The Unofficial and Independent Leyton Orient Message Board
https://lofcforum.com/forum1/phpBB3/
Call it sour grapes if you must and it makes you feel better but please don't use it as a cover for cheating.Howling Mad Murdock wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:40 pm Don't matter we won.End of.
Bin those sour grapes.Thanks.
Ignorance and racism in the same post.BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:17 pmWell, Stokes knew that 2 would do it so that's why he went for 2. If he'd needed more he would have gone for that. Whether he would have got more will for ever be unknown. But yes, he would have changed his stroke to reflect what was needed.tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:00 pmStokes wouldnt have gone for 2 ?BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:16 pm
But meaningless in this case. Just assuming that England had got 5 instead of 6 then the following ball(s) (can't recall where in the over this happened but it wasn't the last ball) would have been played differently. Stokes wouldn't have gone for the 2 on the last ball for instance. So you're basically wrong. We won - get over it and feel the joy for your English brothers
Like New Zeland wouldnt have closed the field in saving a single . Dont try to kid a kidder with waffle .
Course it matters.
The English have no brothers .
You stabbed them all in the back creating your empire & there all dead now !!
Please join the line of people who have a gripe (real or mostly imaginary) with the English. It's quite a long line, but as I argued with an Irish colleague over a beer or 10 in a Dublin boozer many years ago, your gripe is with the English Establishment, the privileged few who continue to rule our lives. My family, and I'd suggest just about everyone's on here, would have just been the cannon fodder that these scumbags used (and continue to use) for their own personal gain. However he still preferred to continue to blame me for the potato famine so I bought him a bag of crisps. That didn't seem to go down well either.
Oops, missed the point by a country mile there Max. I'm differentiating between "the English" and "the English Establishment". I've made no claim that the English establishment weren't to blame.Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:49 pmIgnorance and racism in the same post.BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:17 pmWell, Stokes knew that 2 would do it so that's why he went for 2. If he'd needed more he would have gone for that. Whether he would have got more will for ever be unknown. But yes, he would have changed his stroke to reflect what was needed.tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:00 pm
Stokes wouldnt have gone for 2 ?
Like New Zeland wouldnt have closed the field in saving a single . Dont try to kid a kidder with waffle .
Course it matters.
The English have no brothers .
You stabbed them all in the back creating your empire & there all dead now !!
Please join the line of people who have a gripe (real or mostly imaginary) with the English. It's quite a long line, but as I argued with an Irish colleague over a beer or 10 in a Dublin boozer many years ago, your gripe is with the English Establishment, the privileged few who continue to rule our lives. My family, and I'd suggest just about everyone's on here, would have just been the cannon fodder that these scumbags used (and continue to use) for their own personal gain. However he still preferred to continue to blame me for the potato famine so I bought him a bag of crisps. That didn't seem to go down well either.
There was no famine. It was English created genocide. As the poor of Ireland starved boats full of wheat and beef left Irish ports in their hundreds.
That wasn't my point. You called it a potatoes famine it wasn't. That was the point you missed.BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:53 pmOops, missed the point by a country mile there Max. I'm differentiating between "the English" and "the English Establishment". I've made no claim that the English establishment weren't to blame.Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:49 pmIgnorance and racism in the same post.BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:17 pm
Well, Stokes knew that 2 would do it so that's why he went for 2. If he'd needed more he would have gone for that. Whether he would have got more will for ever be unknown. But yes, he would have changed his stroke to reflect what was needed.
Please join the line of people who have a gripe (real or mostly imaginary) with the English. It's quite a long line, but as I argued with an Irish colleague over a beer or 10 in a Dublin boozer many years ago, your gripe is with the English Establishment, the privileged few who continue to rule our lives. My family, and I'd suggest just about everyone's on here, would have just been the cannon fodder that these scumbags used (and continue to use) for their own personal gain. However he still preferred to continue to blame me for the potato famine so I bought him a bag of crisps. That didn't seem to go down well either.
There was no famine. It was English created genocide. As the poor of Ireland starved boats full of wheat and beef left Irish ports in their hundreds.
That was what my Irish colleague called it and it's how it's referred to historically by many. Google it. So no racism or ignorance from me then. Please, no need to apologiseMax B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:59 pmOops, missed the point by a country mile there Max. I'm differentiating between "the English" and "the English Establishment". I've made no claim that the English establishment weren't to blame.
That wasn't my point. You called it a potatoes famine it wasn't. That was the point you missed.
If 1 run was required off the last ball i guarentee England would have lost.BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:17 pmWell, Stokes knew that 2 would do it so that's why he went for 2. If he'd needed more he would have gone for that. Whether he would have got more will for ever be unknown. But yes, he would have changed his stroke to reflect what was needed.tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:00 pmStokes wouldnt have gone for 2 ?BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 4:16 pm
But meaningless in this case. Just assuming that England had got 5 instead of 6 then the following ball(s) (can't recall where in the over this happened but it wasn't the last ball) would have been played differently. Stokes wouldn't have gone for the 2 on the last ball for instance. So you're basically wrong. We won - get over it and feel the joy for your English brothers
Like New Zeland wouldnt have closed the field in saving a single . Dont try to kid a kidder with waffle .
Course it matters.
The English have no brothers .
You stabbed them all in the back creating your empire & there all dead now !!
Please join the line of people who have a gripe (real or mostly imaginary) with the English. It's quite a long line, but as I argued with an Irish colleague over a beer or 10 in a Dublin boozer many years ago, your gripe is with the English Establishment, the privileged few who continue to rule our lives. My family, and I'd suggest just about everyone's on here, would have just been the cannon fodder that these scumbags used (and continue to use) for their own personal gain. However he still preferred to continue to blame me for the potato famine so I bought him a bag of crisps. That didn't seem to go down well either.
You're still missing the point. You are perpetuating a myth by using uncritical analysis and language to excuse genocide.BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:06 pmThat was what my Irish colleague called it and it's how it's referred to historically by many. Google it. So no racism or ignorance from me then. Please, no need to apologiseMax B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:59 pmOops, missed the point by a country mile there Max. I'm differentiating between "the English" and "the English Establishment". I've made no claim that the English establishment weren't to blame.
That wasn't my point. You called it a potatoes famine it wasn't. That was the point you missed.
But we seem to have drifted from cricket somewhat. So yet again, what a great Victory it was for England!!
The proximate cause of the famine was a natural event, a potato blight, which infected potato crops throughout Europe during the 1840s, precipitating some 100,000 deaths in total in the worst affected areas and among similar tenant farmers of Europe. The food crisis influenced much of the unrest in the more widespread European Revolutions of 1848.Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:13 pmYou're still missing the point. You are perpetuating a myth by using uncritical analysis and language to excuse genocide.BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:06 pmThat was what my Irish colleague called it and it's how it's referred to historically by many. Google it. So no racism or ignorance from me then. Please, no need to apologiseMax B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:59 pm
Oops, missed the point by a country mile there Max. I'm differentiating between "the English" and "the English Establishment". I've made no claim that the English establishment weren't to blame.
That wasn't my point. You called it a potatoes famine it wasn't. That was the point you missed.
But we seem to have drifted from cricket somewhat. So yet again, what a great Victory it was for England!!
We won.TIA.Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:47 pmCall it sour grapes if you must and it makes you feel better but please don't use it as a cover for cheating.Howling Mad Murdock wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:40 pm Don't matter we won.End of.
Bin those sour grapes.Thanks.
You drew twice & claimed victory.Howling Mad Murdock wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:26 pmWe won.TIA.Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:47 pmCall it sour grapes if you must and it makes you feel better but please don't use it as a cover for cheating.Howling Mad Murdock wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 5:40 pm Don't matter we won.End of.
Bin those sour grapes.Thanks.
England may well have been very lucky at certain moments, but cheating is not the correct way to describe what happened.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:48 pm The very expression 'it's just not cricket' is supposed to demonstrate a particularly English adherence to fair play. How ironic that they manage to cheat their way to winning in this of all sports.
World champions in three sports and only the rugby was won fair and square.
Of course it’s not cheating. Sure they got the rib of the green at times but these things even themselves out over a tournament. But to call it cheating is nonsense, and insulting to a team who overcame all sorts of setbacks to win.Red_Army wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:58 pmEngland may well have been very lucky at certain moments, but cheating is not the correct way to describe what happened.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:48 pm The very expression 'it's just not cricket' is supposed to demonstrate a particularly English adherence to fair play. How ironic that they manage to cheat their way to winning in this of all sports.
World champions in three sports and only the rugby was won fair and square.
Not quite, there was an alleged Bloodgate scandal during the 2003 Rugby World Cup. England were accused of using fake blood to feign injuries and stop games thus slowing down play. There was also an accusation that the whole pack were professional cheats, Lawrence Dallaglio being the main culprit with the rest not far behind him.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:48 pm The very expression 'it's just not cricket' is supposed to demonstrate a particularly English adherence to fair play. How ironic that they manage to cheat their way to winning in this of all sports.
World champions in three sports and only the rugby was won fair and square.
I stand corrected. Dallaglio is a right Tory bell anyway so happy to label him a cheat as well.Lovejoy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:05 pmNot quite, there was an alleged Bloodgate scandal during the 2003 Rugby World Cup. England were accused of using fake blood to feign injuries and stop games thus slowing down play. There was also an accusation that the whole pack were professional cheats, Lawrence Dallaglio being the main culprit with the rest not far behind him.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:48 pm The very expression 'it's just not cricket' is supposed to demonstrate a particularly English adherence to fair play. How ironic that they manage to cheat their way to winning in this of all sports.
World champions in three sports and only the rugby was won fair and square.
He is probably an awful lot bigger than you so pray that he does not read your post.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 10:28 pmI stand corrected. Dallaglio is a right Tory bell anyway so happy to label him a cheat as well.Lovejoy wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 8:05 pmNot quite, there was an alleged Bloodgate scandal during the 2003 Rugby World Cup. England were accused of using fake blood to feign injuries and stop games thus slowing down play. There was also an accusation that the whole pack were professional cheats, Lawrence Dallaglio being the main culprit with the rest not far behind him.Proposition Joe wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 7:48 pm The very expression 'it's just not cricket' is supposed to demonstrate a particularly English adherence to fair play. How ironic that they manage to cheat their way to winning in this of all sports.
World champions in three sports and only the rugby was won fair and square.
Sh*t !!
During the Famine, Ireland produced enough food, flax, and wool to feed and clothe double its nine million people.[28] When Ireland had suffered a famine in 1782–83, its ports were closed to keep Irish-grown food in Ireland to feed the Irish. Local food prices promptly dropped. Merchants lobbied against the export ban, but Grattan's Parliament, exercising the short-lived powers within the Constitution of 1782, overrode their protests. There was no such export ban in the 1840s.[29] Some historians[30] have argued, because exports were not stopped, the famine was artificial and a consequence of the British government's failure to retain foodstuffs in the country. [28]tuffers#1 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:22 pmThe proximate cause of the famine was a natural event, a potato blight, which infected potato crops throughout Europe during the 1840s, precipitating some 100,000 deaths in total in the worst affected areas and among similar tenant farmers of Europe. The food crisis influenced much of the unrest in the more widespread European Revolutions of 1848.Max B Gold wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:13 pmYou're still missing the point. You are perpetuating a myth by using uncritical analysis and language to excuse genocide.BoniO wrote: ↑Mon Jul 15, 2019 6:06 pm
That was what my Irish colleague called it and it's how it's referred to historically by many. Google it. So no racism or ignorance from me then. Please, no need to apologise
But we seem to have drifted from cricket somewhat. So yet again, what a great Victory it was for England!!
###The event is sometimes referred to as the Irish Potato Famine, mostly outside Ireland. ###
The impact of the blight was exacerbated by political belief in laissez-faireeconomics
I think he needs to revisit the entire potato blight thing as it was a European disease .
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_F ... prov=sfla1
### denotes its called the irish potato famine outside of Ireland. Very few Irish people would call it that.
Exactly this. Not difficult to understand.LeapsAndBounds wrote: ↑Tue Jul 16, 2019 9:25 am I think the super over is a really great idea. Cricket's equivalent of a penalty shoot out! I was at Leon in 1970 when England lost to Germany 3-2. At the end of the game Keith Newton had a brilliant shot saved by the German keeper. It it had gone in the result would have been decided on a toss of a coin.
Because the super over cannot be tied England went into the super over with a one run advantage due to having scored more boundaries. Both sides were aware of this and we had the greatest finish in cricket history and a clear winner.