FootballNews

Heading for a draw given London’s lovely summer weather :wink:

I always thought that the Poms were the epitome of 'good sportsmanship'....I guess I was wrong....don't care if it was a 'minority' or not...

MegaBonus wrote:I always thought that the Poms were the epitome of 'good sportsmanship'....I guess I was wrong....don't care if it was a 'minority' or not...

I agree pretty ordinary behaviour even it is a minority .

Typical aussie hypocrite. Can dish it out, but can't take it. Obviously, you missed Ian Healys' comments on the Archer/ Smith incident.

Pretty scary incident and I reckon it wasn’t far off hitting Smith where Phil Hughes got hit

B.Toomer

Typical aussie hypocrite. Can dish it out, but can't take it. Obviously, you missed Ian Healys' comments on the Archer/ Smith incident.

so if Healy reiterated what we all know.....that youre a w@nker, you'd agree with him???

@ Buumer...you clown....is the Healey you referring to? if so, continue making a fool of yourself....

“It was disgusting,” Healy said of the booing on Nine on Saturday night. “Lord’s won’t be happy with that either. They don’t like any ‘yobbo’ element of crowd behaviour.”

The hypocrisy of aussies is laughable.

Oh no, the nasty English boo'd a cheat.

Good to former England captain Michael Vaughan condemn the booing at Lords.

Seriously people need to get over the booing.
We've booed Broad every time he's batted in Oz for the last 2 tours and it's 'just banter' from the crowd.
They're allowed to do it.
Archer is going to get booed when he next comes to Oz and no doubt we'll justify it with some garbage

I bet there's not too many aussies whingeing about the weather in London now.

why....we would've gone on and won...

BTW...claiming catches that aren't....cheat, comes to mind...

I suppose it would come to your mind pretty quickly, as you're a big supporter of cheats.

MegaBonus wrote:why....we would've gone on and won...

BTW...claiming catches that aren't....cheat, comes to mind...

This is truly laughable and shows that you lot will whinge over nothing. Many fingers under that ball when it was caught.

Whinge whinge whinge

Oh, and that game would only have ended one way if it had continued, australia/south africa/Pakistan were in trouble.

Who says text cricket is boring, even with rain delays and lost days.
The poms finally found a "foreigner" whom bowling rockets to startle the Aussies, just like Brett Lee and Mitch Johnson used to do the "fragile" poms.
The Poms had to use "dirty" tactics to get out the inform Smith,which worked thanks to the "foreigner"

No probs with the Archer assualt on the batsmen, that's test cricket.
A few points however, The lack of "concern" from Archer after hitting Smith says alot about his character, or lack of it. He did it in the World cup and once again showing his "true colours".
The Aussie Bowling attack with Starc in next test match, will make sure Archer receives some high ball treatment and I am sure if the Aussies had a crack at him at Lords, they would of done the same.
Marnus Rescued the Aussies in the 2 innings. Warner Bancroft are in danger to lose their spots.
Aussie bowling was insepid on day 5, wanting to take early wickets, Stokes and Buttcher were too good.
I still think Root should have declared earlier, if he really wanted to win. I guess he was happy with a draw.

3rd test shapes up to be a cracker, lets hope Smith takes the field and the Aussie quick dish-out payback to the foreigner!
:wink:

MegaBonus wrote:why....we would've gone on and won...

BTW...claiming catches that aren't....cheat, comes to mind...

If smith wasn't injured, the aussies would of won.
The 2nd test was destined to be a draw, the Poms got exactly what the wanted!

Michael wrote:

MegaBonus wrote:why....we would've gone on and won...

BTW...claiming catches that aren't....cheat, comes to mind...

If smith wasn't injured, the aussies would of won.
The 2nd test was destined to be a draw, the Poms got exactly what the wanted!

*have

You've already shown you have no cricket knowledge but please feel free to give further proof.

If you want to talk about foreigners.

Archer was born English.

Laubashagne and Khawaja - where are they from?

God is an Englishman

Oh, and that game would only have ended one way if it had continued.

prove it....

MegaBonus wrote:

God is an Englishman

Oh, and that game would only have ended one way if it had continued.

prove it....

It's not possible to prove as you know. However, I'd be pretty sure if it was to happen that you wouldn't take the bet.

im not a gambling person thus your logic is irrelevant.....

now....serious question for you as I know you can be when you choose...

in terms of the ideals of the game, especially from a spectators perspective, was it inappropriate (deliberate non use of the word 'wrong') for the crowd to 'boo' Smith on his return after retiring injured?

MegaBonus wrote:im not a gambling person thus your logic is irrelevant.....

now....serious question for you as I know you can be when you choose...

in terms of the ideals of the game, especially from a spectators perspective, was it inappropriate (deliberate non use of the word 'wrong') for the crowd to 'boo' Smith on his return after retiring injured?

I have no issue with the boo'ing on him coming out to bat. The boo'ing as he was a walking off after being hit wasn't a great look though. However, it's not something that really bothers me and laughable thst aussies are even mentioning it given their history of crowd abuse.

Was a ripping Test Match and the weather played into the drama.
The notion that England would have won had the game continued is irrelevant - both teams have drawn tests before with the last wicket partnership defending for their lives given the alloted number of overs that were remaining.
Aussies were really disappointing on day 5.
Headingley shaping up to be a cracker - no Steve Smith means England are big favourites.
Top order of both teams is shite at the moment - whichever team improves in this area first will win the series
Aussies only need one more win to retain the Ashes.

Bring it on!

God is an Englishman wrote:

MegaBonus wrote:im not a gambling person thus your logic is irrelevant.....

now....serious question for you as I know you can be when you choose...

in terms of the ideals of the game, especially from a spectators perspective, was it inappropriate (deliberate non use of the word 'wrong') for the crowd to 'boo' Smith on his return after retiring injured?

I have no issue with the boo'ing on him coming out to bat. The boo'ing as he was a walking off after being hit wasn't a great look though. However, it's not something that really bothers me and laughable thst aussies are even mentioning it given their history of crowd abuse.

I'm an Aussie and I completely agree - it wasn't a great look at that time but there's always going to be some people in a large crowd that act stupidly.
Given what we dish out when teams tour here we can be very precious on the receiving end which really annoys me

God is an Englishman wrote: Many fingers under that ball when it was caught.

Hahahaha, just like the ones you whinged about when Australia did similar?

I know you have only one eye open these days, but I'd suggest you go to specsavers, and take the third ump with you. :wink:

Bomber wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote: Many fingers under that ball when it was caught.

Hahahaha, just like the ones you whinged about when Australia did similar?

I know you have only one eye open these days, but I'd suggest you go to specsavers, and take the third ump with you. :wink:

So, I was whingeing but you're not?

Clear catch, I really don't see how anyone can see it differently.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Bomber wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote: Many fingers under that ball when it was caught.

Hahahaha, just like the ones you whinged about when Australia did similar?

I know you have only one eye open these days, but I'd suggest you go to specsavers, and take the third ump with you. :wink:

So, I was whingeing but you're not?

Clear catch, I really don't see how anyone can see it differently.

When you persist with viewing things with only one eye open, you're comprehension of matters does become quite askew (so I am told).

The video is conclusive, both hands under the ball.

God is an Englishman wrote:The video is conclusive, both hands under the ball.

It's just the space between the outstretched fingers that debunks that (plus the little bounce up into the hands).

Bomber wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:The video is conclusive, both hands under the ball.

It's just the space between the outstretched fingers that debunks that (plus the little bounce up into the hands).

bounces up from his hand as there is two hands underneath the ball.

What next, Archer's bowling too fast?