Racing and Sports now moderates the Talkback forum to ensure posting guidelines are adhered to.
The views expressed on Talkback are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Racing and Sports. You must be a registered user to write postings or send messages to other users. Click here to register.
Author: saintly1996 Timestamp:- 2/2/2011 8:00:31 PM Subject: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: What will Beefy sat about Matt Prior after claiming Mitch Johnson was bowled this evening.
The reply clearly shows that he knocked the bails off, then wanted Johnson to walk.
It would be the first time ever that the bails would fall so far in front of the stumps after bowling someone.
Botham should apologise to Phil Hughes stating that players are not always sure of what goes on out on the field, or show some consistency and label Prior a cheat.
Author: Edwarddeboned Timestamp:- 10/2/2011 11:53:29 AM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: Of course a catch does not have to remain clasped in a players hands to be a catch. I player can initially hold the ball in his hands then roll on the ground dislodging the ball from his hands and have it roll across his abdomen before he regains control of it and returns it his hands. Such a manoeuvre would still qualify as a catch. Smith seem to attempt that sort of juggling act. He then turned to the umpire and asked the question. The umpire then clearly questioned him and he even more clearly shook his head and said he didn't know. The umpire then called on the third umpire to establish the bona fides of the catch. I can't see any dishonesty in any of that. The Hughes incident also involved dialogue between the player and the umpire where the player (Hughes) clearly states that he is unsure. Again I can see no dishonesty in that incident.
The incident with Mr Prior has too much stupidity in it to be dishonest. I suspect Mr Prior is a fully fledged moron.
Author: The Mighty Quinn Timestamp:- 9/2/2011 1:45:38 PM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: I'm not defending Prior he was out of order and we all know Botham's a pratt. I do wonder what would have happend if Cook had just walked. If I remember Hughes only stopped celebrating when Cook stood his ground.
As for Smith's appeal for a catch off Pietersen (I think it was) that was terrible, don't care if he could't see the ball because his body was obscuring it unless you've lost all feeling in your hands you know if you've dropped it and picked it up again that was blatant.
Author: saintly1996 Timestamp:- 9/2/2011 10:00:44 AM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: Patsy, IMO, there is a big difference between the Hughes and Prior incidents. After the days play in the test mmatch, Cook stated that Hughes told him straight away he was not sure if it carried, therefore he is not a cheat.
Prior knocked the bail off with his gloves, the bail fell forward, and he still claimed it had bowled Johnson. There is a big difference IMO, yet Botham says nothing about the Prior incident.
Message: Patsy forgets how hopeless England were for years....
In 1994 an English journalist asked the Don what he thought he would average against the current England attack. Don replies "Oh around 50 or so". The Englishman replied:"But you averaged almost 100 in your test career!" To which Don replied "Yes but Im 86 years of age"
Author: saintly1996 Timestamp:- 8/2/2011 1:22:45 PM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: Patsy, 7 posts in this thread and not one actually discussing the topic.
Take your sh!t stirring elsewhere, comment on Botham being a hypocrite, or don't comment at all.
We are all aware you retained the ashes for the first time in a billion years. We are also aware that as usual we trounced you in the one dayers. The cricket results can speak for themselves, what do you say about Prior the cheat?
Message: But Speedy, Im you! If to prove you are an alias you just have to say one thing another poster would say then a WCF post saying Slowline etc should also conclusively prove I am you, right?
Hmm you think someone allegedly having 2 aliases is bad. How about you years ago as 'Speedy Gonzalez' and 'Another Coldie' on the same thread defending each other. That's a lot worse than my supposed actions, you pathetic, lying hypocrite. (You're still by far the worst poster ever anywhere, Toddler. Don;t kid yourself otherwise.)
Author: patsy fagan Timestamp:- 6/2/2011 1:43:12 PM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: MD i havent made 1 comment re prior or re any cheating from either team..its bad when the aussies do it and just as bad when any other team does it..
facts are we have a better test team and some aussies hate it and come out with total tests tallys and inane arguments in regards to 50 over matches to take away the gloss from the ashes victory..it doesnt detract in any way..
what happened from 85 to 2002 was great for australia but has no relevance to 2011..
Author: saintly1996 Timestamp:- 6/2/2011 1:17:16 PM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: You guys are the mising the point. This thread is not about who is a better side or what happened in previous years. This is about Botham calling Hughes a cheat, then showing what a hypocrite he is by saying nothing about Prior cheating.
Author: MD Timestamp:- 6/2/2011 11:42:41 AM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: Count, you are a tool. Where have I not acknowledged that the poms have a far superior test team? As a matter of fact I was the one who pointed this out prior to the Ashes even commencing, and made a very tidy profit from it, so get your facts straight. This thread was about the blatant cheating of Prior and Patsy showed his inability to deal with that.
Author: MD Timestamp:- 6/2/2011 10:35:41 AM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: Not living in the past at all Patsy - just acknowledging it, something you don't want to do for obvious reasons. As I said, it might assist you in gaining some perspective and preventing your outbursts of extreme arrogance - or is that me just being foolishly optimistic?
No sites in the whole of the US take your fancy (or even from that dank hole you seem so proud of)?
Author: CountChivas Timestamp:- 6/2/2011 9:50:10 AM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: MD, stop the sour grapes and 'remember when' routine. At present, the Poms have a far superior Test side than we have and Test Cricket is all that matters, so get over it and get used to it.
They have have earnt their time in the sun, let them enjoy it.
Author: MD Timestamp:- 5/2/2011 3:57:18 PM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: Patsy, still can't find a US site or was that claim just you being a princess again?
Come back and have a meaningful conversation when you understand something about the game and have some sense of what domination means (you may want to study the period 1989 to 2005 for the latter)
Author: geelong63 Timestamp:- 4/2/2011 1:48:28 PM Subject: Re: What do you have to say now Sir Ian?
Message: Luckily Poindexter went into BAT for the Aussies with Hilditch and Co..
PURIST's got it wrong again..
Talk about premature self-congratulations Poindexter. Australia has been squeezing past the 5th best ODI side - a side which includes 80% of its victorious test squad. Despite some good individual performances I suspect England are just a little jaded and will switch on more come WC time.
I still seriously doubt Australia will get past the semis in the WC, assuming that they even get there. As in the tests, Australia has hung off the performances of far too few in the ODIs. The discipline in the side with bat, ball, and hand will want to ramp up 25% for them to be competitive on the continent. Speaking of which, will selectors show some balls and drop Haddin if he continues his second-class form up at the stumps? As Steve Waugh famously said to Herschelle Gibbs.... ‘What does it feel like to drop the World Cup?" Let's hope Haddin isn't put in the same position, literally or figuratively.
This site is maintained by Racing and Sports (®) Pty Ltd (ABN 093 360 108) ("R&S").
Copyright in all R&S materials is owned by Racing and Sports Pty Ltd (R&S).
Racing and Sports is a Registered Trademark.
R&S takes all care in the preparation of information appearing on the site, but accepts no responsibility nor warrants the accuracy of the information displayed.
This information is provided for entertainment purposes only. All information including race fields and TAB numbers should be checked with an official source.
(RAS-WWW03)
(ADS1)
Post a reply to this message.
