Australia v New Zealand

This forum is for discussion of other sports.

Moderators: Randoman, Ernie Cooksey, Forum Admins

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

Sawajiri Erika wrote:When Australians are dishing it out it's sledging. When it comes the other way they cry abuse.
Sledging is a term used more commonly within on-field players, rather than what comes from spectators mouths.
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God Tongue
Promising Junior
Promising Junior
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 11:47 am

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God Tongue »

Sledging/banter/heckling... call it what you like but if you want to dish it out be prepared to take it back.
English is weird. It can be understood through tough thorough thought, though.

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God Tongue wrote:Sledging/banter/heckling... call it what you like but if you want to dish it out be prepared to take it back.
I agree but can't recall too many times when fielders sledged/heckled spectators.
Ignore this signature

N5 1BH
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 3444
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by N5 1BH »

I guess you really need to be an australian to like the australian cricket team, even then...

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:
God Tongue wrote:Sledging/banter/heckling... call it what you like but if you want to dish it out be prepared to take it back.
I agree but can't recall too many times when fielders sledged/heckled spectators.
They'd be stupid to react.
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

N5 1BH wrote:I guess you really need to be an australian to like the australian cricket team, even then...
Nothing more than supporting the mob winning and doing their best for my country. Some see them as nasty bully boys, well, so be it. Why should I care?
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:
N5 1BH wrote:I guess you really need to be an australian to like the australian cricket team, even then...
Nothing more than supporting the mob winning and doing their best for my country. Some see them as nasty bully boys, well, so be it. Why should I care?
Do you not find is embarrassing though when the bullies are crying that they're being bullied?
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
N5 1BH wrote:I guess you really need to be an australian to like the australian cricket team, even then...
Nothing more than supporting the mob winning and doing their best for my country. Some see them as nasty bully boys, well, so be it. Why should I care?
Do you not find is embarrassing though when the bullies are crying that they're being bullied?
Time and place. Spectators commenting on wives/kids is all class I suppose. Heat of the battle between two teams on the field is th e difference you're missing. Plus I don't see anyone "crying" as opposed to answering some questions fired at them by journalists.

Do you care that everyone thinks Millwall supporters are considered thugs and bad eggs?
Ignore this signature

N5 1BH
Star Player
Star Player
Posts: 3444
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 8:17 pm
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by N5 1BH »

The phrase "Clutching at straws" comes to mind.

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:
Time and place. Spectators commenting on wives/kids is all class I suppose. Heat of the battle between two teams on the field is th e difference you're missing. Plus I don't see anyone "crying" as opposed to answering some questions fired at them by journalists.

Do you care that everyone thinks Millwall supporters are considered thugs and bad eggs?
Thought I'd answered this already. Simple answer really - no one likes us, we don't care.

Fact 1: your coach recently encourage crowds to abuse a player

Fact 2: one of your players is now having a cry because the crowd abused him

This just highlights Aussie crickets hypocrisy AGAIN.

So for you Bomber - who was wrong here?

A) Lehman
B) Warner
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
Time and place. Spectators commenting on wives/kids is all class I suppose. Heat of the battle between two teams on the field is th e difference you're missing. Plus I don't see anyone "crying" as opposed to answering some questions fired at them by journalists.

Do you care that everyone thinks Millwall supporters are considered thugs and bad eggs?
Thought I'd answered this already. Simple answer really - no one likes us, we don't care.

Fact 1: your coach recently encourage crowds to abuse a player

Fact 2: one of your players is now having a cry because the crowd abused him

This just highlights Aussie crickets hypocrisy AGAIN.

So for you Bomber - who was wrong here?

A) Lehman
B) Warner
Who's Lehman?
"Abuse" vs personal family attack - I know even you can work that one out given recent history, but as usual, everything is black and white with you (when it suits)
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

So Broad didn't get any personal abuse? Abuse which was encouraged by your coach.

So, who was wrong?

A) Lehmann
B) Warner
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote:So Broad didn't get any personal abuse? Abuse which was encouraged by your coach.

So, who was wrong?

A) Lehmann
B) Warner
Which family member of Broad was verbally attacked?

Re your question, I'd have to phone a friend on that as one I can't recall who stated clearly it was ok to attack family members by either A or B.
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Well I personally heard broad's father the subject of abuse.

Lehman encouraged abuse, was that ok?

Is it OK for Warner then to whinge because the crowd abused him?
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote:Well I personally heard broad's father the subject of abuse.

Lehman encouraged abuse, was that ok?

Is it OK for Warner then to whinge because the crowd abused him?
When a reporter asks him about it, what do you expect him to say, yeah just good banter mate? You might see it as a whinge, but I know you get confused with the term as you do enough of it yourself only to call it "merely stating facts".

Whoever abused Broad's father to him was a numbskull, no doubting that.
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:Well I personally heard broad's father the subject of abuse.

Lehman encouraged abuse, was that ok?

Is it OK for Warner then to whinge because the crowd abused him?
When a reporter asks him about it, what do you expect him to say, yeah just good banter mate? You might see it as a whinge, but I know you get confused with the term as you do enough of it yourself only to call it "merely stating facts".

Whoever abused Broad's father to him was a numbskull, no doubting that.
A lot of numbskulls there then.

It seems to be your definition of whingeing cannot include anything done by an australian and everything done by an Englishman.
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:Well I personally heard broad's father the subject of abuse.

Lehman encouraged abuse, was that ok?

Is it OK for Warner then to whinge because the crowd abused him?
When a reporter asks him about it, what do you expect him to say, yeah just good banter mate? You might see it as a whinge, but I know you get confused with the term as you do enough of it yourself only to call it "merely stating facts".

Whoever abused Broad's father to him was a numbskull, no doubting that.
A lot of numbskulls there then.

It seems to be your definition of whingeing cannot include anything done by an australian and everything done by an Englishman.
And the reverse with you.
Ignore this signature

Wayne Kerr
Squad Player
Squad Player
Posts: 1762
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 3:29 pm

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Wayne Kerr »

^^^^^ BOOM ^^^^^^^
We got Ova' Here?? #ACCUPAHATERS!




Image

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:
A lot of numbskulls there then.

It seems to be your definition of whingeing cannot include anything done by an australian and everything done by an Englishman.
And the reverse with you.[/quote]

I'd deny that obviously but as long as you can see your own errors then that's fine by me
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

.......says the bloke who can't quote properly (after so many years).
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:.......says the bloke who can't quote properly (after so many years).
so on a thread about the hypocritical whingeing of the cons, all you have is my quoting error. :lol:
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:.......says the bloke who can't quote properly (after so many years).
so on a thread about the hypocritical whingeing of the cons, all you have is my quoting error. :lol:
"all I have......." :lol:

You're off your game today, maybe as it's Monday............but at least you can admit to your error so that's fine by me .
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:.......says the bloke who can't quote properly (after so many years).
so on a thread about the hypocritical whingeing of the cons, all you have is my quoting error. :lol:
"all I have......." :lol:

You're off your game today, maybe as it's Monday............but at least you can admit to your error so that's fine by me .
Yes, my biggest error is deleting a bit too much. I will hang my head in shame
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

Far bigger errors whilst your hanging you head in shame:

- hooking up with an Aussie bird
- Millwall
- thinking being a pom is something that needs to be instilled into others as being some sort of advantage
- whingeing about anything and everything any "nasty Aussies" does
- calling us convicts when the real ones came from Britain (remember its all about "blood" according to some)
- thinking Muscat is some sort of demi-god

Shall I go on or let you play around with those for a while? :wink:
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:Far bigger errors whilst your hanging you head in shame:

- hooking up with an Aussie bird
- Millwall
- thinking being a pom is something that needs to be instilled into others as being some sort of advantage
- whingeing about anything and everything any "nasty Aussies" does
- calling us convicts when the real ones came from Britain (remember its all about "blood" according to some)
- thinking Muscat is some sort of demi-god

Shall I go on or let you play around with those for a while? :wink:
None of those were errors though
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:Far bigger errors whilst your hanging you head in shame:

- hooking up with an Aussie bird
- Millwall
- thinking being a pom is something that needs to be instilled into others as being some sort of advantage
- whingeing about anything and everything any "nasty Aussies" does
- calling us convicts when the real ones came from Britain (remember its all about "blood" according to some)
- thinking Muscat is some sort of demi-god

Shall I go on or let you play around with those for a while? :wink:
None of those were errors though
So where did convicts come from?
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:Far bigger errors whilst your hanging you head in shame:

- hooking up with an Aussie bird
- Millwall
- thinking being a pom is something that needs to be instilled into others as being some sort of advantage
- whingeing about anything and everything any "nasty Aussies" does
- calling us convicts when the real ones came from Britain (remember its all about "blood" according to some)
- thinking Muscat is some sort of demi-god

Shall I go on or let you play around with those for a while? :wink:
None of those were errors though
So where did convicts come from?
England, Ireland, Greece... They then went on to form the people we know as Australians. As an Englishman that means I'm not a descendant of a convict and therefore not a Pom.
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote: England, Ireland, Greece... They then went on to form the people we know as Australians. As an Englishman that means I'm not a descendant of a convict and therefore not a Pom.
:lol:

I'm guessing vast majority came from England. You're always on about "what's in the blood" so sorry, "cons" were more English than anything else.
Ignore this signature

User avatar
God is an Englishman
Board Member
Board Member
Posts: 51452
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 5:31 pm
Has thanked: 24 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by God is an Englishman »

Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote: England, Ireland, Greece... They then went on to form the people we know as Australians. As an Englishman that means I'm not a descendant of a convict and therefore not a Pom.
:lol:

I'm guessing vast majority came from England. You're always on about "what's in the blood" so sorry, "cons" were more English than anything else.
originally yes they were majority English. However, are the descendants of those cons australian or English? Were they entitled to a British passport at birth? Unless they have purely bred with other English people then the English blood has been diluted.
Image

User avatar
Bomber
Vice Chairman
Vice Chairman
Posts: 60364
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 11:40 am
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 128 times

Re: Australia v New Zealand

Post by Bomber »

God is an Englishman wrote:
Bomber wrote:
God is an Englishman wrote: England, Ireland, Greece... They then went on to form the people we know as Australians. As an Englishman that means I'm not a descendant of a convict and therefore not a Pom.
:lol:

I'm guessing vast majority came from England. You're always on about "what's in the blood" so sorry, "cons" were more English than anything else.
originally yes they were majority English. However, are the descendants of those cons australian or English? Were they entitled to a British passport at birth? Unless they have purely bred with other English people then the English blood has been diluted.
So maybe you need to factor this in when referring to "cons" - ie, vast majority of Aussies wouldn't fit the bill.
Plus blood doesn't have nationality - it has blood types, so has little relevance as opposed to upbringing and national "traits".
Ignore this signature

Post Reply