Absolutely inexplicable to me. Are people impressed by that new ship or something? I'd love to meet some of these respondents and get a handle on what's going on in their heads. Make them comfortable on a couch and encourage them to tell me all about it. And I'd just listen.
Fairly straightforward.
Brexit backers: 80%+ will go Johnson ex-Remainers: 50% Starmer, 35% no view, 15% Johnson
Brexit has to fail or the economy tank (obviously closely related) to change those numbers much.
Yes I share that analysis. Johnson owns Leave but Starmer doesn't own Remain. And Leave is also bigger than Remain in FPTP terms. Such is the mountain. A different Labour leader probably wouldn't make much difference either. This is largely structural.
The French eat all.kill kinds of filthy food No.lessons from the frogs(legs) thank-you.
Our first cultural day out post lockdown. Music from the shows at Chichester Festival theatrel.
It pains me to say this but the French produce better food than us Brits.
They have the Michelin Guide, we have Wetherspoons, the deep fried Mars bar, and Little Chefs.
While that was true 30 years ago, I'm not sure it's true today.
Britain has had a bit of a food revolution, with the quality of cuisine in gastropubs and the number of truly world class restaurants having increased markedly.
This doesn't mean you can't eat sensationally well in France (see Guy Savoy in Paris), but in general, small town French restaurants have gone backwards, while the UK has done nothing but improve.
Isn't that what a former PBer has been telling us for years ?
Would you be taking your gastronomic opinions from Mr T ?
One doesn't need to listen to MrT to see the rise in the number of British restaurants ranked among the world's elite.
When I was 19 years old, my parents took me to a restaurant called Tante Claire in London. At the time, it was one of just two Michelin Three Star restaraunts in the whole of the UK (along with the Waterside Inn).
There's now seven or eight (I don't know whether Araki is still on the list).
There's been a similar growth in the number of two and one star restaurants.
Congratulations, and that name is just trying a bit too hard.
It'd be like me declaring a fatwa and launching a intifada against this site and calling my next son Mike Robert TSE Royale.
Short price for the first criticism of choice of name!
Yeah, but I mean COME ON.
"Lilibet" Diana?
I wish the kid all the best, but it's nauseating.
Absolutely, because no parent has ever named their sprog after family members.
I mean the Queen has the same name as her mother.
Nice idea from them, but I don’t like nicknames as the official name for kids really. Elizabeth known as ‘Lilibet’ would have been nicer, but then again maybe that’s just me being old fashioned.
Who cares what the Queen is called in private? Who cares what anyone is called in private? The determination to peek inside one family’s life is completely bizarre.
I've always felt that M'lud with a doff of the cap was acceptable to the 'My Lord' I usually would require.
Harry really needs to stop this crap or do a DNA test.
Congratulations, and that name is just trying a bit too hard.
It'd be like me declaring a fatwa and launching a intifada against this site and calling my next son Mike Robert TSE Royale.
Short price for the first criticism of choice of name!
Yeah, but I mean COME ON.
"Lilibet" Diana?
I wish the kid all the best, but it's nauseating.
Absolutely, because no parent has ever named their sprog after family members.
I mean the Queen has the same name as her mother.
Lilibet is an affectionate (and private) family nickname for the Queen.
It's shameless self aggrandisement.
Why do I get the feeling no matter what they named their daughter you and the Mail would have been complaining.
If they picked a modern name you'd be saying it was hopelessly woke.
Christabel Germaine Winnie would have been great.
Add in Brenda and we would have had perfection.
Well I'm happy that Meghan has had a healthy baby girl. I do think the name is a bit insulting to the queen tbh though.
Yup, I agree with that sentiment, first and foremost glad the baby is healthy but the name. They really are awful
Royal names are never given in the diminutive - Lilibet's father is officially Henry Charles Albert David on the records. Personally I think Alex or Mary would have been a better nod to the queen.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
Congratulations, and that name is just trying a bit too hard.
It'd be like me declaring a fatwa and launching a intifada against this site and calling my next son Mike Robert TSE Royale.
Short price for the first criticism of choice of name!
Yeah, but I mean COME ON.
"Lilibet" Diana?
I wish the kid all the best, but it's nauseating.
Absolutely, because no parent has ever named their sprog after family members.
I mean the Queen has the same name as her mother.
Nice idea from them, but I don’t like nicknames as the official name for kids really. Elizabeth known as ‘Lilibet’ would have been nicer, but then again maybe that’s just me being old fashioned.
Who cares what the Queen is called in private? Who cares what anyone is called in private? The determination to peek inside one family’s life is completely bizarre.
I've always felt that M'lud with a doff of the cap was acceptable to the 'My Lord' I usually would require.
Harry really needs to stop this crap or do a DNA test.
The obsession with one family you have never met is beyond bizarre.
The French eat all.kill kinds of filthy food No.lessons from the frogs(legs) thank-you.
Our first cultural day out post lockdown. Music from the shows at Chichester Festival theatrel.
It pains me to say this but the French produce better food than us Brits.
They have the Michelin Guide, we have Wetherspoons, the deep fried Mars bar, and Little Chefs.
While that was true 30 years ago, I'm not sure it's true today.
Britain has had a bit of a food revolution, with the quality of cuisine in gastropubs and the number of truly world class restaurants having increased markedly.
This doesn't mean you can't eat sensationally well in France (see Guy Savoy in Paris), but in general, small town French restaurants have gone backwards, while the UK has done nothing but improve.
Isn't that what a former PBer has been telling us for years ?
Would you be taking your gastronomic opinions from Mr T ?
One doesn't need to listen to MrT to see the rise in the number of British restaurants ranked among the world's elite.
When I was 19 years old, my parents took me to a restaurant called Tante Claire in London. At the time, it was one of just two Michelin Three Star restaraunts in the whole of the UK (along with the Waterside Inn).
There's now seven or eight (I don't know whether Araki is still on the list).
There's been a similar growth in the number of two and one star restaurants.
Actually, having researched it, I think Tante Claire only had two stars when I went there in '93/'94.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
How about, however many overs you are short for the first innings, those who bowled cannot bowl in the second innings until after that number of overs in the second innings?
EDIT: The five who bowled the most overs to prevent everyone having a bowl in the first innings.
I would think Ollie Robinson would miss out at Edgbaston with some disciplinary action. I think it's the right decision. Potentially Olly Stone will come in for Mark Wood and Jack Leach will come in. It wouldn't surprise me, either, if Craig Overton played for one of Broad or Anderson.
----
So they are going to ban Robinson for something he did 10 years ago, but pick somebody who got done for making racist comments of batsmen.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Edit - I shall of course withdraw all this if England score 140 off the last 20 overs. Likely chance.
This was perhaps the most depressing England batting display I've seen:
I would think Ollie Robinson would miss out at Edgbaston with some disciplinary action. I think it's the right decision. Potentially Olly Stone will come in for Mark Wood and Jack Leach will come in. It wouldn't surprise me, either, if Craig Overton played for one of Broad or Anderson.
----
So they are going to ban Robinson for something he did 10 years ago, but pick somebody who got done for making racist comments of batsmen.
If it was something done before someone was playing not just for them but for any professional team, then is it really disciplinary action? It's punitive action, certainly, but it's not disciplinary. I can see such action being appropriate in theory, but after such a length of time with, it appears, not recent repeat? Come on.
I would think Ollie Robinson would miss out at Edgbaston with some disciplinary action. I think it's the right decision. Potentially Olly Stone will come in for Mark Wood and Jack Leach will come in. It wouldn't surprise me, either, if Craig Overton played for one of Broad or Anderson.
----
So they are going to ban Robinson for something he did 10 years ago, but pick somebody who got done for making racist comments of batsmen.
Which has nothing whatever to do with the English hierarchy’s great reluctance to take Robinson to Australia where they believe he won’t be effective, despite the fact Jason Gillespie thought otherwise and when he played for England Lions in Oz he took seven wickets.
The French eat all.kill kinds of filthy food No.lessons from the frogs(legs) thank-you.
Our first cultural day out post lockdown. Music from the shows at Chichester Festival theatrel.
It pains me to say this but the French produce better food than us Brits.
They have the Michelin Guide, we have Wetherspoons, the deep fried Mars bar, and Little Chefs.
While that was true 30 years ago, I'm not sure it's true today.
Britain has had a bit of a food revolution, with the quality of cuisine in gastropubs and the number of truly world class restaurants having increased markedly.
This doesn't mean you can't eat sensationally well in France (see Guy Savoy in Paris), but in general, small town French restaurants have gone backwards, while the UK has done nothing but improve.
Isn't that what a former PBer has been telling us for years ?
Would you be taking your gastronomic opinions from Mr T ?
One doesn't need to listen to MrT to see the rise in the number of British restaurants ranked among the world's elite.
When I was 19 years old, my parents took me to a restaurant called Tante Claire in London. At the time, it was one of just two Michelin Three Star restaraunts in the whole of the UK (along with the Waterside Inn).
There's now seven or eight (I don't know whether Araki is still on the list).
There's been a similar growth in the number of two and one star restaurants.
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
I would think Ollie Robinson would miss out at Edgbaston with some disciplinary action. I think it's the right decision. Potentially Olly Stone will come in for Mark Wood and Jack Leach will come in. It wouldn't surprise me, either, if Craig Overton played for one of Broad or Anderson.
----
So they are going to ban Robinson for something he did 10 years ago, but pick somebody who got done for making racist comments of batsmen.
Ollie Robinson is 42 - 11 - 101 - 7 for the match, aside from Burns he's been our best player.
Congratulations, and that name is just trying a bit too hard.
It'd be like me declaring a fatwa and launching a intifada against this site and calling my next son Mike Robert TSE Royale.
Short price for the first criticism of choice of name!
Yeah, but I mean COME ON.
"Lilibet" Diana?
I wish the kid all the best, but it's nauseating.
Absolutely, because no parent has ever named their sprog after family members.
I mean the Queen has the same name as her mother.
Lilibet is an affectionate (and private) family nickname for the Queen.
It's shameless self aggrandisement.
Why do I get the feeling no matter what they named their daughter you and the Mail would have been complaining.
If they picked a modern name you'd be saying it was hopelessly woke.
How remiss of them not to get approval from the pb reactionaries before finalising the name, how will they ever recover?
It's just gauche, like naming a boy 'Dick 'Dicky' Smith' - with the added sting that 'Dick' was the cherished nickname of the family patriarch in whose face you'd been spitting at every opportunity. Sad to instrumentalize their own child like that.
People really need to chill the heck out.
'Gauche instrumentalising' really? Even if it was, is throwing hissy fits on behalf of the Queen, who for all we know is delighted, a rational reaction?
No intention of being the Queen's spokesman; it just strikes me as a thoroughly avoidable lapse of taste and decorum. The fact that they were either unwilling or unable to avoid it rather symbolizes why their relationship to the rest of the family has become as fraught as it is.
They weren't unwilling or unable to avoid it. They went out of their way to create an utterly tasteless portmanteau name. Lucky she's been born in to money with parents as daft as that.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
How about, however many overs you are short for the first innings, those who bowled cannot bowl in the second innings until after that number of overs in the second innings?
EDIT: The five who bowled the most overs to prevent everyone having a bowl in the first innings.
30 overs a session requirement - if they're slow then the intervals are reduced.
The French eat all.kill kinds of filthy food No.lessons from the frogs(legs) thank-you.
Our first cultural day out post lockdown. Music from the shows at Chichester Festival theatrel.
It pains me to say this but the French produce better food than us Brits.
They have the Michelin Guide, we have Wetherspoons, the deep fried Mars bar, and Little Chefs.
While that was true 30 years ago, I'm not sure it's true today.
Britain has had a bit of a food revolution, with the quality of cuisine in gastropubs and the number of truly world class restaurants having increased markedly.
This doesn't mean you can't eat sensationally well in France (see Guy Savoy in Paris), but in general, small town French restaurants have gone backwards, while the UK has done nothing but improve.
Isn't that what a former PBer has been telling us for years ?
Would you be taking your gastronomic opinions from Mr T ?
One doesn't need to listen to MrT to see the rise in the number of British restaurants ranked among the world's elite.
When I was 19 years old, my parents took me to a restaurant called Tante Claire in London. At the time, it was one of just two Michelin Three Star restaraunts in the whole of the UK (along with the Waterside Inn).
There's now seven or eight (I don't know whether Araki is still on the list).
There's been a similar growth in the number of two and one star restaurants.
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
The Glasshouse at Kew is well worth a visit, if you are in London
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
I’ve never got particularly worked up about slow over rates, except where clearly being used as a deliberate, and blatant ploy in specific match situations (a run chase, or declaration period). Complaints and suggested “solutions” also tend to ignore the extent to which batting teams and yes, even the umpires, often contribute to what’s happening. Things like DRS etc do also make a significant difference to cricket of the distant past. Clamping down too hard can often even undermine the spectator experience, when captains start bringing on part-timers to race through the overs, when the match situation might otherwise be quite interesting.
I also people often are far too apt to use the phrase “spectators aren’t getting their money’s worth” (implying they should get money back) without fully acknowledging why this will always be a non-starter - basically accept the principle that people are paying to see a set number of overs and you open the door to refunds for any pay lost to bad weather etc.
I think also the role of the TV companies in wanting breaks in play to show their advertising etc is usually overlooked.
So basically it’s all a big conspiracy, not just the “fault” of fielding sides.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Edit - I shall of course withdraw all this if England score 140 off the last 20 overs. Likely chance.
This was perhaps the most depressing England batting display I've seen:
The French eat all.kill kinds of filthy food No.lessons from the frogs(legs) thank-you.
Our first cultural day out post lockdown. Music from the shows at Chichester Festival theatrel.
It pains me to say this but the French produce better food than us Brits.
They have the Michelin Guide, we have Wetherspoons, the deep fried Mars bar, and Little Chefs.
While that was true 30 years ago, I'm not sure it's true today.
Britain has had a bit of a food revolution, with the quality of cuisine in gastropubs and the number of truly world class restaurants having increased markedly.
This doesn't mean you can't eat sensationally well in France (see Guy Savoy in Paris), but in general, small town French restaurants have gone backwards, while the UK has done nothing but improve.
Isn't that what a former PBer has been telling us for years ?
Would you be taking your gastronomic opinions from Mr T ?
One doesn't need to listen to MrT to see the rise in the number of British restaurants ranked among the world's elite.
When I was 19 years old, my parents took me to a restaurant called Tante Claire in London. At the time, it was one of just two Michelin Three Star restaraunts in the whole of the UK (along with the Waterside Inn).
There's now seven or eight (I don't know whether Araki is still on the list).
There's been a similar growth in the number of two and one star restaurants.
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
Speaking of nicknames, does anybody else have a problem with using them to people? I hate nicknames and believe Brian Clough used to as well for example.
At work, a couple of people like to be called their initials and especially this I refuse to engage in .
I don't care for them. I started smoking very young and at school was called Woodbine. Once they stick they stick. It wasn't terrible - in fact it lessened the isolating effect of my relentless top grades - but I'd have preferred my actual given name. And my parents didn't like it, especially my mum.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
How about, however many overs you are short for the first innings, those who bowled cannot bowl in the second innings until after that number of overs in the second innings?
EDIT: The five who bowled the most overs to prevent everyone having a bowl in the first innings.
30 overs a session requirement - if they're slow then the intervals are reduced.
but only for the bowling side . Batsmen should still be able to have lunch
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
For those of us who don't frequent Michelin restaurants, it's fair to say there has been a huge improvement in the quality of food out there. Even in my part of London, there are plenty of good places to eat (and some bad ones as well to be fair).
Pub food, as others have said, has undergone a revolution and there are some extremely good meals to be had at some of London's suburban pubs (a shameless plug for the Cuckfield at Wanstead).
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Edit - I shall of course withdraw all this if England score 140 off the last 20 overs. Likely chance.
This was perhaps the most depressing England batting display I've seen:
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
How about, however many overs you are short for the first innings, those who bowled cannot bowl in the second innings until after that number of overs in the second innings?
EDIT: The five who bowled the most overs to prevent everyone having a bowl in the first innings.
30 overs a session requirement - if they're slow then the intervals are reduced.
The session after tea is always the longest so that wouldn't work. An uninterrupted test should be 450 overs (90 overs per day, 5 days); 6 hours of playtime / day @ 15 overs per hour = an over every 4 minutes of playing time. If there are rain delays then the 4 minutes / over of active play time should still stand.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Edit - I shall of course withdraw all this if England score 140 off the last 20 overs. Likely chance.
This was perhaps the most depressing England batting display I've seen:
Admittedly, four of the wickets should have been no balls.
There was little or no risk in the Karachi match - there were always going to be able to go off for the light if they lost wickets.
I was thinking of the second Test at Manchester. Saqlain Mushtaq bowled several no balls that even Mohammed Asif would have blinked at, all of them missed by the umpire and four of which took wickets.
The French eat all.kill kinds of filthy food No.lessons from the frogs(legs) thank-you.
Our first cultural day out post lockdown. Music from the shows at Chichester Festival theatrel.
It pains me to say this but the French produce better food than us Brits.
They have the Michelin Guide, we have Wetherspoons, the deep fried Mars bar, and Little Chefs.
While that was true 30 years ago, I'm not sure it's true today.
Britain has had a bit of a food revolution, with the quality of cuisine in gastropubs and the number of truly world class restaurants having increased markedly.
This doesn't mean you can't eat sensationally well in France (see Guy Savoy in Paris), but in general, small town French restaurants have gone backwards, while the UK has done nothing but improve.
Isn't that what a former PBer has been telling us for years ?
Would you be taking your gastronomic opinions from Mr T ?
One doesn't need to listen to MrT to see the rise in the number of British restaurants ranked among the world's elite.
When I was 19 years old, my parents took me to a restaurant called Tante Claire in London. At the time, it was one of just two Michelin Three Star restaraunts in the whole of the UK (along with the Waterside Inn).
There's now seven or eight (I don't know whether Araki is still on the list).
There's been a similar growth in the number of two and one star restaurants.
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
Tante Claire closed about 15 years ago!
Must have ran out of unconscionable ties to lend to scruffs
The French eat all.kill kinds of filthy food No.lessons from the frogs(legs) thank-you.
Our first cultural day out post lockdown. Music from the shows at Chichester Festival theatrel.
It pains me to say this but the French produce better food than us Brits.
They have the Michelin Guide, we have Wetherspoons, the deep fried Mars bar, and Little Chefs.
While that was true 30 years ago, I'm not sure it's true today.
Britain has had a bit of a food revolution, with the quality of cuisine in gastropubs and the number of truly world class restaurants having increased markedly.
This doesn't mean you can't eat sensationally well in France (see Guy Savoy in Paris), but in general, small town French restaurants have gone backwards, while the UK has done nothing but improve.
Isn't that what a former PBer has been telling us for years ?
Would you be taking your gastronomic opinions from Mr T ?
One doesn't need to listen to MrT to see the rise in the number of British restaurants ranked among the world's elite.
When I was 19 years old, my parents took me to a restaurant called Tante Claire in London. At the time, it was one of just two Michelin Three Star restaraunts in the whole of the UK (along with the Waterside Inn).
There's now seven or eight (I don't know whether Araki is still on the list).
There's been a similar growth in the number of two and one star restaurants.
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
Tante Claire closed about 15 years ago!
Must have ran out of unconscionable ties to lend to scruffs
They sold it to Gordon Ramsay, so the whole establishment would have been a low class dive after that.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
How about, however many overs you are short for the first innings, those who bowled cannot bowl in the second innings until after that number of overs in the second innings?
EDIT: The five who bowled the most overs to prevent everyone having a bowl in the first innings.
30 overs a session requirement - if they're slow then the intervals are reduced.
The session after tea is always the longest so that wouldn't work. An uninterrupted test should be 450 overs (90 overs per day, 5 days); 6 hours of playtime / day @ 15 overs per hour = an over every 4 minutes of playing time. If there are rain delays then the 4 minutes / over of active play time should still stand.
Have you ever been to a Lords test? For many of the spectators the intervals aren’t long enough! The thing is that many people just see a test match as a day out. It’s not just watching 90 overs of cricket.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Edit - I shall of course withdraw all this if England score 140 off the last 20 overs. Likely chance.
This was perhaps the most depressing England batting display I've seen:
Admittedly, four of the wickets should have been no balls.
There was little or no risk in the Karachi match - there were always going to be able to go off for the light if they lost wickets.
I was thinking of the second Test at Manchester. Saqlain Mushtaq bowled several no balls that even Mohammed Asif would have blinked at, all of them missed by the umpire and four of which took wickets.
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
For those of us who don't frequent Michelin restaurants, it's fair to say there has been a huge improvement in the quality of food out there. Even in my part of London, there are plenty of good places to eat (and some bad ones as well to be fair).
Pub food, as others have said, has undergone a revolution and there are some extremely good meals to be had at some of London's suburban pubs (a shameless plug for the Cuckfield at Wanstead).
And in Millom, of course, where even the waitresses are highly experienced criminal lawyers and the food is exquisite.
(Please make the cheque out to Y Doethur, Cyclefree.)
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
I’ve never got particularly worked up about slow over rates, except where clearly being used as a deliberate, and blatant ploy in specific match situations (a run chase, or declaration period). Complaints and suggested “solutions” also tend to ignore the extent to which batting teams and yes, even the umpires, often contribute to what’s happening. Things like DRS etc do also make a significant difference to cricket of the distant past. Clamping down too hard can often even undermine the spectator experience, when captains start bringing on part-timers to race through the overs, when the match situation might otherwise be quite interesting.
I also people often are far too apt to use the phrase “spectators aren’t getting their money’s worth” (implying they should get money back) without fully acknowledging why this will always be a non-starter - basically accept the principle that people are paying to see a set number of overs and you open the door to refunds for any pay lost to bad weather etc.
I think also the role of the TV companies in wanting breaks in play to show their advertising etc is usually overlooked.
So basically it’s all a big conspiracy, not just the “fault” of fielding sides.
15 overs an hour is not particularly quick, and yes it is the fault of the fielding side 90% of the time. To name names, Stuart Broad is particularly bad for constantly resetting fields and taking an age to get through his overs. The third umpire can 'stop the clock' for DRS reviews and so forth, there's an extra half hour for 'stuff' built in and a change of innings is known to cost 2 overs.
Congratulations, and that name is just trying a bit too hard.
It'd be like me declaring a fatwa and launching a intifada against this site and calling my next son Mike Robert TSE Royale.
Short price for the first criticism of choice of name!
Yeah, but I mean COME ON.
"Lilibet" Diana?
I wish the kid all the best, but it's nauseating.
Absolutely, because no parent has ever named their sprog after family members.
I mean the Queen has the same name as her mother.
Nice idea from them, but I don’t like nicknames as the official name for kids really. Elizabeth known as ‘Lilibet’ would have been nicer, but then again maybe that’s just me being old fashioned.
Who cares what the Queen is called in private? Who cares what anyone is called in private? The determination to peek inside one family’s life is completely bizarre.
I've always felt that M'lud with a doff of the cap was acceptable to the 'My Lord' I usually would require.
Harry really needs to stop this crap or do a DNA test.
The obsession with one family you have never met is beyond bizarre.
You individually telling two dozen people that no one but them is interested in a topic is one of my fav PB things
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
For those of us who don't frequent Michelin restaurants, it's fair to say there has been a huge improvement in the quality of food out there. Even in my part of London, there are plenty of good places to eat (and some bad ones as well to be fair).
Pub food, as others have said, has undergone a revolution and there are some extremely good meals to be had at some of London's suburban pubs (a shameless plug for the Cuckfield at Wanstead).
If you look for Michelin Bib Gourmand restaurants you’ll find very good food without the “consommé of chefs tears, sputum and curdled semen” at the 3* places. They cook for you not for the chef’s ego.
Anyone who thinks that France is the start and finish of good restaurants is living in the past. FWIW I used to live in Paris (in the 18th and work at place du Marche St. Honore) so this isn’t just sub-Telegraph “all French are evil”.
Tainte Claire is a place I've not visited for ages. It used to be great. I stopped going because I chose to buy dinner for a French chap that turned up without a tie - they insisted that he had one of theirs. I might be wrong in my recollection, but I'm sure I'd have visited again otherwise.
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
For those of us who don't frequent Michelin restaurants, it's fair to say there has been a huge improvement in the quality of food out there. Even in my part of London, there are plenty of good places to eat (and some bad ones as well to be fair).
Pub food, as others have said, has undergone a revolution and there are some extremely good meals to be had at some of London's suburban pubs (a shameless plug for the Cuckfield at Wanstead).
99.9% of the food I ever eat is not flash. I like baked beans on toast. Admittedly I might add some Tabasco sauce to the beans and be slightly fussy about the bread that I toast.
Even at the height of expense accounts I'd guess that 99% of what I ate was simple food.
Just once in a while though the expense is rewarded by really good food.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Edit - I shall of course withdraw all this if England score 140 off the last 20 overs. Likely chance.
This was perhaps the most depressing England batting display I've seen:
Admittedly, four of the wickets should have been no balls.
There was little or no risk in the Karachi match - there were always going to be able to go off for the light if they lost wickets.
I was thinking of the second Test at Manchester. Saqlain Mushtaq bowled several no balls that even Mohammed Asif would have blinked at, all of them missed by the umpire and four of which took wickets.
Not just any umpire, David Shepherd.
A rare dud test from him.
Edit - from his obituary:
At Old Trafford in 2001, Shepherd had a rare bad match against Pakistan, missing at least two no-balls that took wickets. He was so upset he tried to resign, and also forgot to skip on 333. That, he concluded, was responsible for a small earthquake off the North Devon coast.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Edit - I shall of course withdraw all this if England score 140 off the last 20 overs. Likely chance.
This was perhaps the most depressing England batting display I've seen:
Admittedly, four of the wickets should have been no balls.
There was little or no risk in the Karachi match - there were always going to be able to go off for the light if they lost wickets.
I was thinking of the second Test at Manchester. Saqlain Mushtaq bowled several no balls that even Mohammed Asif would have blinked at, all of them missed by the umpire and four of which took wickets.
Not just any umpire, David Shepherd.
A rare dud test from him.
The thing was the third umpire repeatedly told Shepherd that the Pakistani spinners were bowling massive no balls and to keep an eye on it throughout that final day.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Edit - I shall of course withdraw all this if England score 140 off the last 20 overs. Likely chance.
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Congratulations, and that name is just trying a bit too hard.
It'd be like me declaring a fatwa and launching a intifada against this site and calling my next son Mike Robert TSE Royale.
Short price for the first criticism of choice of name!
Yeah, but I mean COME ON.
"Lilibet" Diana?
I wish the kid all the best, but it's nauseating.
Absolutely, because no parent has ever named their sprog after family members.
I mean the Queen has the same name as her mother.
Nice idea from them, but I don’t like nicknames as the official name for kids really. Elizabeth known as ‘Lilibet’ would have been nicer, but then again maybe that’s just me being old fashioned.
Who cares what the Queen is called in private? Who cares what anyone is called in private? The determination to peek inside one family’s life is completely bizarre.
There was a great story about HM the Q and the Duke of Edinburgh going to a school for deaf children. The Queen had a wonderful time and was running late. The Duke leaned into her and said something. The children all roared with laughter - he had forgotten they could all lip read.
What they had learned was his nickname for the Queen, when he said "C'mon Cabbage, time to go...."
Yes, two undoubted good things about Britain in the last 20 years: real ale has been saved, and is more delicious and varied than ever, and our food is now outstanding.
God, I remember how bloody awful British food, drink and hotels were even in the 1990s. Never again.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
How about, however many overs you are short for the first innings, those who bowled cannot bowl in the second innings until after that number of overs in the second innings?
EDIT: The five who bowled the most overs to prevent everyone having a bowl in the first innings.
30 overs a session requirement - if they're slow then the intervals are reduced.
The session after tea is always the longest so that wouldn't work. An uninterrupted test should be 450 overs (90 overs per day, 5 days); 6 hours of playtime / day @ 15 overs per hour = an over every 4 minutes of playing time. If there are rain delays then the 4 minutes / over of active play time should still stand.
Have you ever been to a Lords test? For many of the spectators the intervals aren’t long enough! The thing is that many people just see a test match as a day out. It’s not just watching 90 overs of cricket.
Whilst i get that people dont necessarily come to watch a test to see 90 overs bowled and get pissed off because only 85 are , cricket has to be careful because if draws become more frequent due to slow over rates (or even too flat pitches) then test cricket will become pointless. Most spectators dont mind a thrilling draw due to batsman holding out or due to high scoring first innings (if not a result of a too dull pitch) but dont want to pay to see draws caused by slow over rates .
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
George Galloway puff piece, but if he does get above 10% then that's more of less Labour done and dusted, surely followed by him getting IDS'd.
However, if Labour want a leader from outside of London it's extremely slim pickings.
Milliband and Cooper weren't the answer back then, and both are likely to lose their seats as things stand. Jarvis and Lavery (ew) have a similar problem.
They're basically left with Nandy, who is just about safe, RLB, Rayner, Phillips, Reeves, and errrr Luke Pollard?
Losing Batley won't mean the end of SKS. He has a year to turn things around.
Frankly it should do! I was perfectly content to give Starmer time to recover from the extended period during which normal party politics has been in abeyance. There was really nothing at all that he could have done to prevent the 'vacine bounce'.He has alienated me - bigtime - by gifting Labour seats to the Tories by calling unnecessary by elections at stupid times. It has really persuaded me that there is something seriously missing in him in terms of what is required of a party leader. His grasp of psephology appears to be minimal , and he has failed to surround himself with others who are much better informed. He might as well as left the timing of the by-elections to Johnson. Perhaps he is psephologically autistic.
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Having looked it up, I can only guess Aftab Habib or Ed Giddins, though I hasten to add I remember both of their glorious contributions.
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Aftab Habib?
Yes.
Literally never heard of him. I wouldn’t have believed there was a test match player for England in the last 35 years that I wouldn’t have known
Had to rewind it about ten times to clock the name, then google
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Gavin Hamilton?
The other rather obscure player to play for England in 1999 was Peter Such (one test at Old Trafford, where he took an hour over scoring a duck).
I am assuming it’s not Ed Giddins who had a long and prominent career with Warwickshire and Sussex, or Darren Maddy, Leicestershire and later Warwickshire captain.
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Gavin Hamilton?
The other rather obscure player to play for England in 1999 was Peter Such (one test at Old Trafford, where he took an hour over scoring a duck).
I am assuming it’s not Ed Giddins who had a long and prominent career with Warwickshire and Sussex, or Darren Maddy, Leicestershire and later Warwickshire captain.
Really weird. I feel lost and listless; disconnected, like I've lost a limb. The closest feeling I can approximate it to is the early stages of a family bereavement.
Strange. This is a not a good thing. I don't want to feel this way about losing a frigging phone.
Yes, two undoubted good things about Britain in the last 20 years: real ale has been saved, and is more delicious and varied than ever, and our food is now outstanding.
God, I remember how bloody awful British food, drink and hotels were even in the 1990s. Never again.
Its almost as if theme tunes for sport programmes is in inverse correlation to food at British eateries in terms of quality
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Aftab Habib?
Yes.
Literally never heard of him. I wouldn’t have believed there was a test match player for England in the last 35 years that I wouldn’t have known
Played for Leicestershire in their championship winning season of 1998, making 114 to beat Surrey and win the title in the final match. Called up on the strength of that when England needed more runs, failed and eventually finished his career as a spare part at Essex.
Congratulations, and that name is just trying a bit too hard.
It'd be like me declaring a fatwa and launching a intifada against this site and calling my next son Mike Robert TSE Royale.
Short price for the first criticism of choice of name!
Yeah, but I mean COME ON.
"Lilibet" Diana?
I wish the kid all the best, but it's nauseating.
Absolutely, because no parent has ever named their sprog after family members.
I mean the Queen has the same name as her mother.
Nice idea from them, but I don’t like nicknames as the official name for kids really. Elizabeth known as ‘Lilibet’ would have been nicer, but then again maybe that’s just me being old fashioned.
Who cares what the Queen is called in private? Who cares what anyone is called in private? The determination to peek inside one family’s life is completely bizarre.
I've always felt that M'lud with a doff of the cap was acceptable to the 'My Lord' I usually would require.
Harry really needs to stop this crap or do a DNA test.
The obsession with one family you have never met is beyond bizarre.
When you say obsession then you'd suggest I've posted about them before I presume?
Cheddar Cheese, Apple Crumble, Coronation Chicken, Mrs King’s Pork Pies, Roast Beef and Horseradish Sandwiches, Stilton, Cumberland Sausage, Marmalade, Dover Sole, Clotted Cream and Jam Scones, Haggis, Stout, Rhubarb and Custard, Chips, Chips, Chips, Bakewell Tart etc etc etc etc
Obviously we cannot compete with French, Italian and Japanese which are all God Tier.
It is still not possible to dine “serendipitously” outside of London, like it is in France.
Good list, but I'm not sure how much you've travelled outside of London recently?
The food in Hampshire is very good to phenomenal in most places - it has to be, or they'd close - and that's also the case in Dorset, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall.
I wonder if there's a strange symbiosis going on here with the smoking ban and change in attitudes to drink-driving here - good food is almost the only way rural hostelries can now survive.
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Gavin Hamilton?
The other rather obscure player to play for England in 1999 was Peter Such (one test at Old Trafford, where he took an hour over scoring a duck).
I am assuming it’s not Ed Giddins who had a long and prominent career with Warwickshire and Sussex, or Darren Maddy, Leicestershire and later Warwickshire captain.
I wouldn't call Peter Such obscure.
I remember Such playing loads of Tests. Or were they ODIs? I remember him always looking as if he was in pain.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
I’ve never got particularly worked up about slow over rates, except where clearly being used as a deliberate, and blatant ploy in specific match situations (a run chase, or declaration period). Complaints and suggested “solutions” also tend to ignore the extent to which batting teams and yes, even the umpires, often contribute to what’s happening. Things like DRS etc do also make a significant difference to cricket of the distant past. Clamping down too hard can often even undermine the spectator experience, when captains start bringing on part-timers to race through the overs, when the match situation might otherwise be quite interesting.
I also people often are far too apt to use the phrase “spectators aren’t getting their money’s worth” (implying they should get money back) without fully acknowledging why this will always be a non-starter - basically accept the principle that people are paying to see a set number of overs and you open the door to refunds for any pay lost to bad weather etc.
I think also the role of the TV companies in wanting breaks in play to show their advertising etc is usually overlooked.
So basically it’s all a big conspiracy, not just the “fault” of fielding sides.
15 overs an hour is not particularly quick, and yes it is the fault of the fielding side 90% of the time. To name names, Stuart Broad is particularly bad for constantly resetting fields and taking an age to get through his overs. The third umpire can 'stop the clock' for DRS reviews and so forth, there's an extra half hour for 'stuff' built in and a change of innings is known to cost 2 overs.
I doubt there are more than a handful of bowlers in a similar profile to Broad who bowl their overs at 15+ an hour. There is also no “golden age” in living (to most) memory when things were any different (in fact in the 80s it was probably far worse, especially when accounting for DRS etc). The thing is, even if it is often the “fault” of the fielding side, once you start trying to penalise them in real time, the batting team will rapidly find ways to slow them down.
You can say that third umpire makes allowance for things like DRS breaks etc (indeed they do, when considering citing captains under existing rules), but this doesn’t feed into reported over-rates only penalties.
Really weird. I feel lost and listless; disconnected, like I've lost a limb. The closest feeling I can approximate it to is the early stages of a family bereavement.
Strange. This is a not a good thing. I don't want to feel this way about losing a frigging phone.
Bloody hell. Sorry to hear that. And yes. That is a misapplication of priorities.
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Aftab Habib?
Yes.
Literally never heard of him. I wouldn’t have believed there was a test match player for England in the last 35 years that I wouldn’t have known
Had to rewind it about ten times to clock the name, then google
To be fair many England cricket fans have repressed large parts of the 1990s.
Wisden do a lot of quizzes like this and it is a great reminder of who has played for England.
It is bleeding very gradually through and out of Lancashire - cases keep rising in Manchester, and are on the rise in Cheshire as well - but compared to the Kent catastrophe it's all pretty pedestrian. And, much more importantly, it's only had a modest effect on hospital admissions and almost none on deaths.
Again, the catastrophe stubbornly fails to materialise. The publicity seekers on ISAGE must be tearing their hair out.
Really weird. I feel lost and listless; disconnected, like I've lost a limb. The closest feeling I can approximate it to is the early stages of a family bereavement.
Strange. This is a not a good thing. I don't want to feel this way about losing a frigging phone.
Bloody hell. Sorry to hear that. And yes. That is a misapplication of priorities.
You are posting now hence you found it?
Thanks. No, I haven't found it, sadly. I'm sulking on my desktop at home.
You're getting the brunt of it so my wife doesn't have to deal with it.
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Aftab Habib?
Yes.
Literally never heard of him. I wouldn’t have believed there was a test match player for England in the last 35 years that I wouldn’t have known
Had to rewind it about ten times to clock the name, then google
To be fair many England cricket fans have repressed large parts of the 1990s.
Wisden do a lot of quizzes like this and it is a great reminder of who has played for England.
Much more important than the name of some offspring, I reckon England cricket has taken a turn for the worse today. If I was at Lords I'd be pretty pissed off and maybe booing. A very generous declaration from NZ, but no effort by England to get the runs before shutting up shop. They could have sought to rotate the strike for the first 30 overs or so, then had a dash, before defending if wickets were lost. You don't need big hitters to get a target of less than 4 an over.
My other major complaint is the over rate in all form of cricket these days. When I was a lad, 20 overs an hour was the norm. Not this constant fiddling with the field, and drinks breaks. Poor value for money now.
Yes, pretty poor show from England
There's just no appropriate punishment for poor over rates. 5 runs added to the opponent's score for each deemed slow over would soon cut it out.
How about, however many overs you are short for the first innings, those who bowled cannot bowl in the second innings until after that number of overs in the second innings?
EDIT: The five who bowled the most overs to prevent everyone having a bowl in the first innings.
30 overs a session requirement - if they're slow then the intervals are reduced.
The session after tea is always the longest so that wouldn't work. An uninterrupted test should be 450 overs (90 overs per day, 5 days); 6 hours of playtime / day @ 15 overs per hour = an over every 4 minutes of playing time. If there are rain delays then the 4 minutes / over of active play time should still stand.
But the extra length of the third session would be much reduced as it would only be the third set of 30 overs which would be extending play rather than the whole 90.
Cheddar Cheese, Apple Crumble, Coronation Chicken, Mrs King’s Pork Pies, Roast Beef and Horseradish Sandwiches, Stilton, Cumberland Sausage, Marmalade, Dover Sole, Clotted Cream and Jam Scones, Haggis, Stout, Rhubarb and Custard, Chips, Chips, Chips, Bakewell Tart etc etc etc etc
Obviously we cannot compete with French, Italian and Japanese which are all God Tier.
It is still not possible to dine “serendipitously” outside of London, like it is in France.
Good list, but I'm not sure how much you've travelled outside of London recently?
The food in Hampshire is very good to phenomenal in most places - it has to be, or they'd close - and that's also the case in Dorset, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall.
I wonder if there's a strange symbiosis going on here with the smoking ban and change in attitudes to drink-driving here - good food is almost the only way rural hostelries can now survive.
I was in the Kentish Weald last week. I guess it’s got better? It’s hard to remember what it was like twenty years ago.
But I stand by my claim that serendipitous dining is not really possible, as in you can’t pull into any random pub and expect well cooked, local fare.
Whereas even motorway services in France will give you a decent meal.
On Friday, when it was raining at Lords, they showed highlights of a Test match from 1999, and there was an England player I had never heard of playing. I am a relative anorak on cricket and couldn’t believe what I was seeing or hearing. I’d never heard of him as a county player even, let alone ‘I didn’t realise he’d played for England’
Anyone guess the player?
Gavin Hamilton?
The other rather obscure player to play for England in 1999 was Peter Such (one test at Old Trafford, where he took an hour over scoring a duck).
I am assuming it’s not Ed Giddins who had a long and prominent career with Warwickshire and Sussex, or Darren Maddy, Leicestershire and later Warwickshire captain.
I wouldn't call Peter Such obscure.
I remember Such playing loads of Tests. Or were they ODIs? I remember him always looking as if he was in pain.
Eleven Tests. Largely when they couldn’t think of anyone else to try out.
Played quite a lot of first class though.
As of course did Aftab Habib and Gavin Hamilton.
What did Hamilton and Such have in common, along with Mike Denness?
It hasn't reopened yet, but this is one of my favourites - sublime and indulgent food, and beds that feel like heaven. A totally English and fully relaxing romantic experience. Get the train to Yeovil Junction, and switch off - completely:
I would think Ollie Robinson would miss out at Edgbaston with some disciplinary action. I think it's the right decision. Potentially Olly Stone will come in for Mark Wood and Jack Leach will come in. It wouldn't surprise me, either, if Craig Overton played for one of Broad or Anderson.
----
So they are going to ban Robinson for something he did 10 years ago, but pick somebody who got done for making racist comments of batsmen.
If it was something done before someone was playing not just for them but for any professional team, then is it really disciplinary action? It's punitive action, certainly, but it's not disciplinary. I can see such action being appropriate in theory, but after such a length of time with, it appears, not recent repeat? Come on.
He was in between professional contracts at Kent and Yorkshire at the time, so that defence doesn't really apply.
Comments
When I was 19 years old, my parents took me to a restaurant called Tante Claire in London. At the time, it was one of just two Michelin Three Star restaraunts in the whole of the UK (along with the Waterside Inn).
There's now seven or eight (I don't know whether Araki is still on the list).
There's been a similar growth in the number of two and one star restaurants.
Harry really needs to stop this crap or do a DNA test.
EDIT: The five who bowled the most overs to prevent everyone having a bowl in the first innings.
Former England captain on BBC Test Match Special
I would think Ollie Robinson would miss out at Edgbaston with some disciplinary action. I think it's the right decision. Potentially Olly Stone will come in for Mark Wood and Jack Leach will come in. It wouldn't surprise me, either, if Craig Overton played for one of Broad or Anderson.
----
So they are going to ban Robinson for something he did 10 years ago, but pick somebody who got done for making racist comments of batsmen.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/pakistan-tour-of-england-2001-61459/england-vs-pakistan-2nd-test-63933/full-scorecard
200 more needed from the last two sessions with 9 wickets in hand, didn't go for the runs, still lost.
All the more disappointing as they had chased down a total in the Karachi dark a few months earlier:
https://www.espncricinfo.com/series/england-tour-of-pakistan-2000-01-61759/pakistan-vs-england-3rd-test-63901/full-scorecard
My guest (the French chap) was uncomfortable throughout the evening and as such basically not only ruined, but went against the whole point of the dinner. It was an unconscionable tie that they lent him.
The big London restaurant is, in my view, on the decline. And precisely for this sort of crap.
I'd like to tell you of the best places, but those I suspect I can't get a booking
I also people often are far too apt to use the phrase “spectators aren’t getting their money’s worth” (implying they should get money back) without fully acknowledging why this will always be a non-starter - basically accept the principle that people are paying to see a set number of overs and you open the door to refunds for any pay lost to bad weather etc.
I think also the role of the TV companies in wanting breaks in play to show their advertising etc is usually overlooked.
So basically it’s all a big conspiracy, not just the “fault” of fielding sides.
Wow. Even for the scraping of the barrel hatred this couple attracts for no sane reason, that is low.
Pub food, as others have said, has undergone a revolution and there are some extremely good meals to be had at some of London's suburban pubs (a shameless plug for the Cuckfield at Wanstead).
An uninterrupted test should be 450 overs (90 overs per day, 5 days); 6 hours of playtime / day @ 15 overs per hour = an over every 4 minutes of playing time. If there are rain delays then the 4 minutes / over of active play time should still stand.
(Please make the cheque out to Y Doethur, Cyclefree.)
The third umpire can 'stop the clock' for DRS reviews and so forth, there's an extra half hour for 'stuff' built in and a change of innings is known to cost 2 overs.
Anyone who thinks that France is the start and finish of good restaurants is living in the past. FWIW I used to live in Paris (in the 18th and work at place du Marche St. Honore) so this isn’t just sub-Telegraph “all French are evil”.
See eg: https://guide.michelin.com/gb/en/greater-london/london/restaurant/provender
Cheddar Cheese, Apple Crumble, Coronation Chicken, Mrs King’s Pork Pies, Roast Beef and Horseradish Sandwiches, Stilton, Cumberland Sausage, Marmalade, Dover Sole, Clotted Cream and Jam Scones, Haggis, Stout, Rhubarb and Custard, Chips, Chips, Chips, Bakewell Tart etc etc etc etc
Obviously we cannot compete with French, Italian and Japanese which are all God Tier.
It is still not possible to dine “serendipitously” outside of London, like it is in France.
Even at the height of expense accounts I'd guess that 99% of what I ate was simple food.
Just once in a while though the expense is rewarded by really good food.
Edit - from his obituary:
At Old Trafford in 2001, Shepherd had a rare bad match against Pakistan, missing at least two no-balls that took wickets. He was so upset he tried to resign, and also forgot to skip on 333. That, he concluded, was responsible for a small earthquake off the North Devon coast.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/story/david-shepherd-473023
Rashford (pen)
Anyone guess the player?
What they had learned was his nickname for the Queen, when he said "C'mon Cabbage, time to go...."
Yes, two undoubted good things about Britain in the last 20 years: real ale has been saved, and is more delicious and varied than ever, and our food is now outstanding.
God, I remember how bloody awful British food, drink and hotels were even in the 1990s. Never again.
(To my mind this is a really weird difference. How can the recipe not have spread.)
Great save
Literally never heard of him. I wouldn’t have believed there was a test match player for England in the last 35 years that I wouldn’t have known
Had to rewind it about ten times to clock the name, then google
I am assuming it’s not Ed Giddins who had a long and prominent career with Warwickshire and Sussex, or Darren Maddy, Leicestershire and later Warwickshire captain.
Really weird. I feel lost and listless; disconnected, like I've lost a limb. The closest feeling I can approximate it to is the early stages of a family bereavement.
Strange. This is a not a good thing. I don't want to feel this way about losing a frigging phone.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSP1E04zp5Y
Maybe all the country's theme tune talent retrained as chefs?
Try to find an example.
Turns out there are none. Hang your head.
The food in Hampshire is very good to phenomenal in most places - it has to be, or they'd close - and that's also the case in Dorset, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall.
I wonder if there's a strange symbiosis going on here with the smoking ban and change in attitudes to drink-driving here - good food is almost the only way rural hostelries can now survive.
You can say that third umpire makes allowance for things like DRS breaks etc (indeed they do, when considering citing captains under existing rules), but this doesn’t feed into reported over-rates only penalties.
You are posting now hence you found it?
Wisden do a lot of quizzes like this and it is a great reminder of who has played for England.
https://wisden.com/play-and-win/quizzes/quiz-every-england-player-who-has-batted-with-alastair-cook-in-tests
https://wisden.com/category/play-and-win/quizzes
Again, the catastrophe stubbornly fails to materialise. The publicity seekers on ISAGE must be tearing their hair out.
You're getting the brunt of it so my wife doesn't have to deal with it.
A week on the North Norfolk coast next week will be the opportunity.
I will be taking the rucksack, tide tables, salt for the squirty bottle of salt water, and optimism.
https://theblizzard.co.uk/quiz-every-england-squad-since-italia-90/quiz/
Walls Sausages an obvious omission. Plus potted shrimps, black pudding, grilled kidneys, and Domino's pizza.
I guess it’s got better? It’s hard to remember what it was like twenty years ago.
But I stand by my claim that serendipitous dining is not really possible, as in you can’t pull into any random pub and expect well cooked, local fare.
Whereas even motorway services in France will give you a decent meal.
Played quite a lot of first class though.
As of course did Aftab Habib and Gavin Hamilton.
What did Hamilton and Such have in common, along with Mike Denness?
http://www.littlebarwick.co.uk/