Page 2 of 3

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 14:45
by Dark
RicheyJames wrote:
Give me a game of softball or rugby any day.
so that's baseball for girls and football for cheats. there may be no chance of saving this one.
You're thinking of rounders and American Football, where all the players feel the need to wear armour. Pansies.

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 14:51
by ruffers
RicheyJames wrote:
markfiend wrote:Gutted I can't put the radio on in work. Following the score courtesy of Channel 4's desktop scorebox, but it's not the same without Blowers, The Bearded Wonder, CMJ et al.
the grauniad's over-by-over reports are a reasonable stand-in. although i'm enjoying a streaming feed of tms in my own little office.
I go with the Guardian OBO also. Couldn't you stream radio 5 sneakily?

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 14:59
by RicheyJames
Dark wrote:
RicheyJames wrote:
Give me a game of softball or rugby any day.
so that's baseball for girls and football for cheats. there may be no chance of saving this one.
You're thinking of rounders and American Football, where all the players feel the need to wear armour. Pansies.
hmmm...
the cambridge english dictionary wrote:softball: a game similar to baseball but played with a larger, softer ball.
sounds a bit girlie to me.

and the only similarity between rugby and american football is the shape of the ball. why people persist in trying to compare the two fails me.

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 15:18
by James Blast
I trained once, and once only, with one of the local American Football teams, believe you me it is not a game for wusses, those guys really have no fear

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 15:39
by emilystrange
2 for 11? here we go, then

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 15:40
by markfiend
emilystrange wrote:2 for 11? here we go, then
Wonderful innit. *sigh*

It'll all be over by Saturday :lol:

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 16:13
by ruffers
emilystrange wrote:2 for 11? here we go, then
Are you Australian?


I think they've all been told it's a one-dayer.

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 16:14
by emilystrange
and another one..

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 16:17
by markfiend
And another. 19-4.

It's not a proper summer unless England are losing.

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 16:21
by Planet Dave
You've always gotta worry when England skittle someone. It simply means we've got to back next. :urff: And so it's proving again.

Now if someone was to kneecap McGrath, we might be in with have a shout.

But probably not.

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 16:27
by nick the stripper
I prefer tennis. :|

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 16:27
by emilystrange
it was all a false alarm then

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 17:32
by RicheyJames
well that all went a bit wrong in the time it took me to get home. still, looks like these two have at least got us back on an even keel...

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 21:05
by Brideoffrankenstein
how long does cricket go on for?

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 21:50
by Francis
So is that what they call "a bowler's wicket" then? I need to know these things. Cricket's very big where I work. My career could depend on knowing where silly-mid-off is if I ever get stuck in a lift with the Chairman.

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 23:00
by Debaser
The bastards have invented a new fielding position....fly slip!! What the chuff was wrong with Man @ Deep Square














I was a huge object of ridicule earlier then whan I made a faux pax and called the above position Deep Square Man :roll:

Posted: 21 Jul 2005, 23:11
by aims
Brideoffrankenstein wrote:how long does cricket go on for?
Too long, in my book :innocent:

Posted: 22 Jul 2005, 00:23
by Planet Dave
Brideoffrankenstein wrote:how long does cricket go on for?
Not long enough.

Posted: 22 Jul 2005, 09:27
by emilystrange
a Test is scheduled for 5 days, and there are 5 Tests in the Ashes, so this will finish..oo.. semptember sometime, i guess

Posted: 22 Jul 2005, 10:29
by RicheyJames
Francis wrote:So is that what they call "a bowler's wicket" then?
well that's an interesting question. because before the kick-off everybody thought it was a good batting track. which is why the aussies chose to bat first after winning the toss. seventeen wickets in a day would seem to suggest otherwise though. i suspect, however, that what we saw yesterday was bowlers at the top of their form (on both sides) and batsmen some way short of their best.

thrilling start to the series though!

Posted: 22 Jul 2005, 10:30
by culprit
And they're off again...10.30... Isn't internet bbc radio a godsend?
although my staff hate it.

Posted: 22 Jul 2005, 11:21
by RicheyJames
hundred and fifty up for england! tenth wicket partnerships are a wonderful thing. except when it's your team who are bowling of course...

Posted: 22 Jul 2005, 11:22
by Mrs RicheyJames
Thought you said on the phone you should actually do some work?!!

Posted: 22 Jul 2005, 12:03
by Dark
Motz wrote:
Brideoffrankenstein wrote:how long does cricket go on for?
Too long, in my book :innocent:
Damn it, you got there before me. :lol:

Posted: 22 Jul 2005, 13:29
by RicheyJames
anyway, the game goes on depsite all the nonsense elsewhere in london.

hayden bowled by flintoff to leave the convicts 54-2.

things seem to have settled down a little compared with yesterday. pietersen's fireworks and harmison/jones' last wicket partnership dragged england back into the match this morning. i think there's still a lot of cricket left in this one...