Feel good is an anachronism. 1966 June World Cup, did the Government not LOSE the Carmarthen by election one month later, followed by a number of losses in 1967, and then the Toies steaming ahead in the polls.
Viceroy ranting from Spain about the threat from foreigners...
As a Brit abroad myself I get the irony but his lunacy is a product of who he is not where he lives.
Has it occured to you 'he' might be your next door neighbour? The woman sitting beside the pool with the big breasts pretending to do the crossword......
All of my neighbour's are Spanish. Your prejudices and stereotypes continue to amuse.
Though the cricket was entertaining comparing it to the 1966 World cup seems a little over egged. That was a WORLD cup including almost every country in the world. This was a rather more limited affair that includes perhaps 10% of the worlds sports playing nations.
Indeed Europe America China Russia and Japan weren't even represented. Did they even know a contest was taking place?
FIFA World Cup 2018 Semi-Finalists: France, Belgium, Croatia, England. Combined population of 138 million. All from Europe.
ICC ODI World Cup 2019 Semi-Finalists: England & Wales, New Zealand, Australia, India. Combined population of 1,428 million. From Europe, South Asia and Oceania.
Which is the more global sport?
Look, It's good England won the cricket but then people like your good self go OTT and start making ludicrous claims about it.
There is no argument that football is the global sport, cricket is a niche game played mainly by the old British Empire, there are about half a dozen decent teams in the world and in the UK the crowds at every county ground on a Saturday combined wouldn't fill Old Trafford. I doubt 1 in 10 could tell you who won the last county championship, I couldn't.
Just enjoy it for what it is and not try to hype it beyond reason. The British press would go mad if we won the world tiddlywinks championship, they are desperate to try and find a feel-good factor to deflect from Brexit gloom.
Very interesting. Since I abandoned Sky for Netflix/Prime/the "iPlayers" I followed the cricket on a combination of TMS, live chat and the ICC just-behind-the-action video clips. Then the end of the final on C4 live streaming (missed the start due to daughter's friend's birthday party obligations).
Once they realise that Insta is a messaging-with-pic/video channel, not a photostream, the ICC will improve those figures even more.
Though the cricket was entertaining comparing it to the 1966 World cup seems a little over egged. That was a WORLD cup including almost every country in the world. This was a rather more limited affair that includes perhaps 10% of the worlds sports playing nations.
Indeed Europe America China Russia and Japan weren't even represented. Did they even know a contest was taking place?
FIFA World Cup 2018 Semi-Finalists: France, Belgium, Croatia, England. Combined population of 138 million. All from Europe.
ICC ODI World Cup 2019 Semi-Finalists: England & Wales, New Zealand, Australia, India. Combined population of 1,428 million. From Europe, South Asia and Oceania.
Which is the more global sport?
Look, It's good England won the cricket but then people like your good self go OTT and start making ludicrous claims about it.
There is no argument that football is the global sport, cricket is a niche game played mainly by the old British Empire, there are about half a dozen decent teams in the world and in the UK the crowds at every county ground on a Saturday combined wouldn't fill Old Trafford. I doubt 1 in 10 could tell you who won the last county championship, I couldn't.
Just enjoy it for what it is and not try to hype it beyond reason. The British press would go mad if we won the world tiddlywinks championship, they are desperate to try and find a feel-good factor to deflect from Brexit gloom.
I'm only responding to sour people doing cricket down. I'm not taking it as seriously as you are.
I'm Welsh so it's hard to praise an English sports team but this is one hell of a one-day team and deserved World champs.
It's the Entland and Wales team though the and Wales tends to get dropped. So there should be no difficulty for you at all.
Indeed, Robert Croft one example of a former Welsh England cricket team player
Denness and (theoretically) Jardine both Scottish. It's a small part of the long tradition of England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland/NI/UK/Britain/nation/country/state obfuscation that keeps the show on the road.
I'm Welsh so it's hard to praise an English sports team but this is one hell of a one-day team and deserved World champs.
It's the Entland and Wales team though the and Wales tends to get dropped. So there should be no difficulty for you at all.
Indeed, Robert Croft one example of a former Welsh England cricket team player
Denness and (theoretically) Jardine both Scottish. It's a small part of the long tradition of England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland/NI/UK/Britain/nation/country/state obfuscation that keeps the show on the road.
Jardine was brilliant, he wound up the Aussies by just breathing.
He and Harold Larwood were shameful treated by the powers that be here.
Though the cricket was entertaining comparing it to the 1966 World cup seems a little over egged. That was a WORLD cup including almost every country in the world. This was a rather more limited affair that includes perhaps 10% of the worlds sports playing nations.
Indeed Europe America China Russia and Japan weren't even represented. Did they even know a contest was taking place?
FIFA World Cup 2018 Semi-Finalists: France, Belgium, Croatia, England. Combined population of 138 million. All from Europe.
ICC ODI World Cup 2019 Semi-Finalists: England & Wales, New Zealand, Australia, India. Combined population of 1,428 million. From Europe, South Asia and Oceania.
Which is the more global sport?
Look, It's good England won the cricket but then people like your good self go OTT and start making ludicrous claims about it.
There is no argument that football is the global sport, cricket is a niche game played mainly by the old British Empire, there are about half a dozen decent teams in the world and in the UK the crowds at every county ground on a Saturday combined wouldn't fill Old Trafford. I doubt 1 in 10 could tell you who won the last county championship, I couldn't.
Just enjoy it for what it is and not try to hype it beyond reason. The British press would go mad if we won the world tiddlywinks championship, they are desperate to try and find a feel-good factor to deflect from Brexit gloom.
Football is clearly the global sport. Cricket has a good claim to be the second global team sport though, certainly in the same tier as the other main contenders basketball, rugby union and hockey. It may even be ahead of tennis as the second global sport.
The very worst thing about Mogg's tweet was that mimsy little 'd..n', the pishy gentility and phoney antiquatedness should bar him from decent company. Since he appears to like hanging out with Farage and the like, he at least seems to be taking action on that front himself.
I'm fairly confident that if such a thing occurs, Jeremy Hunt will not be PM. He's put himself forward to be PM as leader of the Tory Party, which I think rules him out. It's more likely, in my opinion, someone who hasn't been in the Cabinet recently.
Mr. T, I partially disagree. Cricket's played, watched, and generally enjoyed by a great many people. There isn't a binary choice between biggest global sport and niche interest, after ll.
Though the cricket was entertaining comparing it to the 1966 World cup seems a little over egged. That was a WORLD cup including almost every country in the world. This was a rather more limited affair that includes perhaps 10% of the worlds sports playing nations.
Indeed Europe America China Russia and Japan weren't even represented. Did they even know a contest was taking place?
FIFA World Cup 2018 Semi-Finalists: France, Belgium, Croatia, England. Combined population of 138 million. All from Europe.
ICC ODI World Cup 2019 Semi-Finalists: England & Wales, New Zealand, Australia, India. Combined population of 1,428 million. From Europe, South Asia and Oceania.
Which is the more global sport?
Look, It's good England won the cricket but then people like your good self go OTT and start making ludicrous claims about it.
There is no argument that football is the global sport, cricket is a niche game played mainly by the old British Empire, there are about half a dozen decent teams in the world and in the UK the crowds at every county ground on a Saturday combined wouldn't fill Old Trafford. I doubt 1 in 10 could tell you who won the last county championship, I couldn't.
Just enjoy it for what it is and not try to hype it beyond reason. The British press would go mad if we won the world tiddlywinks championship, they are desperate to try and find a feel-good factor to deflect from Brexit gloom.
Football is clearly the global sport. Cricket has a good claim to be the second global team sport though, certainly in the same tier as the other main contenders basketball, rugby union and hockey. It may even be ahead of tennis as the second global sport.
There are no official figures, but these sites provide some interesting pointers:
I'm fairly confident that if such a thing occurs, Jeremy Hunt will not be PM. He's put himself forward to be PM as leader of the Tory Party, which I think rules him out. It's more likely, in my opinion, someone who hasn't been in the Cabinet recently.
Clarke is one obvious choice in this deeply, deeply unlikely scenario, but I wonder about Nick Boles. He's actually left the Conservative party, which might make it easier for non-Tories to back him.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
Be tricky but I guess that is why they are talking.
Please, please though my wallet says, make Clarke PM before Boris gets to the Palace.
I imagine an agreement to set a date for the GE would be an essential part of that.
If these talks are in any way "real" and not just hyperbolic extrapolation of two backbenchers and a journo chewing the fat in a bar, that alone is quite extraordinary.
I'm Welsh so it's hard to praise an English sports team but this is one hell of a one-day team and deserved World champs.
It's the Entland and Wales team though the and Wales tends to get dropped. So there should be no difficulty for you at all.
Indeed, Robert Croft one example of a former Welsh England cricket team player
Denness and (theoretically) Jardine both Scottish. It's a small part of the long tradition of England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland/NI/UK/Britain/nation/country/state obfuscation that keeps the show on the road.
Jardine was brilliant, he wound up the Aussies by just breathing.
He and Harold Larwood were shameful treated by the powers that be here.
Must admit my view of Jardine was formed by the Bodyline tv series which tended to portray him as a bit of archetypal, sneering Englishman. It also rather coloured my view of the same actor's portrayal of Elrond.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
It may only need to be a government for a few days/weeks. Long enough to agree a decent extension with EU and then organize a GE. The GNU would simply be about stopping No Deal.
The risk for the country is that when the GE finally happens there will be a counter reaction which gives Farage a massive wodge of rabid loon MPs like Widdecombe.
Government loses a VONC but a new PM emerges in the 14 day window of the fixed term Parliament act.
While I would love to see Ken Clarke as PM, I don't see how he gets a majority in the Commons. Would he even get a majority of Tory MPs, given so many of them have gone the full Viceroy?
Be tricky but I guess that is why they are talking.
Please, please though my wallet says, make Clarke PM before Boris gets to the Palace.
I imagine an agreement to set a date for the GE would be an essential part of that.
If these talks are in any way "real" and not just hyperbolic extrapolation of two backbenchers and a journo chewing the fat in a bar, that alone is quite extraordinary.
I don't believe for one second that Corbyn would give confidence to any GONU.
Cross party probably means what people love to call so-called "moderates" and nowhere approaching 316 or so MPs needed to form a majority.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
I'm Welsh so it's hard to praise an English sports team but this is one hell of a one-day team and deserved World champs.
It's the Entland and Wales team though the and Wales tends to get dropped. So there should be no difficulty for you at all.
Indeed, Robert Croft one example of a former Welsh England cricket team player
Denness and (theoretically) Jardine both Scottish. It's a small part of the long tradition of England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland/NI/UK/Britain/nation/country/state obfuscation that keeps the show on the road.
Jardine was brilliant, he wound up the Aussies by just breathing.
He and Harold Larwood were shameful treated by the powers that be here.
Must admit my view of Jardine was formed by the Bodyline tv series which tended to portray him as a bit of archetypal, sneering Englishman. It also rather coloured my view of the same actor's portrayal of Elrond.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
Depends if its temporarily with the sole purpose of securing a Brexit extension followed by a GE.
Government loses a VONC but a new PM emerges in the 14 day window of the fixed term Parliament act.
While I would love to see Ken Clarke as PM, I don't see how he gets a majority in the Commons. Would he even get a majority of Tory MPs, given so many of them have gone the full Viceroy?
You would need most of the Labour party, all the other parties and around 50-70 Tories. For that reason Cooper or Benn might be more likely, with Clarke, Letwin, Grieve and Boles involved in senior roles, possibly Hammond and Stewart as well.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
Depends if its temporarily with the sole purpose of securing a Brexit extension followed by a GE.
or even just revoking A50 and calling a General Election (as revoking would be quicker and doesn't require the rest of the EU).
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
Depends if its temporarily with the sole purpose of securing a Brexit extension followed by a GE.
or even just revoking A50 and calling a General Election (as revoking would be quicker and doesn't require the rest of the EU).
Mr. Above, problem with Cooper/Benn is that Clarke is a respected elder statesman who is clearly not going to try and be a permanent PM. Whereas Cooper/Benn could have decades ahead of them, which means being PM would be both a huge career advantage and very helpful for Labour (Clarke being PM would not be correspondingly helpful for the Conservatives).
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
These are unusual times! If the purpose of said government was purely to negotiate an extension to Brexit (again!) with the EU so that a GE could be carried out in good order without us falling into a No Deal crash out Brexit, then it seems plausible that Labour would vote for it.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
Could it not be a move from labour MPs to distance themselves from cult corbyn in ‘the national interest’
Mr. Above, problem with Cooper/Benn is that Clarke is a respected elder statesman who is clearly not going to try and be a permanent PM. Whereas Cooper/Benn could have decades ahead of them, which means being PM would be both a huge career advantage and very helpful for Labour (Clarke being PM would not be correspondingly helpful for the Conservatives).
Who's the equivalent on the Labour side? Dennis Skinner?
Interesting that in all the interviews with Hunt about the Iran crisis no one asks if he agrees with the Amassador's view that the treaty was reneged on to spite Obama.
Government loses a VONC but a new PM emerges in the 14 day window of the fixed term Parliament act.
While I would love to see Ken Clarke as PM, I don't see how he gets a majority in the Commons. Would he even get a majority of Tory MPs, given so many of them have gone the full Viceroy?
You would need most of the Labour party, all the other parties and around 50-70 Tories. For that reason Cooper or Benn might be more likely, with Clarke, Letwin, Grieve and Boles involved in senior roles, possibly Hammond and Stewart as well.
I don't see Labour doing this, certainly not under Corbyn and probably not under any other Labour leader.
Interesting that in all the interviews with Hunt about the Iran crisis no one asks if he agrees with the Amassador's view that the treaty was reneged on to spite Obama.
Not seen any interviews myself, but I can believe it. Sometimes the most obvious questions go unasked.
Be tricky but I guess that is why they are talking.
Please, please though my wallet says, make Clarke PM before Boris gets to the Palace.
I imagine an agreement to set a date for the GE would be an essential part of that.
If these talks are in any way "real" and not just hyperbolic extrapolation of two backbenchers and a journo chewing the fat in a bar, that alone is quite extraordinary.
I don't believe for one second that Corbyn would give confidence to any GONU.
Cross party probably means what people love to call so-called "moderates" and nowhere approaching 316 or so MPs needed to form a majority.
The absence of 50-60 LDs somewhat unbalances the whole equation. You could just about conceive of 80-100 Tories, 150 Labourites, 60 LDs and a few assorted hangers on scraping something together, but 50-odd Tories, 80-odd Labourites and a handful of LDs are clearly not getting anywhere.
Most people are not tuned in to cricket - though I personally much prefer it to football. It is likely to pass most people by , and the highly technical nature of this win will incline many to the view that justice was not done with NZ effectively being robbed as the more deserving team.
Big G's MP.....not entirely popular with his constituents apparently.....
He is a former Plaid member and is in real trouble in his constutuency long before he became a full on remainer and disregarding his manifesto my fellow members campaigned on for him. I do not want to turn on conservative mps who have different views but he was not suitable for the party and was likely to be deselected, not just on Brexit
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
The only point I would note is that I don't think Corbyn wants to be in Government. So while it might be what Labour in general (and indeed, others on the Lab front bench in particular) might want, I don't think "those around leadership" are remotely interested.
However, I think the past year or two have demonstrated that the loyalty to the Labour brand/vision/ideology/history/name in the party are so great that it is unlikely ever to split. That has surely been tested to breaking point with the Twitter-only responses to the current crisis.
That's what renders these notions of a GONU rather fanciful more even than "arithmetic".
Government loses a VONC but a new PM emerges in the 14 day window of the fixed term Parliament act.
While I would love to see Ken Clarke as PM, I don't see how he gets a majority in the Commons. Would he even get a majority of Tory MPs, given so many of them have gone the full Viceroy?
Indeed this is what I have been saying. The newly-elected and with a strong mandate Party Leader would perfectly reasonably three line whip against I expect and any MPs to break the line would have to leave the party and not be Conservatives at the next election. How many Tories are prepared to defect from the party - Hammond claims 30 but in reality it will be fewer, already Rudd who was meant to be one of the 30 has shown she won't.
Which leaves it in Corbyn's hands. I think he'd rather see the Tories fall in chaos then have an election than see an extension agreed first. He could either oppose a GONU or as a precondition for it insist he is PM for the GONU and will seek an election after an extension. Are there over 300 MPs prepared to make Corbyn PM?
If not Corbyn, he can reject any GONU and any Labour MPs who back it would again probably need to defect from the party do so.
I can't see hundreds of Tory and Labour MPs being prepared to defect from their parties. So a GONU must be headed or backed either by Corbyn or the Tory leader.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
These are unusual times! If the purpose of said government was purely to negotiate an extension to Brexit (again!) with the EU so that a GE could be carried out in good order without us falling into a No Deal crash out Brexit, then it seems plausible that Labour would vote for it.
Would/should Lab trust the Cons to do whatever they say they will do? Even Saint Ken thinks a Lab govt would be a disaster.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
Could it not be a move from labour MPs to distance themselves from cult corbyn in ‘the national interest’
Could be - but that is a long way from supporting a Cons PM for however long. cf. all those Cons who say they don't want no deal but would stop short of vonc their own govt.
Under the fixed-term parliament act, the house has 14 days after a VONC in the governement to select an alternate government that it does have confidence in, or else a general election follows automatically. So the House is entitled to (for example) back a government of national unity led by Ken after kicking out Boris if it so chooses.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
But surely (as I see @Cyclefree has also noted) that doesn't change the arithmetic in the Commons. There would not be a "coming together" by Labour for any Tory-fronted govt. This is the chance Lab have been waiting for and they are unlikely to want to patch up the open wound.
The only point I would note is that I don't think Corbyn wants to be in Government. So while it might be what Labour in general (and indeed, others on the Lab front bench in particular) might want, I don't think "those around leadership" are remotely interested.
However, I think the past year or two have demonstrated that the loyalty to the Labour brand/vision/ideology/history/name in the party are so great that it is unlikely ever to split. That has surely been tested to breaking point with the Twitter-only responses to the current crisis.
That's what renders these notions of a GONU rather fanciful more even than "arithmetic".
Most people are not tuned in to cricket - though I personally much prefer it to football. It is likely to pass most people by , and the highly technical nature of this win will incline many to the view that justice was not done with NZ effectively being robbed as the more deserving team.
NZ were not robbed but they were unlucky.
Remember this was not a one off match, there were a whole series of matches which each team had to come through and England demolishing Australia in the semi was a fantastic result which alone gives the lie to one team being the most deserving
Be tricky but I guess that is why they are talking.
Please, please though my wallet says, make Clarke PM before Boris gets to the Palace.
I imagine an agreement to set a date for the GE would be an essential part of that.
If these talks are in any way "real" and not just hyperbolic extrapolation of two backbenchers and a journo chewing the fat in a bar, that alone is quite extraordinary.
I don't believe for one second that Corbyn would give confidence to any GONU.
Cross party probably means what people love to call so-called "moderates" and nowhere approaching 316 or so MPs needed to form a majority.
The absence of 50-60 LDs somewhat unbalances the whole equation. You could just about conceive of 80-100 Tories, 150 Labourites, 60 LDs and a few assorted hangers on scraping something together, but 50-odd Tories, 80-odd Labourites and a handful of LDs are clearly not getting anywhere.
I say that so I can be proven dramatically wrong!
There aren't even 50-odd Tories. Hammond has claimed 30 but Rudd was meant to be one of them and her words say otherwise.
Most people are not tuned in to cricket - though I personally much prefer it to football. It is likely to pass most people by , and the highly technical nature of this win will incline many to the view that justice was not done with NZ effectively being robbed as the more deserving team.
NZ were not robbed but they were unlucky.
Remember this was not a one off match, there were a whole series of matches which each team had to come through and England demolishing Australia in the semi was a fantastic result which alone gives the lie to one team being the most deserving
The best team in ODIs over the past few years won the tournament, beating australia, new zealand and india on the way to the final.
Most people are not tuned in to cricket - though I personally much prefer it to football. It is likely to pass most people by , and the highly technical nature of this win will incline many to the view that justice was not done with NZ effectively being robbed as the more deserving team.
I think that it was close enough that either side would have been worthy winners, regardless of how the luck played out.
Most people are not tuned in to cricket - though I personally much prefer it to football. It is likely to pass most people by , and the highly technical nature of this win will incline many to the view that justice was not done with NZ effectively being robbed as the more deserving team.
I think that it was close enough that either side would have been worthy winners, regardless of how the luck played out.
Be tricky but I guess that is why they are talking.
Please, please though my wallet says, make Clarke PM before Boris gets to the Palace.
I imagine an agreement to set a date for the GE would be an essential part of that.
If these talks are in any way "real" and not just hyperbolic extrapolation of two backbenchers and a journo chewing the fat in a bar, that alone is quite extraordinary.
I don't believe for one second that Corbyn would give confidence to any GONU.
Cross party probably means what people love to call so-called "moderates" and nowhere approaching 316 or so MPs needed to form a majority.
The absence of 50-60 LDs somewhat unbalances the whole equation. You could just about conceive of 80-100 Tories, 150 Labourites, 60 LDs and a few assorted hangers on scraping something together, but 50-odd Tories, 80-odd Labourites and a handful of LDs are clearly not getting anywhere.
I say that so I can be proven dramatically wrong!
There aren't even 50-odd Tories. Hammond has claimed 30 but Rudd was meant to be one of them and her words say otherwise.
The assumption would have to be that if there are, say 20-odd right now, but a "credible" alternative and some heavy hitters who are not part of that 20 step up to create a GONU, you could get to 40 or 50. The flaw being that you aren't going to get a number of heavy hitters stepping up if there are only 20-odd prepared to jump right now.
On the other hand, if there were 50-odd right now, and the heavy hitters stepped up, you could see how you could get to 80-100. Again, purely hypothetical, as the conditions don't exist.
Congratulations to the England cricket team and while I don't think there is a great link between sport and politics the Blair government in 2005 after the 2003 rugby world cup win was re elected, albeit the 1966 World Cup soccer win cane before that year's general election in 1970 the Wilson Government was voted out after England went out
Not true. The 1966 General Election took place on 31st March - four months ahead of the World Cup Final.
Second. And I wished I shared OGH optimism. But Trump has just let his racist mask slip and will double down rather than apologise and shortly the Tories and us will be lumbered with an incompetent for PM. Good to see Mrs May enjoying the cricket. I suspect history will be kinder to her than her successor.
Nanci Pelosi can't even bring herself to use the word racist. She alludes to it but the best she can manage is xenophobic.
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Stoke's apologised on the field the minute it happened.
Umpire's make mistakes all the time, non more so when Roy was given out closing in on his century v Australia and he was not out by any stretch of the imagination
I think as Lampard's incorrectly disallowed goal was the catalyst for improvements to football technology (Goal line tech), so the first ball lbw of Roy might well adjust the ball hitting stumps to perhaps 25% of the ball.
The misapplication of rule 19.8 was simply an error by those the umpires. However that should have been referred up to Rod Tucker, where he could have consulted the rules.
Government loses a VONC but a new PM emerges in the 14 day window of the fixed term Parliament act.
While I would love to see Ken Clarke as PM, I don't see how he gets a majority in the Commons. Would he even get a majority of Tory MPs, given so many of them have gone the full Viceroy?
But wouldn't him being elected leader and on day one being replaced as PM by someone chosen by the House be the more fantabulous result imaginable.....
Better than the '66 Word Cup the Rugby Word Cup the Cricket World Cup and Murray's Wimbledon all rolled into one
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Stoke's apologised on the field the minute it happened.
Umpire's make mistakes all the time, non more so when Roy was given out closing in on his century v Australia and he was not out by any stretch of the imagination
There's a big difference between an official making an error of judgement and error of law. On this occasion I think there's sufficient wriggle room in the law meaning it's plausible that they got it right. And I didn't notice NZ kicking off about it at the time.
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Though Adil is quite capable of having hit the winning runs (or getting out to an absurd swipe).
Surely if a mistake has been clearly identified, it ought to be corrected! We would expect nothing less from an error discovered in an election count.Failing to do so makes the result appear pretty fraudulent - or at best contrived.
As an adjunct to a review, if reviews are expired, why not allow the the teams additional reviews at a cost of 10 runs if they get it wrong? That would have saved Roy..
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Stoke's apologised on the field the minute it happened.
Umpire's make mistakes all the time, non more so when Roy was given out closing in on his century v Australia and he was not out by any stretch of the imagination
There's a big difference between an official making an error of judgement and error of law. On this occasion I think there's sufficient wriggle room in the law meaning it's plausible that they got it right. And I didn't notice NZ kicking off about it at the time.
The act had to have been "wilful". If Stokes act had been "wilful" then he would have been out obstructing the field. Since it was not "wilful" the throw clearly should have been the correct point at which the runs were considered.
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Though Adil is quite capable of having hit the winning runs (or getting out to an absurd swipe).
Surely if a mistake has been clearly identified, it ought to be corrected! We would expect nothing less from an error discovered in an election count.Failing to do so makes the result appear pretty fraudulent - or at best contrived.
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Though Adil is quite capable of having hit the winning runs (or getting out to an absurd swipe).
Surely if a mistake has been clearly identified, it ought to be corrected! We would expect nothing less from an error discovered in an election count.Failing to do so makes the result appear pretty fraudulent - or at best contrived.
Umpires regularly make mistakes in cricket, its part of the game. Roy was given out in the semi final and wasn't.
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Stoke's apologised on the field the minute it happened.
Umpire's make mistakes all the time, non more so when Roy was given out closing in on his century v Australia and he was not out by any stretch of the imagination
There's a big difference between an official making an error of judgement and error of law. On this occasion I think there's sufficient wriggle room in the law meaning it's plausible that they got it right. And I didn't notice NZ kicking off about it at the time.
I don't think either team were aware of the particular rule at that moment - Stokes clearly didn't want the extra runs (and would not have run any had the ball failed to reach the boundary), and NZ didn't ask the umpire to reconsider.
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Though Adil is quite capable of having hit the winning runs (or getting out to an absurd swipe).
Surely if a mistake has been clearly identified, it ought to be corrected! We would expect nothing less from an error discovered in an election count.Failing to do so makes the result appear pretty fraudulent - or at best contrived.
Are you going to review every decision in the match? And what about all the preceding matches as well?
It always amazes me that baseball has the same tech as hawkeye for every single game, but the players and fans accept that every umpire "sees" the strike zone quite differently. Some are known for allowing much larger area, it is just part and parcel of the game, despite the tech being there to precisely define what is right / wrong.
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Stoke's apologised on the field the minute it happened.
Umpire's make mistakes all the time, non more so when Roy was given out closing in on his century v Australia and he was not out by any stretch of the imagination
There's a big difference between an official making an error of judgement and error of law. On this occasion I think there's sufficient wriggle room in the law meaning it's plausible that they got it right. And I didn't notice NZ kicking off about it at the time.
The act had to have been "wilful". If Stokes act had been "wilful" then he would have been out obstructing the field. Since it was not "wilful" the throw clearly should have been the correct point at which the runs were considered.
In that case this is quite a serious error, though a good example of why competitive sports people should know the laws.
That said, it seems an odd law to me - why give the umpires the hassle of something else to look out for?
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Though Adil is quite capable of having hit the winning runs (or getting out to an absurd swipe).
Surely if a mistake has been clearly identified, it ought to be corrected! We would expect nothing less from an error discovered in an election count.Failing to do so makes the result appear pretty fraudulent - or at best contrived.
The umpire's ruling at the time is final.
Quite right too because all action that follows is based on the prior rulings.
Had we played on knowing we needed a 4 rather than runs then the batsman would have played the delivery differently.
Ouch. Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Though Adil is quite capable of having hit the winning runs (or getting out to an absurd swipe).
Surely if a mistake has been clearly identified, it ought to be corrected! We would expect nothing less from an error discovered in an election count.Failing to do so makes the result appear pretty fraudulent - or at best contrived.
Umpires regularly make mistakes in cricket, its part of the game. Roy was given out in the semi final and wasn't.
Exactly. People saying "if not for this so-and-so would have won" also need to remember that there will have been many more mistakes over the course of tournament.
Feel good is an anachronism. 1966 June World Cup, did the Government not LOSE the Carmarthen by election one month later, followed by a number of losses in 1967, and then the Toies steaming ahead in the polls.
No - the World Cup was held at the end of July 1966 a couple of weeks later than Plaid's win at Carmarthen.
Comments
You're neighbour's... pools ? crosswords... ?? ...
There is no argument that football is the global sport, cricket is a niche game played mainly by the old British Empire, there are about half a dozen decent teams in the world and in the UK the crowds at every county ground on a Saturday combined wouldn't fill Old Trafford. I doubt 1 in 10 could tell you who won the last county championship, I couldn't.
Just enjoy it for what it is and not try to hype it beyond reason. The British press would go mad if we won the world tiddlywinks championship, they are desperate to try and find a feel-good factor to deflect from Brexit gloom.
UNBELIEVABLE ⁉️
France, the only country where you will be denied nationality for the sole reason: works too much.
Big G's MP.....not entirely popular with his constituents apparently.....
Once they realise that Insta is a messaging-with-pic/video channel, not a photostream, the ICC will improve those figures even more.
https://twitter.com/mij_europe/status/1150683097698054144?s=21
It's a small part of the long tradition of England/Scotland/Wales/Ireland/NI/UK/Britain/nation/country/state obfuscation that keeps the show on the road.
Incredible game of cricket . Played in a good spirit . NZ are wonderful ambassadors for their country and England put a smile on peoples faces .
That’s it, does Brexit need to come in to everything .
He and Harold Larwood were shameful treated by the powers that be here.
Please, please though my wallet says, make Clarke PM before Boris gets to the Palace.
So you need a plan to ensure that when the VoNC is won by the opposition there is a workable plan to ensure what needs to happen next happens.
and I suspect that is either a very long extension or revoke to then allow an election to take place.
Looking into the future unless we actually leave Brexit is going to be the defining point of all elections for the next 20 years...
https://sportsshow.net/top-10-most-popular-sports-in-the-world/
https://www.totalsportek.com/most-popular-sports/
https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/what-are-the-most-popular-sports-in-the-world.html
They all put cricket in the top three.
It seems unlikely, but cometh the hour...
If these talks are in any way "real" and not just hyperbolic extrapolation of two backbenchers and a journo chewing the fat in a bar, that alone is quite extraordinary.
https://twitter.com/tseofpb/status/1111624927445159940?s=21
https://twitter.com/basitmahmood91/status/1150422563933302789?s=21
The risk for the country is that when the GE finally happens there will be a counter reaction which gives Farage a massive wodge of rabid loon MPs like Widdecombe.
Cross party probably means what people love to call so-called "moderates" and nowhere approaching 316 or so MPs needed to form a majority.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/engvaus/content/story/213701.html
He even signed up to fight in World War II, he was injured at Dunkirk, never matched the Aussie parody of him.
I say that so I can be proven dramatically wrong!
Skinner hasn't held a string of high offices and is not generally considered to have been a competent Cabinet minister.
Winning here Justine? 🔶
However, I think the past year or two have demonstrated that the loyalty to the Labour brand/vision/ideology/history/name in the party are so great that it is unlikely ever to split. That has surely been tested to breaking point with the Twitter-only responses to the current crisis.
That's what renders these notions of a GONU rather fanciful more even than "arithmetic".
Such decisions can be rough.
Which leaves it in Corbyn's hands. I think he'd rather see the Tories fall in chaos then have an election than see an extension agreed first. He could either oppose a GONU or as a precondition for it insist he is PM for the GONU and will seek an election after an extension. Are there over 300 MPs prepared to make Corbyn PM?
If not Corbyn, he can reject any GONU and any Labour MPs who back it would again probably need to defect from the party do so.
I can't see hundreds of Tory and Labour MPs being prepared to defect from their parties. So a GONU must be headed or backed either by Corbyn or the Tory leader.
Lest we forget the 2010 and 1986 association football world cups where England were cheated out of those tournaments.
Remember this was not a one off match, there were a whole series of matches which each team had to come through and England demolishing Australia in the semi was a fantastic result which alone gives the lie to one team being the most deserving
Which umpire made the ruling on the day ...?
Too late to affect the result, but we ought to apologise to NZ.
Though Adil is quite capable of having hit the winning runs (or getting out to an absurd swipe).
On the other hand, if there were 50-odd right now, and the heavy hitters stepped up, you could see how you could get to 80-100. Again, purely hypothetical, as the conditions don't exist.
The Dems are fucked.
Umpire's make mistakes all the time, non more so when Roy was given out closing in on his century v Australia and he was not out by any stretch of the imagination
The misapplication of rule 19.8 was simply an error by those the umpires. However that should have been referred up to Rod Tucker, where he could have consulted the rules.
Better than the '66 Word Cup the Rugby Word Cup the Cricket World Cup and Murray's Wimbledon all rolled into one
https://twitter.com/LauraLambert8/status/1150694998356221952
That said, it seems an odd law to me - why give the umpires the hassle of something else to look out for?
Had we played on knowing we needed a 4 rather than runs then the batsman would have played the delivery differently.