stevegrant

Fixed. I'll spend an hour or so tonight trying to work out why some predictions aren't saving. Bit strange that some are but others aren't.

I just think we would want as long as possible to bowl them out, given they're likely to be on the defensive right from the start. They're not going to be chasing runs with pretty much zero chance of winning the game, so if we were to bowl them out for 200-odd, that would give us a whopping target of about 30. I'd fancy our chances there

Jimmy's gone for 196 Might let Vince get the one run needed to get 150, but should be declaring now really.

Expect we'll bat until we get to 400 - thus securing maximum batting points - and then declare, seeing if we can skittle them cheaply this afternoon. We've got 11 overs to score 33 runs, so would expect we should manage that comfortably.

New ball taken, 268/3

Sent...

Just had a lunchtime chuckle reading back through this excellent article from March. Storrie

This.

Of course he's not endearing himself to a buyer, Chainrai is his buyer and he's going to do whatever it takes to ensure nobody else comes on the scene, even though anyone would have to be utterly mental to do so.

The fact that he needs a bridging loan to get anywhere near it should set off all sorts of alarm bells!

Not entirely sure about that, a batsman is only deemed "stumped" when the wicketkeeper removes the bails after a batsman goes too far forward to play the ball and ends out of his crease, whereas any player can run out a batsman who has left his crease for any other reason, including setting off for a run, as was (inadvertently) the case on Saturday.

Agreed. I'm also looking forward to taking your £50 at the end of the season

If you have to pull out, you have to pull out. These things happen, unfortunately. Better to lose out on £500 (or however much you've paid to date) than £10k+ further down the line when it ends up needing more work than the survey suggested - they can't see absolutely everything, so there's always an element of "caveat emptor". I was going to buy a flat in Crystal Palace not so long ago, but the survey reported that there were significant structural deficiencies in the building which needed major underpinning work. I may well have pulled out of that deal had the estate agent not stitched me up before I got the chance... Going for a new-build flat now, no such worries there!

It says:

This. I'm not unduly concerned about the long-term future of the club, with no debt to any banks and the Guardian suggesting that the money Markus invested initially to repay those debts has been converted to equity, even if the Liebherr dynasty decided they wanted to walk away, the club is still in a fantastic position financially. I genuinely believe that we wouldn't require someone with masses of cash at their disposal, because the fanbase and assets we have ensure that the club will be self-sufficient. As for the rows, reports and rumours that have been circulating in recent months, they're entirely irrelevant at this time.

Email subscriptions@saintsweb.co.uk

I'll be amazed if Cork doesn't play, even if he needs about 20 painkilling injections before and during the game. He won't want to miss it, particularly as captain.

He's retiring from management. He always came across to me as the sort of bloke who absolutely hated his job, but just kept doing it because he knew he was pretty good at it.

Personally, I think the game should have gone ahead, with the players going out there with a "do it for Markus" attitude. "The show must go on", as they say. No issue with it being called off, mind you, can fully understand the decision. Also, from an entirely selfish point of view, it means I'll actually be able to go to the rearranged game.

The "admin" username isn't used by any of the administrators - it's just the default one that is set up when the forum gets installed. Drop me a PM and I'll get it sorted.

Full draw: Accrington Stanley v Newcastle United Portsmouth v Crystal Palace Leeds United v Leicester City Wolverhampton Wanderers v Southend United Blackburn Rovers v Norwich City Milton Keynes Dons v Blackpool Tranmere Rovers v Swansea City Everton v Huddersfield Town Peterborough United v Cardiff City Reading v Northampton Town S****horpe United v Sheffield Wednesday Brentford v Hull City Sunderland v Colchester United Leyton Orient v West Bromwich Albion Morecambe v Burnley Birmingham City v Rochdale Crewe Alexandra v Ipswich Town Watford v Notts County West Ham United v Oxford United Southampton v Bolton Wanderers Bradford City v Preston North End Fulham v Port Vale Millwall v Middlesbrough Stoke City v Shrewsbury Town Hartlepool United v Wigan Athletic

Right, having a few issues this evening with the heavy traffic for obvious reasons. As a result, as a temporary measure, I have disabled a number of features, most of which shouldn't affect your use of the forum anyway. I have also hidden all the other forums apart from this one - you will still be able to access the others if you've already got the URL saved, but I'd rather if you stayed off them for the time being. These changes appear to have improved things substantially, so they'll remain in place until at least 10pm this evening. I'd appreciate a bit of patience with this, I'm entirely on my own with the technical side of things at the moment as Baj is on holiday, so I'm trying to do the work of two people at the moment.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony Although come to think of it, that's probably wrong, because I did expect you to come out with a load of guff that didn't actually address any of the points made. What's that got to do with anything? If you're going to point out "inaccuracies", you could at least get them right yourself. Club photographers are employees of the club, so it stands to reason that they would have access

I'll tell you what IS ironic... that you continually bleat on about the Echo failing to do research and then when trying to prove a point, you fail to do even the most basic of research. You ->

My thoughts entirely...