Jump to content

Raja

Members
  • Posts

    7,347
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Raja

  1. The reason I linked that thread is that you kept mentioning that she wasn't leaving her crease early, which she was multiple times as exhbited by those pictures. Now you've gone off a tangent regarding the logic that dude was using, which is fine, but not the reason why the thread was linked. Overs 30 & 37 are most egregious, and I think it's totally fine for her to do that, but she obviously runs the risk of being run out. You don't put it on your back leg, your inital weight is on the bat as you leave the bat in the crease whilst the rest of the body is outside the crease and extend, and then as the bowler releases the ball, you gain ground and can back up, the weight is then not on your back leg, but on your front leg as you're walking by the time the ball is released. It's not that difficult. People stay in the crease and take quick singles *all* the time.
  2. Plenty of examples here, look at the picture for the 30th over in particular and the 37th over. Which is why you assertion that it hasn't been done before = the women's game are against it is a stretch for me. We are not though, are we? You can back up way more between the ball being released and reaching the striker. You can be halfway down the pitch if you time it right. It isn't that difficult at all.
  3. Yeah, defo think backing up happens a fair bit. I don't mind seeing some experimentation to see if we can come up with a better solution, but I agree with Paxter in that I'd want to see batters run the full distance and don't see an issue with them being rooted to the crease. In addition, just because we haven't seen it happen before in women's cricket doesn't meant women's cricket as a collective are 'decling to take part in it', as if everyone's making a conscious decision not to do it. None of the players have said anything like this prior to the game, surely, which is why it is a stretch to say 'the women's game as a collective is against it', it's rare even in the men's game. Lastly, Cricinfo did an analysis of Dean as the non striker and she apparently left the crease early 70 odd times and then got dismissed when she did it the 73rd time
  4. Thought that was one of the weakest episodes of HOTD. Lots of spectacle, but not enough ground work laid for a lot of the scenes to have the impact that they *should* have.
  5. I mean, of course no one wants to see them win but I'd be down for seeing good football.
  6. Yes, but if you don't concede goals, you don't lose matches. It's the big brain play.
  7. I wasn't ready for this second half. ( Also, White is miles ahead of whatever this maguire performance is. And please don't even bring up coady)
  8. Oh look, maybe playing Saka at RW makes more sense than playing him at wing back
  9. Let maguire play all the england games
  10. Just sack deschamps & southgate in one week and the sufferball era will be over
  11. I imagine it's cause she's losing her father & brother to it? I was confused as well at the start but it made more sense towards the end Will post more thoughts when I've thought about the episode a bit as I've only just seen it today
  12. I think it's a shit way to end a match & a series, and as a spectator I'm disappointed but I wouldn't blame the players one bit for doing it. In addition, I think 'aversion amongst the players' is a bit of a stretch just because we haven't seen it before. The MCC did put out a statement regarding as well as it when it occured in the IPL, specifically regarding warnings Imo, a warning is an incorrect way to go about it. I'm totally for figuring out a way to avoid dismissals like this though.
  13. I think it's certainly an anti-climactic & a shame to finish the game & a series in that way, especially when you're 2-0 up and don't have a chance to lose the series if you lose the game. However, I don't really see it as something against the 'spirit of the game', given that it's explictly in the rules.
  14. Don't you *have* to be in your delivery stride for it to count?
  15. No money for public sector pay rises though, don't forget. This is on the back of doctors, nurses & barristers all set to strike next year. Look, I hope it doesn't get as messy as some are predicting because it would be bad for regular people but it's hard not to be a little alarmed at what the economists are saying regarding the 'mini-budget' Also, re: leveling up - did we achieve that already? One thing is clear though, this 'mini budget' will only seek to make inequality in the UK worse.
  16. Like I said, none of the twitter thread is in the actual story. So accusing someone of 'selective quoting' when you haven't bothered to read the article & when the quotes are not actually in the story makes no sense. The right thing to do would be to apologize as you were in the wrong, instead of doubling down or trying to speak about prior posts and not about the post in question.
  17. None of the twitter thread quotes are in the NYT story. So here you are, telling someone they are 'typically selectively quoting' something, without reading the story in question to see if those quotes are even there in the story. Sounds like your normal level of due diligence, so perhaps I shouldn't be surprised.
  18. I mean, if you had any reading comprehension skills, you would see that the NYT story linked is talking about a separate issue than the 'sterling crisis' that he mentions in the twitter thread
  19. Big fan of the chief secretary of the treasury tweeting this out Reader, the sterling didn't 'strengthen'
×
×
  • Create New...