badgerx16

Sandworm

https://www.lords.org/mcc/the-laws-of-cricket/dead-ball

If you stay sat on that fence you will get splinters in your arse. Saying Icke is wrong, a charlatan, a lunatic, or whatever is not being "unprepared for all possibilities". It is the position one takes when having assessed both sides you come to the clear and obviously correct decision.

Using sandpaper to doctor the ball is only one slight step beyond Mike Atherton having sand in his pockets, or English bowlers with vaseline in their eyebrows. All of which is not only against the "spirit" of the game but the Laws. What happened yesterday may have been unsporting but was entirely legal. The easy way to defuse it would have been for the umpire at the bowler's end to have refused the appeal as the ball was dead. Once he did not Bairstow was out. Set's Headingly up nicely though.

Yes, but only for a split second because he isn't.

If the umpires on the field had ruled the over was 'over' they would not have permitted the appeal on the grounds that the ball was dead. They were the people responsible for asking for the third umpire's review. It might have been against the 'spirit' of the game but it was well within the Laws.

Stage 1 fought out by the Yates twins. Stage 2 gives COFIDIS their first win since 2008. More worrying - some twats scattered tacks across the road towards the end of today's stage, causing several punctures.

I reckon it's Worcester. Watched them lose to Lanky at Blackpool a few rounds ago.

If Bairstow had run Steve Smith out in the same way. I assume you would expect Stokes to withdraw the appeal.

This is The Ashes. Spirit is fine but winning, within the Laws, is the prime purpose. It's not as if Carey was trying to con the umpires like a Premier League centre forward tripping over his own feet in the penalty area. Bairstow should have turned to watch Carey and waited for the umpire to call "dead ball".

Bairstow's error, not paying attention. The Aussies are perfectly entitled to appeal, can't blame them and 2 umpires gave it - onfield and review. The same people raging about this decision were perfectly happy last night when Starc's catch was over-ruled by the same umpires.

You accusing other people of bring opinionated and self important is rich. I generally form my views on a subject based on looking at various differing standpoints, how else can you make informed and intelligent assessments ? Do you do the same, or are you reliant on being fed by selected media streams ? Have you ever considered the possibility that Icke might be wrong ? What evidence that runs counter to his views have you researched and deemed to be wrong - and on what basis ? When I listen to someone giving a speech that opens with something that is clearly and demonstrably bullshit why should I bother to listen to any more ? The opening gambit destroys whatever credibility he had, ( putting aside personal judgements of Icke's lunacy ). You are equally as dismissive and condescending towards contrary opinion as you accuse me and others of being. Sometimes, despite all that you and your fellow conspiracy theorists protest, the given common narrative is actually the true one, written history is correct, and on occasion the "MSM" print the truth.

It's all about the post count.

Arrest

From 188:1 we lost 137:9. Think McGrath is right with his 5-0 prediction. They now know how to bowl at England for the rest of the series.

Also, gender re-assignment surgery is not carried out on children.

Operating in international waters - nobody had jurisdiction. It would not have been allowed to operate in US / Canadian / UK / French etc waters without certification.

How else was malaria being spread then ?

Down at that depth scavengers arrive very quickly and in surprising numbers.

Couldn't get beyond his opening gambit that both World Wars were instigated by a mysterious third party that funded both sides in each conflict. Didn't see much point in going beyond that as I assume the rest is just more of the same fantastical guff. If Icke truly believed what he was saying in that video then he IS a nutter. Unless, of course, Gavrilo Princip was put up to assassinating Arch Duke Ferdinand in Sarajevo in 1914 by this conspirator, the chauffeur of the Arch Duke's car was in on the act, and the military treaties between the various central European powers were a set-up. Then, of course, the whole Versailles treaty must have been drawn up by this mysterious background entity, and Hitler guided to power in 1933 so that he could rearm Germany and be encouraged to the Anschluss, occupation of the Sudetenland, and ultimately to invade Poland because somebody was whispering in his ear.

There are flat-Earthers all around the World.

You are quite welcome to the forum, but you have just had a taste of how it operates and how people feel. Certain styles of post and opinion will elicit specific forms of response. By your own admission you didn't read much of this thread - perhaps if you had you would not be so surprised by the reception of your maiden speech.

Radical.

It wasn't concise enough.