Ashes Prediction

[John Cartwright]

For the mystified gentlemen from other climes benefit; here are the basic rules of cricket
1. There are two teams. One out, one in.

2. The team that's out try to get the player that's in, out.

3. When they do get him out, he goes in.

4. Then the next player goes out. As long as he's out, he's in.

5. The object is then for the team that's out to get the second player out. When they get him out, he goes in.

6. This process is repeated for each innings until the team that's out gets the team that's in all out.

7. When the whole team is out, the team that was in goes out, and the team that was out goes in.

8. Then they play a second innings until they're all out. Except one player. He remains not out.

[=CfC=Father Ted]

Hmmmm.... not how I remember the days of Peter May, Freddie Laker and others.....

Freddie Laker was more likely to have been an employer of yours than someone you saw playing cricket!  Perhaps you were thinking of Jim Laker or Fred Trueman?  Actually, I'm pretty sure the latter was a nasty piece of work.  Also I'm sure Bluey and Tinks would point to Douglas Jardine (1930s) as being a gent who didn't have a lot of time for the spirit of cricket.

[=CfC=Bounder]

Oops....yes you are right.....Freddie Laker was my boss at BUA in the 60's........you can now see how my brain is loosing cells so rapidly! How could I fail to remember "Jim" and all the wickets he took in that famous match way back when I was in short trousers and held these chaps in the highest esteem.

I guess that like Agnew, we will agree to differ on our opinion as to how to go about playing the game. I can tell you that I was distraught at watching Broad taking his boot off before lunch and trying to reduce the number of overs. A poor reflection of what was once a gentleman's pastime now reduced to the manner in which another sport is played with a round ball instead of an oval ball.

I beg to differ!

Bounder

[=CfC=Father Ted]

Bounder, I'm not defending Stuart Broad (I actually thought his time-wasting a worse crime than waiting for the umpire to give him out) or anyone else who does any of the other acts of gamesmanship, just trying to point out that these things have always been in cricket.

Just in case you want me drummed out of Chuffy's as a bad apple, I'd like to report that I walked earlier this season when  our umpire wasn't going to give me out.

[John Cartwright]

So, were you out when you should of been in or in thinking you were out Ted? I be confuddled

[=CfC=Father Ted]

So, were you out when you should of been in or in thinking you were out Ted? I be confuddled

Basically I knew I'd hit the ball into the wicketkeeper's gloves, but our umpire (a teammate, remember) either didn't know or knew but was prepared to brazen it out if I didn't admit to it.  I took the decision out of his hands by walking off.  This is considered the gentlemanly thing to do - and it's what Stuart Broad conspicuously failed to do.  However his case is slightly different in that he had an independent umpire deciding whether or not he hit it, and that umpire said he didn't.  A basic tenet of cricket is that the umpire's decision is final - if he gives you out you certainly shouldn't argue, so why should you if he erroneously gives you not out?

[CFC_Conky]

For the mystified gentlemen from other climes benefit; here are the basic rules of cricket
1. There are two teams. One out, one in.

2. The team that's out try to get the player that's in, out.

3. When they do get him out, he goes in.

4. Then the next player goes out. As long as he's out, he's in.

5. The object is then for the team that's out to get the second player out. When they get him out, he goes in.

6. This process is repeated for each innings until the team that's out gets the team that's in all out.

7. When the whole team is out, the team that was in goes out, and the team that was out goes in.

8. Then they play a second innings until they're all out. Except one player. He remains not out.

Best...post...ever...

[John Cartwright]

Thanks Conkers; but plagiarized of course. Ted may concur this has been around since Woof was a lad

[=CfC=Bounder]

Bounder, I'm not defending Stuart Broad (I actually thought his time-wasting a worse crime than waiting for the umpire to give him out) or anyone else who does any of the other acts of gamesmanship, just trying to point out that these things have always been in cricket.

Just in case you want me drummed out of Chuffy's as a bad apple, I'd like to report that I walked earlier this season when  our umpire wasn't going to give me out.

Dear oh dear.......Teders... I consider you to be a pillar of gentlemanliness...It is just that in the 50's things were somewhat different (certainly my memories of it) without pressures of expensive teams, product placement and all the other things that have gone to change the game. I guess that I'm just reminiscing and wishing for my youth back again!

Bounders

[=CfC=Father Ted]

Thanks Conkers; but plagiarized of course. Ted may concur this has been around since Woof was a lad

...and of course it make the whole thing sound much less complicated than it actually is.

[=CfC=Woof]

Thanks Conkers; but plagiarized of course. Ted may concur this has been around since Woof was a lad

Do we have  a Chaplain in the Squadron to whom I can complain anent the constant use of my manly years as a yardstick by which momentous events are dated?  Or is sulking on the bountiful bosom of Matron my only solace? 

[John Cartwright]

Don't do that Woofers old stick, we will never see you again.......

'Woof's in there!! Chuffys never leave a man behind!! I'm going in!!'

[=CfC=BlueDog]

  (at BalDaddy & Woof's comments)

(at the inept performance by Oz batsmen)

Ted, you are required to report to Australia House for a quick citizenship ceremony.   You're opening for Australia next test.

[=CfC=BlueDog]

Would you believe 3:2 (Aussies favour)?

[CFC_Conky]

Would you believe 3:2 (Aussies favour)?

Aussie, Aussie, Aussie, Oil!, Oi!, Oil!