• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

**Official** England in The West Indies

SpaceMonkey

International Debutant
Remember the fact it was Sarwan (who the umpires know has a tendency to shuffle across and play across the line) probably didnt help ;)
 

garage flower

State Vice-Captain
Swervy said:
i was using an exaggerated hypothetical to try and prove some sort of point.

I thought the point of this was that you said that the umpire obviuosly had some sort of doubt...what I think i am trying to say is that how do you know that he had a doubt.For what i have heard, it was the correct decision
Probably - and I'm not being sarcastic here - I haven't made my point clearly enough. I think we're just going to go round in circles if we carry on though.
 

Swervy

International Captain
garage flower said:
Probably - and I'm not being sarcastic here - I haven't made my point clearly enough. I think we're just going to go round in circles if we carry on though.

ok
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
garage flower said:
"That sentence is so wrong on so many levels."

Yes, I realise that a rhetorical question by it's very nature is needless, or at least doesn't require an answer, but smarse-**** semantics and a smug smilie don't disguise the fact that you haven't addressed the central point. The time taken to give the decision is not the issue.

Whatever the merits of my argument, petty point scoring really isn't as clever as you seem to think it is.
I notice that you completely changed the emphasis of my comment by the casual removal of the giveaway emoticon, yet you then refer to it as 'smug', when the whole object of the exercise was to lighten the mood a little.

Oh well, no matter. The central point, you seemed earlier to be suggesting, was that the umpire took a long time over the decision, therefore he was in doubt, therefore the decision should have been in the negative. What was the phrase again? 'didn't seem very sure given the amount of time he took'.

In this (above) comment, though, you suggest that 'the time taken to give the decision is not the issue'.

To accuse me of smart-assed semantics isn't going to worry me one iota. Remember one thing, though. To win a point (as opposed to scoring one, which I assure you I would never do in your case), you have to first clearly make one.
 

garage flower

State Vice-Captain
luckyeddie said:
I notice that you completely changed the emphasis of my comment by the casual removal of the giveaway emoticon, yet you then refer to it as 'smug', when the whole object of the exercise was to lighten the mood a little.

Oh well, no matter. The central point, you seemed earlier to be suggesting, was that the umpire took a long time over the decision, therefore he was in doubt, therefore the decision should have been in the negative. What was the phrase again? 'didn't seem very sure given the amount of time he took'.

In this (above) comment, though, you suggest that 'the time taken to give the decision is not the issue'.

To accuse me of smart-assed semantics isn't going to worry me one iota. Remember one thing, though. To win a point (as opposed to scoring one, which I assure you I would never do in your case), you have to first clearly make one.
The sentiment certainly came across as being smug and I'm no expert on smilies, though I did to try to include it in my "copy and paste" having initially forgotten to properly quote your post .

I'd suggest that taking the p*** is not necessarily the best way to lighten the mood, though if I darkened it in the 1st place, I apologize.

With regard to the - apparently unclear - point. I shouldn't have allowed myself to get sidetracked by focusing on the time it took to give the decision. The real point (assuming there is one and I'm sure you'll clarify) was around - and I've posted it at least once already - consistency of interpretation and the degree of certainty needed.
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
MoM Steve Harmison.

Probably the right decision again - that first-innings spell set the match up for England, although it could have gone to any one of 4 players.
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
marc71178 said:
I agree - that won't worry LE, he's the King of Smart-assed semantism! ;)
Even without trying, apparently. Honestly, I was just trying to lighten the mood.

Wonder what GF's star sign is?

Bet he's a scorpio.
 

a massive zebra

International Captain
Langeveldt said:
It will be a travesty if Trescothick doesnt lose his place...
Yep, i have to agree with you there.

Trescothick has made 18 runs in 4 innings this series with a highest score of 7.

Impressive :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

SpaceMonkey

International Debutant
luckyeddie said:
Even without trying, apparently. Honestly, I was just trying to lighten the mood.

Wonder what GF's star sign is?

Bet he's a scorpio.
Hey im a scorpio so i hope that wasnt mocking hehe
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
SpaceMonkey said:
Hey im a scorpio so i hope that wasnt mocking hehe
It's an old, very obscure CW joke - there's probably only a dozen or so contributors who would understand.
 

garage flower

State Vice-Captain
luckyeddie said:
It's an old, very obscure CW joke - there's probably only a dozen or so contributors who would understand.
Good, I was worried that I was being a bit thick.

Are you going to enlighten me?
 

luckyeddie

Cricket Web Staff Member
garage flower said:
Good, I was worried that I was being a bit thick.

Are you going to enlighten me?
There was a member called Scorpio - and we were always getting into really silly arguments about nothing
 

garage flower

State Vice-Captain
luckyeddie said:
There was a member called Scorpio - and we were always getting into really silly arguments about nothing
Yes, sounds pretty apt in that case. I'm a borderline Virgo/Libra though (from memory - I haven't looked for a good few years - it varied depending on which newspaper's stars column dates I looked at and I never bothered to find out the correct dates) so it's probably more to do with my stubborness and oversensitivity.
 

Top