am
nice to see the selective spirit of cricket by poms again
“How wasn’t that a 4?? And why didn’t Stokes call it in the “spirit of cricket”??!!!”
While the moment isn’t likely to swing the outcome of the contest, at least we hope not, it’s hard not to watch it and laugh at the double standard in the Spirit of Cricket debate.
When it suits England the voices are quiet, but when it goes against them the outcry can be heard for miles.
The umpires looked at it time and time again and couldn't see it but you can apparently.
Looked like a 4 to me but Stokes wouldn't have known.
A decent effort but sorry, not good enough.
Aussies whingeing about an umpires decision.
Facepalm!!!!
ps, I am not an Ozzie, I have told you many times now.
Only Whingers on here is you, still crying that Oztralia 2, Poms 0 - in your own backyard!
And you needed a Kiwi to almost pull off the miracle to win the 2nd test!
How Embarassing!
Sáncte Míchael Archángele, defénde nos in proélio, cóntra nequítiam et insídias diáboli ésto præsídium.
Just Dave now wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:10 am
nice to see the selective spirit of cricket by poms again
“How wasn’t that a 4?? And why didn’t Stokes call it in the “spirit of cricket”??!!!”
While the moment isn’t likely to swing the outcome of the contest, at least we hope not, it’s hard not to watch it and laugh at the double standard in the Spirit of Cricket debate.
When it suits England the voices are quiet, but when it goes against them the outcry can be heard for miles.
The umpires looked at it time and time again and couldn't see it but you can apparently.
Looked like a 4 to me but Stokes wouldn't have known.
A decent effort but sorry, not good enough.
Aussies whingeing about an umpires decision.
the fourth ump must be the only one who couldnt see it and as for whingeing about an umps decision , lol you crack me up , what planet you been on the last 4 or 5 days
I may not be perfect but I'm still the closest I have ever come across
MegaBonus wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:50 am
Dont let Hawksey dictate the course of the conversation on here......I have no problem with Smith reviewing, but his reaction to the verdict was not a good look
the bigger issue is his silence on the 'spirit of the game' double standards....at least the English commentators called it out...
other than not hearing from Hawksey,,,,,Bairstow has been silent....i wonder why?
anyway....game evenly posed. Quick wickets tonight will be the key.
I have no issue with him wasting a review either.
So how is Broad a cheat but not Smith?
Can you explain that hypocrisy?
completely different but you have every right to call smith a cheat but really only for sandpaper .
I may not be perfect but I'm still the closest I have ever come across
Rule 2 of test cricket; Australia shall always be given the benefit of the doubt otherwise it shall be considered cheating and they will be permitted to complain and complain ad nauseum.
Pursuant to Rule 2; if an English batsman does not show any dissent whatsoever when given out he shall still be labelled a cheat and a whinger. However if an Australian batter shows dissent when given out it shall be put done to a misunderstanding and glossed over.
N5 1BH wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 1:41 pm
Rule 2 of test cricket; Australia shall always be given the benefit of the doubt otherwise it shall be considered cheating and they will be permitted to complain and complain ad nauseum.
Pursuant to Rule 2; if an English batsman does not show any dissent whatsoever when given out he shall still be labelled a cheat and a whinger. However if an Australian batter shows dissent when given out it shall be put done to a misunderstanding and glossed over.
rule 3 , poms make the rules and use them when it suits them , otherwise when it doesnt suit them they can whinge till the cows come home but deflect from own weaknesses and blame spirit of the game to make them feel better about themselves
pursuant to rule 3 , poms can laugh when up and about at opposition and boo them incessantly , again to feel good about themselves but whenever the opposition bite back we are allowed to revert to them having started it and calling them bullies
I may not be perfect but I'm still the closest I have ever come across
MegaBonus wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:50 am
Dont let Hawksey dictate the course of the conversation on here......I have no problem with Smith reviewing, but his reaction to the verdict was not a good look
the bigger issue is his silence on the 'spirit of the game' double standards....at least the English commentators called it out...
other than not hearing from Hawksey,,,,,Bairstow has been silent....i wonder why?
anyway....game evenly posed. Quick wickets tonight will be the key.
I have no issue with him wasting a review either.
So how is Broad a cheat but not Smith?
Can you explain that hypocrisy?
completely different but you have every right to call smith a cheat but really only for sandpaper .
How is it different?
One hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it. The other hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it.
Can you explain the rules we have to live by to not be a cheat when being caught?
Just Dave now wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:10 am
nice to see the selective spirit of cricket by poms again
“How wasn’t that a 4?? And why didn’t Stokes call it in the “spirit of cricket”??!!!”
While the moment isn’t likely to swing the outcome of the contest, at least we hope not, it’s hard not to watch it and laugh at the double standard in the Spirit of Cricket debate.
When it suits England the voices are quiet, but when it goes against them the outcry can be heard for miles.
The umpires looked at it time and time again and couldn't see it but you can apparently.
Looked like a 4 to me but Stokes wouldn't have known.
A decent effort but sorry, not good enough.
Aussies whingeing about an umpires decision.
the fourth ump must be the only one who couldnt see it and as for whingeing about an umps decision , lol you crack me up , what planet you been on the last 4 or 5 days
When have I whinged about the umpires decision in the kast 4/5 days?
So the 3rd and the 4th umpire looked at it still you're whingeing?
Really, this is like Botham v Chappell. Pig-headedness in the name of some sort of sporting superiority. Neither country have much to be proud about with this win at all costs attitude with BOTH preaching holier than thou statements about rules, spirit and each other's hypocrisy, so it seems.
Expect this "but you did it" in a schoolyard. Everyone needs a decent slap in the face and then just get on with the game without whining every bloody 5 seconds about something. No wonder I have little interest in cricket these days. Grow up.
I might be old, senile, short sighted and a poor driver but give me some spinach and I'll have you for breakfast!
MegaBonus wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:50 am
Dont let Hawksey dictate the course of the conversation on here......I have no problem with Smith reviewing, but his reaction to the verdict was not a good look
the bigger issue is his silence on the 'spirit of the game' double standards....at least the English commentators called it out...
other than not hearing from Hawksey,,,,,Bairstow has been silent....i wonder why?
anyway....game evenly posed. Quick wickets tonight will be the key.
I have no issue with him wasting a review either.
So how is Broad a cheat but not Smith?
Can you explain that hypocrisy?
completely different but you have every right to call smith a cheat but really only for sandpaper .
How is it different?
One hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it. The other hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it.
Can you explain the rules we have to live by to not be a cheat when being caught?
one gets a very faint tickle its reviewed and correct decision ensued , the other smashes it and stands his ground when obvious he was out and you didnt even need a replay and therefore is not out , there is your difference , but its not so much that its the fact that broad whinged so much about bairstow stumping when broad's was much worse , kapish ?
I may not be perfect but I'm still the closest I have ever come across
Popeye Magoo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 2:40 pm
Really, this is like Botham v Chappell. Pig-headedness in the name of some sort of sporting superiority. Neither country have much to be proud about with this win at all costs attitude with BOTH preaching holier than thou statements about rules, spirit and each other's hypocrisy, so it seems.
Expect this "but you did it" in a schoolyard. Everyone needs a decent slap in the face and then just get on with the game without whining every bloody 5 seconds about something. No wonder I have little interest in cricket these days. Grow up.
ease up pops its the ashes , and its fun watching poms squirm
I may not be perfect but I'm still the closest I have ever come across
MegaBonus wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:50 am
Dont let Hawksey dictate the course of the conversation on here......I have no problem with Smith reviewing, but his reaction to the verdict was not a good look
the bigger issue is his silence on the 'spirit of the game' double standards....at least the English commentators called it out...
other than not hearing from Hawksey,,,,,Bairstow has been silent....i wonder why?
anyway....game evenly posed. Quick wickets tonight will be the key.
I have no issue with him wasting a review either.
So how is Broad a cheat but not Smith?
Can you explain that hypocrisy?
completely different but you have every right to call smith a cheat but really only for sandpaper .
How is it different?
One hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it. The other hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it.
Can you explain the rules we have to live by to not be a cheat when being caught?
one gets a very faint tickle its reviewed and correct decision ensued , the other smashes it and stands his ground when obvious he was out and you didnt even need a replay and therefore is not out , there is your difference , but its not so much that its the fact that broad whinged so much about bairstow stumping when broad's was much worse , kapish ?
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious.
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
MegaBonus wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:50 am
Dont let Hawksey dictate the course of the conversation on here......I have no problem with Smith reviewing, but his reaction to the verdict was not a good look
the bigger issue is his silence on the 'spirit of the game' double standards....at least the English commentators called it out...
other than not hearing from Hawksey,,,,,Bairstow has been silent....i wonder why?
anyway....game evenly posed. Quick wickets tonight will be the key.
I have no issue with him wasting a review either.
So how is Broad a cheat but not Smith?
Can you explain that hypocrisy?
completely different but you have every right to call smith a cheat but really only for sandpaper .
How is it different?
One hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it. The other hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it.
Can you explain the rules we have to live by to not be a cheat when being caught?
one gets a very faint tickle its reviewed and correct decision ensued , the other smashes it and stands his ground when obvious he was out and you didnt even need a replay and therefore is not out , there is your difference , but its not so much that its the fact that broad whinged so much about bairstow stumping when broad's was much worse , kapish ?
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious.
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
broad is hardly the saint and the purveyor of sportsmanship here is all i am saying and if you cant see that you are worse than i thought
I may not be perfect but I'm still the closest I have ever come across
MegaBonus wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:50 am
Dont let Hawksey dictate the course of the conversation on here......I have no problem with Smith reviewing, but his reaction to the verdict was not a good look
the bigger issue is his silence on the 'spirit of the game' double standards....at least the English commentators called it out...
other than not hearing from Hawksey,,,,,Bairstow has been silent....i wonder why?
anyway....game evenly posed. Quick wickets tonight will be the key.
I have no issue with him wasting a review either.
So how is Broad a cheat but not Smith?
Can you explain that hypocrisy?
completely different but you have every right to call smith a cheat but really only for sandpaper .
How is it different?
One hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it. The other hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it.
Can you explain the rules we have to live by to not be a cheat when being caught?
one gets a very faint tickle its reviewed and correct decision ensued , the other smashes it and stands his ground when obvious he was out and you didnt even need a replay and therefore is not out , there is your difference , but its not so much that its the fact that broad whinged so much about bairstow stumping when broad's was much worse , kapish ?
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious.
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
broad is hardly the saint and the purveyor of sportsmanship here is all i am saying and if you cant see that you are worse than i thought
I may not be perfect but I'm still the closest I have ever come across
completely different but you have every right to call smith a cheat but really only for sandpaper .
How is it different?
One hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it. The other hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it.
Can you explain the rules we have to live by to not be a cheat when being caught?
one gets a very faint tickle its reviewed and correct decision ensued , the other smashes it and stands his ground when obvious he was out and you didnt even need a replay and therefore is not out , there is your difference , but its not so much that its the fact that broad whinged so much about bairstow stumping when broad's was much worse , kapish ?
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious.
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
broad is hardly the saint and the purveyor of sportsmanship here is all i am saying and if you cant see that you are worse than i thought
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious?
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
completely different but you have every right to call smith a cheat but really only for sandpaper .
How is it different?
One hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it. The other hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it.
Can you explain the rules we have to live by to not be a cheat when being caught?
one gets a very faint tickle its reviewed and correct decision ensued , the other smashes it and stands his ground when obvious he was out and you didnt even need a replay and therefore is not out , there is your difference , but its not so much that its the fact that broad whinged so much about bairstow stumping when broad's was much worse , kapish ?
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious.
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
broad is hardly the saint and the purveyor of sportsmanship here is all i am saying and if you cant see that you are worse than i thought
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious?
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
what part of smith being correctly given out and broad not being given out dont you get ? and more importantly in which case was justice served ? and when broad joked about not walking saying this is all about the ashes and doing whats best for your country but then cries to carey about being always remembered for what he did .
i know you are a master at trying to deflect but your outcomes are poor
I may not be perfect but I'm still the closest I have ever come across
One hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it. The other hits the ball to the keeper and claims he didn't hit it.
Can you explain the rules we have to live by to not be a cheat when being caught?
one gets a very faint tickle its reviewed and correct decision ensued , the other smashes it and stands his ground when obvious he was out and you didnt even need a replay and therefore is not out , there is your difference , but its not so much that its the fact that broad whinged so much about bairstow stumping when broad's was much worse , kapish ?
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious.
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
broad is hardly the saint and the purveyor of sportsmanship here is all i am saying and if you cant see that you are worse than i thought
Ahh so it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious?
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
what part of smith being correctly given out and broad not being given out dont you get ? and more importantly in which case was justice served ? and when broad joked about not walking saying this is all about the ashes and doing whats best for your country but then cries to carey about being always remembered for what he did .
i know you are a master at trying to deflect but your outcomes are poor
Facts are simple here. If Broad was a cheat for not walking then Smith is a cheat for not walking.
So it's only cheating if you are not caught and punished?
So it's OK to cheat as long as it's not obvious?
So Broad wouldn't have cheated if the aussies hadn't used up their reviews on pointless fishing exercises?
Popeye Magoo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 2:40 pm
Really, this is like Botham v Chappell. Pig-headedness in the name of some sort of sporting superiority. Neither country have much to be proud about with this win at all costs attitude with BOTH preaching holier than thou statements about rules, spirit and each other's hypocrisy, so it seems.
Expect this "but you did it" in a schoolyard. Everyone needs a decent slap in the face and then just get on with the game without whining every bloody 5 seconds about something. No wonder I have little interest in cricket these days. Grow up.
This.
Both teams shiraz pathetic embarrassments to themselves and their countries
In saying that, it's entertaining to watch both sides complete lack of self awareness
These users thanked the author Sunny Vanilla for the post:
Old Master, johndedes, theorakle, ozzie owl, suzie, thewabster, Za Dom Spremni
Popeye Magoo wrote: ↑Fri Jul 07, 2023 2:40 pm
Really, this is like Botham v Chappell. Pig-headedness in the name of some sort of sporting superiority. Neither country have much to be proud about with this win at all costs attitude with BOTH preaching holier than thou statements about rules, spirit and each other's hypocrisy, so it seems.
Expect this "but you did it" in a schoolyard. Everyone needs a decent slap in the face and then just get on with the game without whining every bloody 5 seconds about something. No wonder I have little interest in cricket these days. Grow up.
This.
Both teams shiraz pathetic embarrassments to themselves and their countries
In saying that, it's entertaining to watch both sides complete lack of self awareness
England should win this one and then it is game on again.
Warner has to go right now, open with Marsh and then you can bring Green back and you have 2 bowling all rounders.
One thing that did annoy the shite out of me in England's first innings is why they persistent with spin when the Kiwi was seeing them like beach balls
Rookie wrote: ↑Sun Jul 09, 2023 4:29 pm
England should win this one and then it is game on again.
Warner has to go right now, open with Marsh and then you can bring Green back and you have 2 bowling all rounders.
One thing that did annoy the shite out of me in England's first innings is why they persistent with spin when the Kiwi was seeing them like beach balls
Does anyone in cricket hit the ball cleaner than that kiwi? We are truly lucky to be able to watch him.
