I know it gets a kicking but I'm prepared to give it the benefit of the doubt, I'm hoping there are fewer blowouts than last season as teams get used to the concept and tactics.
The colour scheme still hurt my eyes though, and I think it might be damaging my TV.
JM2K6 wrote: Mon Aug 07, 2023 7:23 am
The only thing you've served is undercooked shrimp, you absolute fantasist.
Hmmmm. You questioned my credentials. Let's see yours big man. Or is it Dunkirk all over again lol......
...
Hey I realise this is Your Thing and all, but... what credentials? I'm not claiming to have been in the armed forces. You're the absolute dweeb who tried to defend his habit of playing the big man on the internet only to run away at the first sign of danger by claiming you're some armed forces hard nut. No-one actually gives a shit - half the people on this board have a military background and somehow none of them are a gigantic squalling pissbaby, except you. And the other half are, to a man, better people than you anyway.
Honestly, it's absolutely baffling - do you honestly think anyone reads your drivel and goes "oh, he's in the military, that means this battery of whinging conspiracist lunacy has some justification"? Unless you have PTSD brought on by an IED made from a box of cricket balls, the simple answer is that you're just a deeply sad individual who dishes it out and cannot for a second take it. You've humiliated yourself time and again on here - word to the wise, you're better off just doing your disappearing act, which you're quite good at, and making it stick this time. No-one likes you, no-one thinks you're funny or smart, and definitely no-one is impressed by your rambling about the military. True or not, it doesn't mean you're not a chickenshit moron.
But hey, maybe you are some military bigshot. In which case, show your CO your posts on this forum. I'm sure he'll be fucking ecstatic
JM2K6 wrote: Mon Aug 07, 2023 7:23 am
The only thing you've served is undercooked shrimp, you absolute fantasist.
Hmmmm. You questioned my credentials. Let's see yours big man. Or is it Dunkirk all over again lol......
...
Hey I realise this is Your Thing and all, but... what credentials? I'm not claiming to have been in the armed forces. You're the absolute dweeb who tried to defend his habit of playing the big man on the internet only to run away at the first sign of danger by claiming you're some armed forces hard nut. No-one actually gives a shit - half the people on this board have a military background and somehow none of them are a gigantic squalling pissbaby, except you. And the other half are, to a man, better people than you anyway.
Honestly, it's absolutely baffling - do you honestly think anyone reads your drivel and goes "oh, he's in the military, that means this battery of whinging conspiracist lunacy has some justification"? Unless you have PTSD brought on by an IED made from a box of cricket balls, the simple answer is that you're just a deeply sad individual who dishes it out and cannot for a second take it. You've humiliated yourself time and again on here - word to the wise, you're better off just doing your disappearing act, which you're quite good at, and making it stick this time. No-one likes you, no-one thinks you're funny or smart, and definitely no-one is impressed by your rambling about the military. True or not, it doesn't mean you're not a chickenshit moron.
But hey, maybe you are some military bigshot. In which case, show your CO your posts on this forum. I'm sure he'll be fucking ecstatic
Yup. That's what I thought a parasitic coward.....
Hmmmm. You questioned my credentials. Let's see yours big man. Or is it Dunkirk all over again lol......
...
Hey I realise this is Your Thing and all, but... what credentials? I'm not claiming to have been in the armed forces. You're the absolute dweeb who tried to defend his habit of playing the big man on the internet only to run away at the first sign of danger by claiming you're some armed forces hard nut. No-one actually gives a shit - half the people on this board have a military background and somehow none of them are a gigantic squalling pissbaby, except you. And the other half are, to a man, better people than you anyway.
Honestly, it's absolutely baffling - do you honestly think anyone reads your drivel and goes "oh, he's in the military, that means this battery of whinging conspiracist lunacy has some justification"? Unless you have PTSD brought on by an IED made from a box of cricket balls, the simple answer is that you're just a deeply sad individual who dishes it out and cannot for a second take it. You've humiliated yourself time and again on here - word to the wise, you're better off just doing your disappearing act, which you're quite good at, and making it stick this time. No-one likes you, no-one thinks you're funny or smart, and definitely no-one is impressed by your rambling about the military. True or not, it doesn't mean you're not a chickenshit moron.
But hey, maybe you are some military bigshot. In which case, show your CO your posts on this forum. I'm sure he'll be fucking ecstatic
Yup. That's what I thought a parasitic coward.....
So anyone who isn't in the armed forces is a parasitic coward? That's hysterical, well done
Come on then billy big bollocks, tell us all about your military service. We're all ears. Particularly the bit where it has anything to do with you being an absolute coward on a rugby forum. Maybe you're really brave when you've got a rifle in your hand and you're up against goat herders? We're dying to know! Probably literally if you're as dead hard as you make out!
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2023 12:28 pm
by Biffer
Only Aussie military engagements in the last 20 years are East Timor, Solomon Islands and Bougainville, are they not?
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2023 12:31 pm
by JM2K6
Biffer wrote: Mon Aug 07, 2023 12:28 pm
Only Aussie military engagements in the last 20 years are East Timor, Solomon Islands and Bougainville, are they not?
Perhaps they lost to the Emus again and didn't tell anyone?
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2023 12:36 pm
by Guy Smiley
Biffer wrote: Mon Aug 07, 2023 12:28 pm
Only Aussie military engagements in the last 20 years are East Timor, Solomon Islands and Bougainville, are they not?
They award VCs for shooting unarmed Afghans.
Hard men, Aussies.
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Mon Aug 07, 2023 12:46 pm
by inactionman
Biffer wrote: Mon Aug 07, 2023 12:28 pm
Only Aussie military engagements in the last 20 years are East Timor, Solomon Islands and Bougainville, are they not?
Some bits through NATO, for example boots on ground in Iraq and some anti-piracy around Somalia, but that's mostly peacekeeping and regeneration as part of a NATO presence.
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Tue Aug 08, 2023 7:18 am
by TedMaul
Sources indicate DS is either a woman or a dwarf.
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Fri Aug 18, 2023 3:00 pm
by Biffer
Recent results demonstrating even further the utter nonsense of the full vs associate distinction in cricket. West indies beating India over five games of T20 despite being humiliated by Associates a month earlier, Ireland getting whumped by India, Scotland snd the Netherlands would have put up a better show
Biffer wrote: Mon Aug 07, 2023 12:28 pm
Only Aussie military engagements in the last 20 years are East Timor, Solomon Islands and Bougainville, are they not?
They award VCs for shooting unarmed Afghans.
Hard men, Aussies.
You really have a hard on for Australians don't you mail order guy. Did an Aussie cuckold you little man lol,is that why you were reduced to trawling through the slums of Asia desperately looking for a bedfellow?
Now dickhead, unlike New Zealand we haven't covered up our alleged crimes. NZ SAS were up to a bit of baby killing weren't they cuck? Operation Burnham anyone? Covered it up didn't you parasite. And of course British special forces are currently under investigation for around 50 unlawful killings in Afghanistan. But of course it's those immoral Australians who are the real culprits aren't they lol.....
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 7:21 am
by Random1
One of the few wokesters to whom I enjoy listening. Talking about all things MCC through to Carey’s treatment in the long room.
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2023 5:43 pm
by Biffer
New Zealand just lost a T20I to the UAE.
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2023 12:44 am
by Gumboot
Zimbabwe cricket great Heath Streak has died after a battle with cancer. He was 49 years old.
The fast bowler was the first Zimbabwean player to take 100 test wickets, ultimately finishing his 65-test career with 216 to his name.
He also played 189 one-day internationals, taking 239 wickets. He sits seventh in Zimbabwe's all-time list of run scorers.
Former Zimbabwe teammate Henry Olonga took to social media to pay his respects to his country's "greatest allrounder".
Really sad news. I used to enjoy watching him play.
RIP
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2023 9:59 am
by Gumboot
Former Zimbabwe fast bowler Heath Streak's demise appears to have been exaggerated, as a former teammate took to social media to rubbish reports of his death on Wednesday.
Streak was reported to have died after a battle with cancer at the age of 49.
Former teammate Henry Olonga was one to post tributes to Streak after his apparent death.
However, Olonga later took to Twitter, posting a WhatsApp screenshot of a conversation with Streak, appearing to contradict claims of his death.
"I can confirm that rumours of the demise of Heath Streak have been greatly exaggerated," Olonga posted.
"I just heard from him. The third umpire has called him back. He is very much alive folks."
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2023 10:26 am
by Insane_Homer
ah shit! Class player. RIP
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2023 10:28 am
by Guy Smiley
Insane_Homer wrote: Wed Aug 23, 2023 10:26 am
ah shit! Class player. RIP
Check Gumboot’s second post. He took the review and overturned the decision.
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2023 10:35 am
by Insane_Homer
ah, excellent!
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2023 11:14 am
by inactionman
Great name as well
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2023 2:33 pm
by Insane_Homer
T20s series start today
SA v Aus 5pm
Eng v NZ 6pm
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2023 3:34 pm
by OomStruisbaai
SA won the tos, bowl first. Coetzee to debut
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2023 4:16 pm
by Insane_Homer
Aus off to fucking flyer despite the early wicket!
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2023 4:43 pm
by OomStruisbaai
83/4 after 8
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2023 5:27 pm
by Insane_Homer
192/5 with 3 overs left
226/6
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2023 5:43 pm
by OomStruisbaai
Aussie cheaters way to good for our laaities.
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2023 9:12 am
by Biffer
Another mankad causing a stink.
I'm actually entirely ok with this one, the batsman has left the crease before the bowler has got to the stumps, so he's clearly gaining an advantage. It's the ones where the bowler goes through his bowling action and then does it that I think are out of order.
Re: The Official Cricket Thread
Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2023 9:27 am
by Mahoney
You can't be out that way if the bowler goes through their action:
38.3 Non-striker leaving his/her ground early
38.3.1 At any time from the moment the ball comes into play until the instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, the non-striker is liable to be Run out if he/she is out of his/her ground. In these circumstances the non-striker will be out Run out if he/she is out of his/her ground when his/her wicket is broken by the bowler throwing the ball at the stumps or by the bowler’s hand holding the ball, whether or not the ball is subsequently delivered.
38.3.1.1 The instant when the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball is defined as the moment the bowler’s arm reaches the highest point of his/her normal bowling action in the delivery swing.
38.3.1.2 Even if the non-striker had left his/her ground before the instant at which the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball, once the bowler has reached that point it is no longer possible for the bowler to run out the non-striker under this Law.
