Congratulations England, What A Series.

If NOT for Manchester rain, England would have won 3-2

England's aggressive style made Test cricket more interesting and addictive.

Honestly I watched England vs Australia tests instead of India vs WI
matches.

Yeah, was a great series.

England could've won 4-1.

I think England were favoured to win Lord's when Bairstow had a brain-fade *and* Australia stretched the Spirit to its breaking point.
Then of course Manchester.

Along the way we had some fantastic entertainment. At times Bazball leaves me speechless, and I hope it can continue for a long time.
The team's goal of providing "entertainment first, wins second" is working perfectly.

May as well drop my series ratings here;

Crawley 9/10 - I started the series feeling worried about his future in the team, now I'm feeling excited. If he's fixed his "get out early" issue, I expect wonderful things. Great slipper too.
Duckett 7.5/10 - Admirable job. Zero complaints or things I'd change.
Pope 4/10 - Hmmm. Still on the fence with him.
Ali - 500/10. What a legend. Came out of retirement when his country needed him, thrust into #3, and did a stellar job.
Root 9/10 - My favourite sight in cricket today is Root reverse sweeping Aussie quicks. It makes me giggle.
Stokes 9/10 - Brilliant batting. Seems to flourish when under tremendous pressure, which is rare.
Brook 8/10. Ok series, but I think he'd like to have done a smidgeon better. 4 50s, 0 100s.
Bairstow 7/10. Keeping was suspect, but did take a few key blinders. Balanced by dropping plenty of sitters, and his Lord's brain-fade (which went a long way to not winning the Ashes).

Bowlers all did fine, apart from Anderson (whom I give a 1/10).

In message <df4caff8-ecb0-43fa-88c4-e4a3fd3a640dn@googlegroups.com>,
jack fredricks <jzfredricks@gmail.com> writes
>May as well drop my series ratings here;
>
>Crawley 9/10 - I started the series feeling worried about his future in
>the team, now I'm feeling excited. If he's fixed his "get out early"
>issue, I expect wonderful things. Great slipper too. Duckett 7.5/10 -
>Admirable job. Zero complaints or things I'd change. Pope 4/10 - Hmmm.
>Still on the fence with him. Ali - 500/10. What a legend. Came out of
>retirement when his country needed him, thrust into #3, and did a
>stellar job. Root 9/10 - My favourite sight in cricket today is Root
>reverse sweeping Aussie quicks. It makes me giggle. Stokes 9/10 -
>Brilliant batting. Seems to flourish when under tremendous pressure,
>which is rare. Brook 8/10. Ok series, but I think he'd like to have
>done a smidgeon better. 4 50s, 0 100s. Bairstow 7/10. Keeping was
>suspect, but did take a few key blinders. Balanced by dropping plenty
>of sitters, and his Lord's brain-fade (which went a long way to not
>winning the Ashes).
>
>Bowlers all did fine, apart from Anderson (whom I give a 1/10).

Not too many quibbles with that. McCullum and Stokes did a very good job
with selection: sticking with Crawley, keeping faith with Bairstow,
bringing in Ali when Leach was injured and taking up his suggestion to
bat at 3. (And I say that as someone who would have dropped Crawley long
ago and dropped Bairstow after the first Test.)

Given that Wood probably wasn't fit enough to play in the first two
Tests, their only real mistake - and even that is only with the benefit
of hindsight - was to prefer Robinson and Tongue to Woakes for the first
two Tests.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On 01/08/2023 04:24, jack fredricks wrote:
> Along the way we had some fantastic entertainment. At times Bazball
> leaves me speechless, and I hope it can continue for a long time.

Absolutely; but ...

> The team's goal of providing "entertainment first, wins second" is
> working perfectly.

... I know that is what Stokes /said/, but I don't think it's
entirely true. In an era of "Big Data", it's what has been /shown/ to
/work/. The reverse sweeps, ramps, scoops, ... produce lots of runs
and are not as dangerous [after loads of practice] as was thought when
first played. Put it differently: a top player may expect to average,
say, 50. If a reverse sweep gets [on average] 15 boundaries to once
being out [and looking rather silly when that happens], that's a bonus.
On the other hand, a forward defensive stroke scores very few runs and
occasionally gets you out. So the Bazball thesis is not that you must
never play a defensive stroke, but that the "entertaining" strokes give
you more runs per wicket on average. The "boring" strokes enable you
to last longer, but you don't score as many runs before you snick that
catch to the WK. All backed up by the detailed statistics.

The "harumph -- in my day ..." brigade see the daft dismissals.
The Bazballers see lots of entertainment, building on the success of
T20 and more generally limited-over batting. We've learned to take
calculated risks [bowling as well as batting, but that's less visible],
which sometimes fail but more often succeed. Yes, it's "fantastic"
and we've seen a great series; and it will continue for as long as the
statistics stack up. Why would they ever stop doing so? Why would any
/other/ Test side not do the same? [Answers on a postcard ....]

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Chalon

On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 1:09:55 PM UTC+1, Andy Walker wrote:
> On 01/08/2023 04:24, jack fredricks wrote:
> > Along the way we had some fantastic entertainment. At times Bazball
> > leaves me speechless, and I hope it can continue for a long time.
> Absolutely; but ...
> > The team's goal of providing "entertainment first, wins second" is
> > working perfectly.
> ... I know that is what Stokes /said/, but I don't think it's
> entirely true. In an era of "Big Data", it's what has been /shown/ to
> /work/. The reverse sweeps, ramps, scoops, ... produce lots of runs
> and are not as dangerous [after loads of practice] as was thought when
> first played. Put it differently: a top player may expect to average,
> say, 50. If a reverse sweep gets [on average] 15 boundaries to once
> being out [and looking rather silly when that happens], that's a bonus.
> On the other hand, a forward defensive stroke scores very few runs and
> occasionally gets you out. So the Bazball thesis is not that you must
> never play a defensive stroke, but that the "entertaining" strokes give
> you more runs per wicket on average. The "boring" strokes enable you
> to last longer, but you don't score as many runs before you snick that
> catch to the WK. All backed up by the detailed statistics.
>
> The "harumph -- in my day ..." brigade see the daft dismissals.
> The Bazballers see lots of entertainment, building on the success of
> T20 and more generally limited-over batting. We've learned to take
> calculated risks [bowling as well as batting, but that's less visible],
> which sometimes fail but more often succeed. Yes, it's "fantastic"
> and we've seen a great series; and it will continue for as long as the
> statistics stack up. Why would they ever stop doing so? Why would any
> /other/ Test side not do the same? [Answers on a postcard ....]
>
> --
> Andy Walker, Nottingham.
> Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
> Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Chalon

But...but...you haven't been to a Test since God knows when ... RH

On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 10:39:14 AM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <df4caff8-ecb0-43fa...@googlegroups.com>,
> jack fredricks <jzfre...@gmail.com> writes
> >May as well drop my series ratings here;
> >
> >Crawley 9/10 - I started the series feeling worried about his future in
> >the team, now I'm feeling excited. If he's fixed his "get out early"
> >issue, I expect wonderful things. Great slipper too. Duckett 7.5/10 -
> >Admirable job. Zero complaints or things I'd change. Pope 4/10 - Hmmm.
> >Still on the fence with him. Ali - 500/10. What a legend. Came out of
> >retirement when his country needed him, thrust into #3, and did a
> >stellar job. Root 9/10 - My favourite sight in cricket today is Root
> >reverse sweeping Aussie quicks. It makes me giggle. Stokes 9/10 -
> >Brilliant batting. Seems to flourish when under tremendous pressure,
> >which is rare. Brook 8/10. Ok series, but I think he'd like to have
> >done a smidgeon better. 4 50s, 0 100s. Bairstow 7/10. Keeping was
> >suspect, but did take a few key blinders. Balanced by dropping plenty
> >of sitters, and his Lord's brain-fade (which went a long way to not
> >winning the Ashes).
> >
> >Bowlers all did fine, apart from Anderson (whom I give a 1/10).
> Not too many quibbles with that. McCullum and Stokes did a very good job
> with selection: sticking with Crawley, keeping faith with Bairstow,
> bringing in Ali when Leach was injured and taking up his suggestion to
> bat at 3. (And I say that as someone who would have dropped Crawley long
> ago and dropped Bairstow after the first Test.)
>
> Given that Wood probably wasn't fit enough to play in the first two
> Tests, their only real mistake - and even that is only with the benefit
> of hindsight - was to prefer Robinson and Tongue to Woakes for the first
> two Tests.

The selection of Anderson was a triumph of hope over experience rather than the evidence before the selectors' eyes: Anderson's sell by date has finally been passed. Stop buying into the myth. RH

On 7/31/2023 8:24 PM, jack fredricks wrote:
> Yeah, was a great series.
>
> England could've won 4-1.
>
> I think England were favoured to win Lord's when Bairstow had a brain-fade *and* Australia stretched the Spirit to its breaking point.
> Then of course Manchester.
>
> Along the way we had some fantastic entertainment. At times Bazball leaves me speechless, and I hope it can continue for a long time.
> The team's goal of providing "entertainment first, wins second" is working perfectly.
>
> May as well drop my series ratings here;
>
> Crawley 9/10 - I started the series feeling worried about his future in the team, now I'm feeling excited. If he's fixed his "get out early" issue, I expect wonderful things. Great slipper too.
> Duckett 7.5/10 - Admirable job. Zero complaints or things I'd change.
> Pope 4/10 - Hmmm. Still on the fence with him.
> Ali - 500/10. What a legend. Came out of retirement when his country needed him, thrust into #3, and did a stellar job.
> Root 9/10 - My favourite sight in cricket today is Root reverse sweeping Aussie quicks. It makes me giggle.
> Stokes 9/10 - Brilliant batting. Seems to flourish when under tremendous pressure, which is rare.
> Brook 8/10. Ok series, but I think he'd like to have done a smidgeon better. 4 50s, 0 100s.
> Bairstow 7/10. Keeping was suspect, but did take a few key blinders. Balanced by dropping plenty of sitters, and his Lord's brain-fade (which went a long way to not winning the Ashes).
>
> Bowlers all did fine, apart from Anderson (whom I give a 1/10).
>

WHY is James Anderson still NOT retiring.

He failed AT HOME in favorable conditions for his style of swing bowling.

He aint gonna get better from here, he is 40 years old, doesn't have
energy for long spells anymore.

In message <aa48529c-723a-45d9-ae0b-47fa3d279ec7n@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
>On Tuesday, August 1, 2023 at 10:39:140 >> In message <df4caff8-ecb0-43fa...@googlegroups.com>,
>> jack fredricks <jzfre...@gmail.com> writes
>> >May as well drop my series ratings here;
>> >
>> >Crawley 9/10 - I started the series feeling worried about his future in
>> >the team, now I'm feeling excited. If he's fixed his "get out early"
>> >issue, I expect wonderful things. Great slipper too. Duckett 7.5/10 -
>> >Admirable job. Zero complaints or things I'd change. Pope 4/10 - Hmmm.
>> >Still on the fence with him. Ali - 500/10. What a legend. Came out of
>> >retirement when his country needed him, thrust into #3, and did a
>> >stellar job. Root 9/10 - My favourite sight in cricket today is Root
>> >reverse sweeping Aussie quicks. It makes me giggle. Stokes 9/10 -
>> >Brilliant batting. Seems to flourish when under tremendous pressure,
>> >which is rare. Brook 8/10. Ok series, but I think he'd like to have
>> >done a smidgeon better. 4 50s, 0 100s. Bairstow 7/10. Keeping was
>> >suspect, but did take a few key blinders. Balanced by dropping plenty
>> >of sitters, and his Lord's brain-fade (which went a long way to not
>> >winning the Ashes).
>> >
>> >Bowlers all did fine, apart from Anderson (whom I give a 1/10).
>> Not too many quibbles with that. McCullum and Stokes did a very good job
>> with selection: sticking with Crawley, keeping faith with Bairstow,
>> bringing in Ali when Leach was injured and taking up his suggestion to
>> bat at 3. (And I say that as someone who would have dropped Crawley long
>> ago and dropped Bairstow after the first Test.)
>>
>> Given that Wood probably wasn't fit enough to play in the first two
>> Tests, their only real mistake - and even that is only with the benefit
>> of hindsight - was to prefer Robinson and Tongue to Woakes for the first
>> two Tests.
>
>The selection of Anderson was a triumph of hope over experience rather
>than the evidence before the selectors' eyes: Anderson's sell by date
>has finally been passed. Stop buying into the myth. RH

Yes, that's something I should have mentioned. I think Tongue should
have been brought in for the fifth Test.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On 01/08/2023 17:34, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 7/31/2023 8:24 PM, jack fredricks wrote:
>> Yeah, was a great series.
>>
>> England could've won 4-1.
>>
>> I think England were favoured to win Lord's when Bairstow had a
>> brain-fade *and* Australia stretched the Spirit to its breaking point.
>> Then of course Manchester.
>>
>> Along the way we had some fantastic entertainment. At times Bazball
>> leaves me speechless, and I hope it can continue for a long time.
>> The team's goal of providing "entertainment first, wins second" is
>> working perfectly.
>>
>> May as well drop my series ratings here;
>>
>> Crawley 9/10 - I started the series feeling worried about his future
>> in the team, now I'm feeling excited. If he's fixed his "get out
>> early" issue, I expect wonderful things. Great slipper too.
>> Duckett 7.5/10  -  Admirable job. Zero complaints or things I'd change.
>> Pope 4/10 - Hmmm. Still on the fence with him.
>> Ali - 500/10. What a legend. Came out of retirement when his country
>> needed him, thrust into #3, and did a stellar job.
>> Root 9/10 - My favourite sight in cricket today is Root reverse
>> sweeping Aussie quicks. It makes me giggle.
>> Stokes 9/10 - Brilliant batting. Seems to flourish when under
>> tremendous pressure, which is rare.
>> Brook 8/10. Ok series, but I think he'd like to have done a smidgeon
>> better. 4 50s, 0 100s.
>> Bairstow 7/10. Keeping was suspect, but did take a few key blinders.
>> Balanced by dropping plenty of sitters, and his Lord's brain-fade
>> (which went a long way to not winning the Ashes).
>>
>> Bowlers all did fine, apart from Anderson (whom I give a 1/10).
>>
>
>
> WHY is James Anderson still NOT retiring.
>
> He failed AT HOME in favorable conditions for his style of swing bowling.
>
> He aint gonna get better from here, he is 40 years old, doesn't have
> energy for long spells anymore.

Maybe he's just out of form. After all, he averaged under 19 in each of
his 4 previous series in the last 14 months. A few more months on his
age doesn't explain him suddenly getting that much worse.

I can understand why he wouldn't want to go out on such a low point
personally. Mind you, if he goes to India, that's not going to be any
easier.

--
David North

On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:24:08 -0700, jack fredricks wrote:

> Yeah, was a great series.
>
> England could've won 4-1.

Hmmmm. Let's see.

Playing at home. On tailored pitches.
Won 4/5 tosses, and in the one that they didn't win, were hugely favoured
by a highly dubious ball change.
By common consent, had the better of the conditions in 4/5 Tests.
Australia's best bowler broke down in T2, not to play again.

And *still* couldn't win the series! Clearly a moral series win to Oz.

hth

alvey

On Wed, 2 Aug 2023 20:04:03 -0000 (UTC), alvey
<Paddy.O.Furniture@Coast.org> wrote:

>On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:24:08 -0700, jack fredricks wrote:
>
>> Yeah, was a great series.
>>
>> England could've won 4-1.
>
>Hmmmm. Let's see.
>
>Playing at home. On tailored pitches.
>Won 4/5 tosses, and in the one that they didn't win, were hugely favoured
>by a highly dubious ball change.
>By common consent, had the better of the conditions in 4/5 Tests.
>Australia's best bowler broke down in T2, not to play again.
>
>And *still* couldn't win the series! Clearly a moral series win to Oz.
>
>hth
>
>
>alvey

Australia won the who gets to keep more of their fees contest than
England.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384125

Lose 5% of the fee for every WTC point deducted.

max.it

In message <uaecrj$8ntb$1@dont-email.me>, alvey
<Paddy.O.Furniture@Coast.org> writes
>On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:24:08 -0700, jack fredricks wrote:
>
>> Yeah, was a great series.
>>
>> England could've won 4-1.
>
>Hmmmm. Let's see.
>
>Playing at home. On tailored pitches.

Tailored pitches? I didn't see any sign of that. They weren't the
green-tops of old.

>Won 4/5 tosses,

I don't think in most of the games that the toss had a huge impact.

> and in the one that they didn't win, were hugely favoured
>by a highly dubious ball change.
>By common consent, had the better of the conditions in 4/5 Tests.
>Australia's best bowler broke down in T2, not to play again.
>
>And *still* couldn't win the series! Clearly a moral series win to Oz.

I think it's fair to say that England had most of the luck during the
series. Perhaps it was a case of fortune favouring the brave? But
Australia had one huge stroke of luck with the weather on the last two
days at Old Trafford.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

In message <iaflci5pt2bpr1eivam370b30jhr50vpe7@4ax.com>, max. it
<max@tea.time> writes
>Australia won the who gets to keep more of their fees contest than
>England.
>
>https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384125
>
>Lose 5% of the fee for every WTC point deducted.

Which won't have left the England players with much cash. Being 9 overs
short at Lord's really hurt them. That was the match that Moeen missed
with his split spinning finger, so that the only spin came from Root.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On Wed, 02 Aug 2023 21:41:16 +0100, max.it wrote:

> On Wed, 2 Aug 2023 20:04:03 -0000 (UTC), alvey
> <Paddy.O.Furniture@Coast.org> wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:24:08 -0700, jack fredricks wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, was a great series.
>>>
>>> England could've won 4-1.
>>
>>Hmmmm. Let's see.
>>
>>Playing at home. On tailored pitches.
>>Won 4/5 tosses, and in the one that they didn't win, were hugely
>>favoured by a highly dubious ball change.
>>By common consent, had the better of the conditions in 4/5 Tests.
>>Australia's best bowler broke down in T2, not to play again.
>>
>>And *still* couldn't win the series! Clearly a moral series win to Oz.
>>
>>hth
>>
>>
>>alvey
>
>
> Australia won the who gets to keep more of their fees contest than
> England.
>
> https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384125
>
> Lose 5% of the fee for every WTC point deducted.

Hahahaha.
So Oz are even more Spirited then...

alvey

On Wed, 02 Aug 2023 21:53:38 +0100, John Hall wrote:

> In message <uaecrj$8ntb$1@dont-email.me>, alvey
> <Paddy.O.Furniture@Coast.org> writes
>>On Mon, 31 Jul 2023 20:24:08 -0700, jack fredricks wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, was a great series.
>>>
>>> England could've won 4-1.
>>
>>Hmmmm. Let's see.
>>
>>Playing at home. On tailored pitches.
>
> Tailored pitches? I didn't see any sign of that. They weren't the
> green-tops of old.

'Zactly! The Eng/NZ batting strategy need flatties to work.

>>Won 4/5 tosses,
>
> I don't think in most of the games that the toss had a huge impact.

"Well, you would say that. Wouldn't you?"
>> and in the one that they didn't win, were hugely favoured
>>by a highly dubious ball change.
>>By common consent, had the better of the conditions in 4/5 Tests.
>>Australia's best bowler broke down in T2, not to play again.
>>
>>And *still* couldn't win the series! Clearly a moral series win to Oz.
>
> I think it's fair to say that England had most of the luck during the
> series. Perhaps it was a case of fortune favouring the brave? But
> Australia had one huge stroke of luck with the weather on the last two
> days at Old Trafford.

Nahhh. They knew the weather forecast, so they played (and drank)
accordingly.

Ashes to ashes
Dust to dust
We've got the urn
Feel free to combust.

On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 9:58:34 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <iaflci5pt2bpr1eiv...@4ax.com>, max. it
> <m...@tea.time> writes
> >Australia won the who gets to keep more of their fees contest than
> >England.
> >
> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384125
> >
> >Lose 5% of the fee for every WTC point deducted.
> Which won't have left the England players with much cash. Being 9 overs
> short at Lord's really hurt them. That was the match that Moeen missed
> with his split spinning finger, so that the only spin came from Root.
> --

at OT england put oz in and only bowled 83 overs in the day, and that
was with 30 mins added on. all this moving the game on when theyr batting,
but slowing the game down when theyr bowling. So both engalnd and
oz got 28pts for the 2-2, but oz lost 10 and england 19, which puts us
just below Windies in the WTC! haha

Maybe theyll schedule the next final in UAE or Bdesh to make sure india
win the next one.

mike

In message <da48ff83-4bd6-41d7-bdf8-244ddf875cdfn@googlegroups.com>,
mike <dmike204@yahoo.co.uk> writes
>On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 9:58:340 >> In message <iaflci5pt2bpr1eiv...@4ax.com>, max. it
>> <m...@tea.time> writes
>> >Australia won the who gets to keep more of their fees contest than
>> >England.
>> >
>> >https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384125
>> >
>> >Lose 5% of the fee for every WTC point deducted.
>> Which won't have left the England players with much cash. Being 9 overs
>> short at Lord's really hurt them. That was the match that Moeen missed
>> with his split spinning finger, so that the only spin came from Root.
>> --
>
>at OT england put oz in and only bowled 83 overs in the day, and that
>was with 30 mins added on. all this moving the game on when theyr batting,
>but slowing the game down when theyr bowling. So both engalnd and
>oz got 28pts for the 2-2, but oz lost 10 and england 19, which puts us
>just below Windies in the WTC! haha

It's frustrating, as our over rate is almost always so slow that -
however well we play - it probably scuppers our chances of making the
next WTC final. And as I believe ICC have now been persuaded that in
future there should be a cap of 40% (was it?) on fines, it seems
unlikely to improve unless we can somehow unearth a demon spinner or
two.

>
>Maybe theyll schedule the next final in UAE or Bdesh to make sure india
>win the next one.

Anywhere but England or NZ, and they'd probably be OK. Getting Bumrah
and Pant fit again would also be a big boost to their chances.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On 8/2/2023 3:04 PM, mike wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 9:58:34 PM U10TC+1, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <iaflci5pt2bpr1eiv...@4ax.com>, max. it
>> <m...@tea.time> writes
>>> Australia won the who gets to keep more of their fees contest than
>>> England.
>>>
>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384125
>>>
>>> Lose 5% of the fee for every WTC point deducted.
>> Which won't have left the England players with much cash. Being 9 overs
>> short at Lord's really hurt them. That was the match that Moeen missed
>> with his split spinning finger, so that the only spin came from Root.
>> --
>
> at OT england put oz in and only bowled 83 overs in the day, and that
> was with 30 mins added on. all this moving the game on when theyr batting,
> but slowing the game down when theyr bowling. So both engalnd and
> oz got 28pts for the 2-2, but oz lost 10 and england 19, which puts us
> just below Windies in the WTC! haha
>
> Maybe theyll schedule the next final in UAE or Bdesh to make sure india
> win the next one.
>
> mike
>

Spinning conspiracy theories to demonize India/BCCI non-stop because of
your inherent racist bias, when in REALITY India/BCCI don't think and
act and doesn't change rules to suit them like selfish cunning western
white race.

Here are some FUCKING FACTS for you to chew on.

India HASN'T WON an ICC TROPHY since 2013 i.e 10 years which means YOU
are a "100% PURE RACIST conspiracy theorist".

BCCI didn't make ICC rules of over rate penalties.

Western whites BLAME POC for cloudy weather and even when whites can't
get their dicks up.

On Wednesday, 2 August 2023 at 23:04:52 UTC+1, mike wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 9:58:34 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> > In message <iaflci5pt2bpr1eiv...@4ax.com>, max. it
> > <m...@tea.time> writes
> > >Australia won the who gets to keep more of their fees contest than
> > >England.
> > >
> > >https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66384125
> > >
> > >Lose 5% of the fee for every WTC point deducted.
> > Which won't have left the England players with much cash. Being 9 overs
> > short at Lord's really hurt them. That was the match that Moeen missed
> > with his split spinning finger, so that the only spin came from Root.
> > --
> at OT england put oz in and only bowled 83 overs in the day, and that
> was with 30 mins added on. all this moving the game on when theyr batting,
> but slowing the game down when theyr bowling. So both engalnd and
> oz got 28pts for the 2-2, but oz lost 10 and england 19, which puts us
> just below Windies in the WTC! haha

So if England had kept up with the over-rate, they could have lost 4-1 and ended up with 3 more points.

On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 18:35:06 UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> Congratulations England, What A Series.
>
> If NOT for Manchester rain, England would have won 3-2
>

Mike, is that you bro?

On 8/3/2023 8:53 AM, Tikli Chestikov wrote:
> On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 18:35:06 UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> Congratulations England, What A Series.
>>
>> If NOT for Manchester rain, England would have won 3-2
>>
>
> Mike, is that you bro?

No.

I am the WORST NIGHTMARE of the EVIL barbaric cunning back stabbing
filthy "cross dressing, confused gender, semen eating EVIL CIA NSA FBI
DHS MI6 MI5 ASIS ASIO Psychopaths".

I am the MERCILESS SLAYER of the EVIL Western White christian CIA NSA
FBI DHS MI6 MI5 psychopaths who FEAR ME more than any entity on this
planet because they KNOW FOR A FACT that IF I have power, I would have
FORCED the entire CROSS DRESSING, LIPSTICK WEARING confused gender CIA
NSA FBI DHS MI6 MI5 filth ON THEIR KNEES and BEG ME and the rest of the
world FOR MERCY.

No american has the balls to EVEN USE a name
"FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer". I used it for 16+ years thousands of times.

Heck, americans are SHIT SCARED to EVEN TALK about CIA NSA FBI DHS
Psychopaths just like brits are SCARED of EVEN TALKING about MI6 and MI5
and Ozzies are SHIT SCARED to even TALK about ASIS ASIO aka the REAL
WESTERN GOVTS.

FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer
AmerGovtCriminalsExposer
AmerGovtPsychopathsExposer
HusbandofALLFBInCIAnNSAAgents

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 1:53:19 AM UTC+10, Tikli Chestikov wrote:
> On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 18:35:06 UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> > Congratulations England, What A Series.
> >
> > If NOT for Manchester rain, England would have won 3-2
> >
> Mike, is that you bro?

Would you get over your obsession with Mike and start actual discussions about cricket?

In message <944569c7-bd94-49ff-9a65-19f538fe7d05n@googlegroups.com>,
Hamish Laws <hamish.laws@gmail.com> writes
>On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 1:53:190 >> On Monday, 31 July 2023 at 18:35:06 UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> > Congratulations England, What A Series.
>> >
>> > If NOT for Manchester rain, England would have won 3-2
>> >
>> Mike, is that you bro?
>
>Would you get over your obsession with Mike and start actual
>discussions about cricket?

Anyone unable to distinguish between FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer and Mike
Holmans has a problem. Talking of Mike, does anyone know what's happened
to him? Since I returned from holiday about six weeks ago there's been
no sign of him, which is rather worrying.
--
John Hall "[It was] so steep that at intervals the street broke into steps,
like a person breaking into giggles or hiccups, and then resumed
its sober climb, until it had another fit of steps."
Ursula K Le Guin "The Beginning Place"

On Friday, 4 August 2023 at 07:40:11 UTC+1, John Hall wrote:

> Talking of Mike, does anyone know what's happened
> to him? Since I returned from holiday about six weeks ago there's been
> no sign of him, which is rather worrying.
> --
> John Hall

Maybe he's disappeared up his own backside?

On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 2:13:53 AM UTC+10, Tikli Chestikov wrote:
> On Friday, 4 August 2023 at 07:40:11 UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
>
> > Talking of Mike, does anyone know what's happened
> > to him? Since I returned from holiday about six weeks ago there's been
> > no sign of him, which is rather worrying.
> >
> Maybe he's disappeared up his own backside?

Fuck off shithead