• 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.

Paul Nixon

Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
:laugh::lol::laugh::lol: :laugh::lol::laugh::lol:

The dangers of making such predictions!

(Unless, of course, you like that "thrill of losing", which so many gamblers allude to)
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
Richard said:
(Unless, of course, you like that "thrill of losing", which so many gamblers allude to)
Click to expand...
Lots of gamblers talk poo, frankly. I've lost loads over the years & it's never anything other than a kick in the nads. Few kicks were bigger than copping Freddie for a solid month either, tbh.

Winning is a real blast tho, it must be said. Feels like you've beaten the system.
 
T

tooextracool

International Coach
BoyBrumby said:
Decent article, even if I thought it was possibly intended a bit of a conversation starter (as I guess on-line papers' blogs would be) & not necessarily what the writer thinks, but it does contains a couple of pieces of real insight:

"On the pitch, Nixon is a breath of fresh bull****. A man who admitted that he had no qualms about sledging Mike Hussey for not walking yet would never walk himself. The most abrasive and irritating cricketer to play for England since Dominic Cork."

&

"Unlike Cork, Nixon does not have the talent to back up his attitude."

However, in answer to your questions: no & no. If we wanted to annoy the Aussies couldn't we just rub some Ralgex into their jock-straps or make chimp noises when Punter's around? Moreover it was a massive kick in the nads to younger, more talented keeper/batsmen (I'm thinking Read & Foster mainly) who would've automatically assumed they were higher in the pecking order than Nixon.
Click to expand...
I think for the large part, the reason why Fletcher doesnt like Read is because he isnt animated enough in the field or in the dressing room while he often prefers cheer leaders like Geraint Jones and Paul Nixon to create a better atmosphere in certain situations like earlier on in this series. Its probably the same situation with Foster IMO. I dont exactly agree with the policy, but at least now i see some reasoning behind the selection of a 36 year old keeper thats rubbish with the bat.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
BoyBrumby said:
Lots of gamblers talk poo, frankly. I've lost loads over the years & it's never anything other than a kick in the nads. Few kicks were bigger than copping Freddie for a solid month either, tbh.

Winning is a real blast tho, it must be said. Feels like you've beaten the system.
Click to expand...
How'd'you know they talk ****? How'd'you know what it feels like for them?! :wacko:

It mightn't be anything of the sort for you, but why on Earth did you make said bet if it was such a horror to have to do what you said you'd do?

And I might add - what's so utterly terrible about having one of the greatest and most charismatic frontmen rock has ever produced as an avatar? If it's solely from the homosexual POV, I presume I don't need to remind you that you could've done far, far worse than that (Pete Burns, Boy George, Andy Bell, Sylvester, Jimmy Somerville, pretty much anyone from Village People). Indeed, many of the greatest pop-musicians of our time have been gay - Elton John, George Michael, Farrokh himself, David Bowie (though of course that's a moot-point). To most people - at least of my generation - homosexuality is the last thing that comes to mind with such characters.
 
pasag

pasag

RTDAS
Fiery said:
Quite understandable really. One of the cheesiest bands in history and Bohemian Rhapsody is THE cheesiest song in history
Click to expand...
And just when I was beginning to think you weren't that bad, you go and say something like that.
 
Richard

Richard

Cricket Web Staff Member
Fiery said:
Quite understandable really. One of the cheesiest bands in history and Bohemian Rhapsody is THE cheesiest song in history
Click to expand...
How would you consider they compare to Duran Duran, Ultravox and Spandau Ballet?

All of whom certainly qualify as bands (which are different from the musical groups such as Take That and 5ive).

Seriously, if Queen are cheesy (not that, as far as I'm concerned, there's anything wrong with that) then there are some ultra-cheddar bands on our hands!
 
Fiery

Fiery

Banned
Yeah, you can certainly do a lot worse than Queen actually, having thought about it more. They were good musicians and Mercury was a great showman with a very good singing voice (managed to disguise his severe lisp when he sung)..."Another Bites The Dust" was one of my favourite songs when I was about 11. So I take back my original comment. Bohemian Rhapsody is still the cheesiest song in history though.
 
Prince EWS

Prince EWS

Global Moderator
Richard said:
Why do so many Aussies (even if they're Indo-Aussies like you) have Nixon as an avatar at the moment? ::huh::unsure::mellow:
Click to expand...
Jono just thinks Nixon is hilarious I'd imagine - like the forum's support for AA.

The rest of them lost avatar bets surrounding England winning a finals game....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top