FootballNews

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:02 pm**

six and out wrote:
swannsong wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:What makes you think you're more Australian than Stokes is English?
I've lived here since I was 3 (58 years (95% of my life), and a citizen since I was 10 (84% of my life) ...and my Dad also served here for about a year in 1946...
And my Mum's name is Sheilagh...
Ben Stokes has lived in the UK for 16 years (57% of his life)....not sure how or, why he became eligible to play for England ie citizenship-family origins...
The ICC rules say if you have played in a country for 4 years you can then play for that country.

My apologies, I hadn't realised they were quite that stringent !!!

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:10 pm**

swannsong wrote: My apologies, I hadn't realised they were quite that stringent !!!

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:13 pm**

MegaBonus wrote:rubbish....

Bay 13 at the MCG?

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 4:20 pm**

six and out wrote:
MegaBonus wrote:rubbish....
Bay 13 at the MCG?

In fairness that's like comparing to Barmy Army.

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:29 pm**

six and out wrote:
MegaBonus wrote:im not referring to the laws of the game but rather the etiquette of spectators
I don’t think Australian fans have ever adhered to them?

I'm sure 1 or 2 do. Australian fans in general are terrible.

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:30 pm**

six and out wrote:
swannsong wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:What makes you think you're more Australian than Stokes is English?
I've lived here since I was 3 (58 years (95% of my life), and a citizen since I was 10 (84% of my life) ...and my Dad also served here for about a year in 1946...
And my Mum's name is Sheilagh...
Ben Stokes has lived in the UK for 16 years (57% of his life)....not sure how or, why he became eligible to play for England ie citizenship-family origins...
The ICC rules say if you have played in a country for 4 years you can then play for that country.

Is that an ICC rule or England's rule? I thought we were the only country that has that requirement.

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:58 pm**

Amid the furore over umpires call to give an extra run when a throw struck Ben Stokes’ bat in the World Cup final, it has now come to light that the all-rounder had asked the umpires to take away the four overthrows which ultimately proved to be decisive in England’s win over New Zealand.
During the final over in England’s chase of 241 on Sunday at Lord’s, Stokes accidentally knocked the ball coming in from deep midwicket fielder and deflected it off to the third man boundary, while attempting to dive for his crease with an outstretched bat in a bid to complete his second run.
After consultation with Marais Erasmus and the rest of his umpiring colleagues, Kumar Dharmasena signalled six runs for the incident, meaning that England — who by then seemed to be drifting out of contention needing nine runs from three balls — were suddenly right back in the hunt for their World Cup glory needing three more from two.
James Anderson, Stokes’ Test team-mate, has revealed that the all-rounder, who was hugely apologetic the moment the incident happened, had appealed to the umpires to overturn their decision.
“The etiquette in cricket is if the ball is thrown at the stumps and it hits you and goes into a gap in the field you don’t run,” Sydney Morning Herald quoted Anderson as telling BBC’s Tailenders podcast.
“But if it goes to the boundary, in the rules it’s four and you can’t do anything about it.
“I think, talking to Michael Vaughan who saw him after the game, Ben Stokes actually went to the umpires and said, ‘Can you take that four runs off. We don’t want it’.
“But it’s in the rules and that’s the way it is,” he added.
Former Australian umpire Simon Taufel has described the costly ruling in the World Cup final as a “clear mistake”.
“They (England) should have been awarded five runs, not six,” Taufel told foxsports.com.au.
“It’s a clear mistake and it’s an error of judgment,” he added.
However, the ICC said the umpires took decisions on the field based on their interpretation of the rules, and the cricket body would not comment on the episode.

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 8:48 pm**

God is an Englishman wrote:

Is that an ICC rule or England's rule? I thought we were the only country that has that requirement.

ECB changed their rules to be more like ICC - but could be totally wrong!!!

Posted: **Wed Jul 17, 2019 9:43 pm**

Are you still feeling it now? Yep, the aussies are still feeling it.

Posted: **Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:34 am**

B.Toomer wrote:Are you still feeling it now? Yep, the aussies are still feeling it.

Let me know when you've got 5 cups and get back to me. Actually, I doubt I will live that long.

Posted: **Thu Jul 18, 2019 2:19 pm**

Bomber wrote:
B.Toomer wrote:Are you still feeling it now? Yep, the aussies are still feeling it.
Let me know when you've got 5 cups and get back to me. Actually, I doubt I will live that long.

Let us know when you're the current world champions.

Posted: **Thu Jul 18, 2019 2:40 pm**

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
B.Toomer wrote:Are you still feeling it now? Yep, the aussies are still feeling it.
Let me know when you've got 5 cups and get back to me. Actually, I doubt I will live that long.
Let us know when you're the current world champions.

Lived it, breathed it a lot longer than your mob!

Posted: **Thu Jul 18, 2019 4:15 pm**

Bomber wrote: Lived it, breathed it a lot longer than your mob!

Let us know when you're the current world champions.

Posted: **Thu Jul 18, 2019 5:25 pm**

Yeah, the whinging convicts are still feeling it.

Posted: **Thu Jul 18, 2019 9:57 pm**

B.Toomer wrote:Yeah, the whinging convicts are still feeling it.

i'm guessing you lived in Australia for around 50 years and whinged about living here and bagged this country and its national sides the whole time you had been there
and you seem to only pop your head up either when Australia stumbles or England succeeds a typical only sing when they're winning supporter

Posted: **Thu Jul 18, 2019 11:05 pm**

Lucky for you that you don't make your living from guessing.

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 10:04 am**

B.Toomer wrote:Lucky for you that you don't make your living from guessing.

the only guessing part was the time in Australia the rest is quite evident from your 13 years posting negativity on here

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 10:56 am**

B.Toomer wrote:Yeah, the whinging convicts are still feeling it.

How do you get showing 5 cups to your 1 as whingeing? I'd call it being quite buoyant if anything.

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 12:24 pm**

The odds are, with the next WC being in india the aussies won’t be world champs for at least 8 more long years. England however are world champs for at least the next 4 years.

Would using wickets lost to determine the winner push the game in the right direction? Short form cricket is only about getting as many runs as possible from a set number of balls and if you’ve got 10 wickets why not make good tactical use of every one of them if you want, like England did at the end. Rules should encourage aggressive cricket and teams prepared to go hard and bat deep, it’s entertaining. Punters want to see teams push the boundaries, is it better in the long run to get bowled out for 300 in 40 overs than get 300 for 0 in 50 overs, coz next game it might be 400 / 450 etc.

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:07 pm**

N5 1BH wrote:The odds are, with the next WC being in india the aussies won’t be world champs for at least 8 more long years. England however are world champs for at least the next 4 years.

Would using wickets lost to determine the winner push the game in the right direction? Short form cricket is only about getting as many runs as possible from a set number of balls and if you’ve got 10 wickets why not make good tactical use of every one of them if you want, like England did at the end. Rules should encourage aggressive cricket and teams prepared to go hard and bat deep, it’s entertaining. Punters want to see teams push the boundaries, is it better in the long run to get bowled out for 300 in 40 overs than get 300 for 0 in 50 overs, coz next game it might be 400 / 450 etc.

That logic flaws if both teams get the same amount of runs of the same number of overs, yet one team achieves it losing less wickets ???
Total runs determines the winner normally, so wickets lost would only come into effect in the event of equal runs.
A batting couple could get 2 runs off every ball (12) or 3 x 4 of only 3 of the deliveries and defending 3 deliveries....yet the current rules give boundaries preference over the 6 x 2 runs....each to their own...

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:32 pm**

I reckon the way forward for limited overs cricket is to use wickets as a tool, a different mindset to test cricket. So if we agree countbacks, whether boundaries or wickets are not an acceptable way to decide a winner why not just play another super over, two new batsmen and a new bowler, simple.

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 1:42 pm**

Just play another super over would be better, however that wasn't the rules for this one and England won it.

Feels good to be world champions.

Only country ever to have won football, cricket and rugby world cups.

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 2:08 pm**

God is an Englishman wrote: Only country ever to have won football, cricket and rugby world cups.

True, to an aggregate total of 4

Australia in those sports aggregate total of 7

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 3:24 pm**

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote: Only country ever to have won football, cricket and rugby world cups.
True, to an aggregate total of 4

Australia in those sports aggregate total of 7

And we've won all of them more recently as well.

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:06 pm**

Ben Stokes nominated for Kiwi of the Year

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:10 pm**

MegaBonus wrote:
Ben Stokes nominated for Kiwi of the Year

I just love hypocritical triggered aussies.

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:25 pm**

attacking the man and not the issue.....youre losing....

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 4:47 pm**

MegaBonus wrote:attacking the man and not the issue.....youre losing....

No, we definitely won the world cup. I saw it happen.

Posted: **Fri Jul 19, 2019 6:09 pm**

Posted: **Sat Jul 20, 2019 12:00 am**

swannsong wrote:

So funny

FootballNews

ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup

Re: ODI cricket world cup