South Australia - pitch doctoring

[Sawajiri Erika]

It's just not cricket.

[Bomber]

Well, not since certain people open just one eye and not see the big picture.

[God is an Englishman]

Well, not since certain people open just one eye and not see the big picture.

boty eyes open would be admitting all team do it, one eyed would be saying all teams do it except for their own.

[Bomber]

Well, not since certain people open just one eye and not see the big picture.

boty eyes open would be admitting all team do it, one eyed would be saying all teams do it except for their own.

Not every person sees things in black and white either, regardless of how many eyes.

[God is an Englishman]

Well, not since certain people open just one eye and not see the big picture.

boty eyes open would be admitting all team do it, one eyed would be saying all teams do it except for their own.

Not every person sees things in black and white either, regardless of how many eyes.

How is it not black and white?

Both England and South Australia did EXACTLY the same thing.

[Bomber]

How could they have? Did they exactly have the same groundsmen? Did they have exactly the same orders? Did they have exactly the same reasons for preparing pitch in a certain way? Did they exactly have same circumstances? Of course not, so rubbish talk.

[The Home Straight]

whaa whaa

[God is an Englishman]

How could they have? Did they exactly have the same groundsmen? Did they have exactly the same orders? Did they have exactly the same reasons for preparing pitch in a certain way? Did they exactly have same circumstances? Of course not, so rubbish talk.

The pitch speaks for itself

No

Yes

Yes

No but very similar

Both teams produced a wicket in order to ensure a win/loss result.

[Bomber]

How could they have? Did they exactly have the same groundsmen? Did they have exactly the same orders? Did they have exactly the same reasons for preparing pitch in a certain way? Did they exactly have same circumstances? Of course not, so rubbish talk.

The pitch speaks for itself

No

Yes

Yes

No but very similar

Both teams produced a wicket in order to ensure a win/loss result.

So it wasn't EXACTLY the same at all. That's all I needed

[God is an Englishman]

How could they have? Did they exactly have the same groundsmen? Did they have exactly the same orders? Did they have exactly the same reasons for preparing pitch in a certain way? Did they exactly have same circumstances? Of course not, so rubbish talk.

The pitch speaks for itself

No

Yes

Yes

No but very similar

Both teams produced a wicket in order to ensure a win/loss result.

So it wasn't EXACTLY the same at all. That's all I needed

The relevant points were exactly the same, that's all you need.

[Bomber]

Maybe you need to look up the OED again and see what "exactly" means. Then revisit the main points of the topic. I'll give you a C- for persistence so far, but you need much improvement when it comes to content and researching facts in these instances. More homework required and perhaps less distraction of others.

[God is an Englishman]

The relevant points are exactly the same

[Bomber]

OED mate, OED

[God is an Englishman]

The relevant points are exactly the same

[Bomber]

Fail. I'll need to arrange a parent interview with such poor effort. For now, best go to sit out.

[God is an Englishman]

What if the relevant points are not exactly the same?

[Bomber]

Then you might twig that each situation has its own considerations and differences, subtle or otherwise. Otherwise why have courts for example? Is each assault charge worthy of same consideration, or is it best we hear all the whys, the hows, the testimonies of those that were there? In fact it would be rare to have two situations, with every major sticking point "exactly" the same.

[God is an Englishman]

Then you might twig that each situation has its own considerations and differences, subtle or otherwise. Otherwise why have courts for example? Is each assault charge worthy of same consideration, or is it best we hear all the whys, the hows, the testimonies of those that were there? In fact it would be rare to have two situations, with every major sticking point "exactly" the same.

So what relevant points are not exactly the same?

[Bomber]

Then you might twig that each situation has its own considerations and differences, subtle or otherwise. Otherwise why have courts for example? Is each assault charge worthy of same consideration, or is it best we hear all the whys, the hows, the testimonies of those that were there? In fact it would be rare to have two situations, with every major sticking point "exactly" the same.

So what relevant points are not exactly the same?

You answered yes and no to questions that showed up why not exactly the same. The OED could have assisted you in not having asking this again had you taken my earlier advice.

[God is an Englishman]

So what relevant points are not exactly the same?

[Delete Your Account]

So what relevant points are not exactly the same?

One relevant point - the Test was for a 5 day match, whereas the Shield is a 4 day match. They would require different "doctoring" to ensure a result - the Shield pitch couldn't be made to last 5 days for example.

[God is an Englishman]

So what relevant points are not exactly the same?

One relevant point - the Test was for a 5 day match, whereas the Shield is a 4 day match. They would require different "doctoring" to ensure a result - the Shield pitch couldn't be made to last 5 days for example.

Not sure how relevant that is, it still requires doctoring to ensure a result pitch.

[Bomber]

So what relevant points are not exactly the same?

Answered already. If you cant see it, then either lazy or just another fail. OED/exactly etc will help you.

[God is an Englishman]

So what relevant points are not exactly the same?

Answered already. If you cant see it, then either lazy or just another fail. OED/exactly etc will help you.

Redmum used to use that excuse as well

[Bomber]

So what relevant points are not exactly the same?

Answered already. If you cant see it, then either lazy or just another fail. OED/exactly etc will help you.

Redmum used to use that excuse as well

So you're deflecting now?

[God is an Englishman]

Redmum used to use that excuse as well

So you're deflecting now?[/quote]

Don't need to deflect, you've used the same excuse as redmum for not answering a question. Look how low you've sunk.

You're only way out now is either suicide or to answer the question.

[Bomber]

Redmum used to use that excuse as well

So you're deflecting now?

Don't need to deflect, you've used the same excuse as redmum for not answering a question. Look how low you've sunk.

You're only way out now is either suicide or to answer the question.[/quote]

Answered already - as I said, either too lazy to use scroll function, or plain stupid, or finding it hard to admit defeat. Which one applies, or is it more than one? I've given you examples of why it isn't exactly the same and you even helped illustrate it. If you have trouble with that and find your only way to feel better about it is repeating the same question then suggest seek therapy (Col could refer one to you) or just deal with it. There's no shame in being wrong (or so I'm told).

[God is an Englishman]

Wow, redmum is back

[Bomber]

Wow, redmum is back

Translation - "I'm out of material, utterly defeated".

[God is an Englishman]

Wow, redmum is back

Translation - "I'm out of material, utterly defeated".

Why won't you answer such a simple question, something to hide?