*Official* England in South Africa Thread

[superkingdave]

I must have gotten him mixed up with someone else, I can vividly remember someone getting caught behind off McGrath down the leg-side twice on debut.

Never even played against McGrath

Steve James had launched his Test career with two confident clips off his legs for four while Pollock was getting his bearings but then he almost immediately followed his former Cambridge captain to the pavilion as a lifting ball of 85mph velocity brushed his glove and chest, giving Mark Boucher just sufficient time to take off far to his left and make a spectacular leg-side catch.


After James had edged an outswinger to second slip, Atherton and Hussain put together the partnership that took England off the slide and gave them a breather

He struck for the first time in his second over of the afternoon when James, rightly moving his feet, was deceived by the dip which comes from sharp spin and drove a return catch

Steve James's determined resistance was ended when he pushed forward and was caught at silly point off bat and pad.

 

[Pratters]

a) You don't give a good impression of it.

b) Where did Marc complain about the decision?!

a) You are bent on not readint properly. Its not my problem.

b) When did I say Marc did? Marc said I moaned about the decision which I did not. Learn to read properly.

 

[Tom Halsey]

I thought it was wrong in the sense of it being a mistake by an umpire. Should not have been given out. But I accept such decisions happen in cricket.

No way it was wrong at all!

 

[Pratters]

Yes, and there you said that the bowlers always had a rough time.

Then you come in here and say that if bowlers bowl well, they get decent figures.

If that isn't contradicting yourself, I'm a Dutchman's Uncle.

Some times good bowling will be rewarded. Does not change a thing.

 

[Tom Halsey]

a) You are bent on not readint properly. Its not my problem.

b) When did I say Marc did? Marc said I moaned about the decision which I did not. Learn to read properly.

b) 'Marc contrived to' when talking about moaning about the decision.

 

[Pratters]

No way it was wrong at all!

Its not my belief. But dont deviate from the point. where did I moan huh!?

 

[Mr Casson]

I thought it was wrong in the sense of it being a mistake by an umpire. Should not have been given out. But I accept such decisions happen in cricket.

That's just giving us a verbal run-around. You're not saying anything that you haven't said before; you're just saying it in a different way. It's called logorrhoea.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Some times good bowling will be rewarded. Does not change a thing.

If good bowling is rewarded, it's not as voured towards batters as you suggest.

 

[Pratters]

That's just giving us a verbal run-around. You're not saying anything that you haven't said before; you're just saying it in a different way. It's called logorrhoea.

Or maybe you took it in a different way.

 

[Mr Casson]

Or maybe you took it in a different way.

How could I take something that you'd already said a different way?

 

[Pratters]

If good bowling is rewarded, it's not as voured towards batters as you suggest.

If good bowling is rewarded some times, does not mean more often than not batters have an upper hand as shown by the poll and every thing.

You are one of the few people who think twenty20 cricket is equal for both and I am afraid no one can convince you against your adamancy.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Its not my belief.

'It's not my belief' and 'I thought'. More contradictions.

 

[marc71178]

This 'unlucky' method of dismissal didn't stop Glamorgan's opener James Test career lasting just the 1 Test.

Which is 1 more than he deserved IMO.

 

[Pratters]

'It's not my belief' and 'I thought'. More contradictions.

No contradictions any where.

 

[Tom Halsey]

If good bowling is rewarded some times, does not mean more often than not batters have an upper hand as shown by the poll and every thing.

'does not mean more often than not batters have an upper hand'.

Contadicting your belief it's favoured towards the batters.

 

[marc71178]

Then what was your reason for arguement in the twenty20 thread!? You just contradict for the sake of it?

No, you went on as if it was an impossible game for the bowlers, as it was so batting dominated.

I pointed out that if they bowled well enough they could get rewards.

Then an example of this was shown (as in the final last year where there was some great bowling) - and you start blaming anything first before actually grasping that the bowling was good.

 

[Tom Halsey]

No contradictions any where.

Look at the two posts concerned on the same topic (the LBW) and you said 'I thought' and 'It isnot my belief'. That is contradicting youself. Go look it up in a dictionary.

 

[marc71178]

I thought Dar made some bad decisions. So I blamed him. But I dont moan or cry over them. Its part of cricket.

You must have a pretty odd definition of moaning then.

You also need to work out your own stance on this as in the last 24 hours you have categorically stated that you didn't blame the decision, and now say you did.

Either way you're overlooking the fact that the decision was correct!

 

[marc71178]

Moaning would be crying over the decision and accusing ot for the match and after events etc. For me Dar had made some poor decisions but as I mentioned right in the beginning, it should not be thought to alter result of a match. I have argued over the decision itself when people said it was clearly out. Not moaned or any thing over the decision as I have accepted it. Just pointed it being a wrong one according to me.

If you keep digging you'll be at the Earth's core soon!

 

[Tom Halsey]

Then an example of this was shown (as in the final last year where there was some great bowling) - and you start blaming anything first before actually grasping that the bowling was good.

Even though he didn't even watch it!