The Height of Optimism
Andrew Dunford
'Pakistan close in after Younis ton'
Andrew
CricketLeague
"Andrew Dunford" <adun...@artifax.net> wrote in message
news:5mm01bF...@mid.individual.net...
> Pakistan is 161/3 chasing 427. CricInfo's headline screams:
>
> 'Pakistan close in after Younis ton'
>
> Andrew
Whats the big deal Sir Andrew Dunford.
Scoring 260 runs with 7 wickets has never been done before ?
Geoff Muldoon
> > Pakistan is 161/3 chasing 427. CricInfo's headline screams:
> >
> > 'Pakistan close in after Younis ton'
> Whats the big deal Sir Andrew Dunford.
>
> Scoring 260 runs with 7 wickets has never been done before ?
In the last innings on the fifth day of a test, NO.
I actually hope they do, but think it is highly unlikely.
Geoff M
Vig
found myself rooting for Pakistan to reach the target but at the same
time supporting SA to win the match. I am not sure if I'll be
disappointed or happy after the match seeing as a draw is improbable...
Kallis batted beyond expectations in both innings as well and the
bowlign hasn't been particularly woeful either (subpar, but not woeful)
- essentially making it a great match to watch that dispelled my notions
about certain cricketers (including the myth of the Protea
spinner)...temporarily...
Cheers!
--
Vig
Andrew Dunford
"Geoff Muldoon" <geoff....@trap.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.21708b1eb...@news.readfreenews.net...
> CricketLeague says...
>>
>> "Andrew Dunford" <adun...@artifax.net> wrote in message
>
>> > Pakistan is 161/3 chasing 427. CricInfo's headline screams:
>> >
>> > 'Pakistan close in after Younis ton'
>
>> Whats the big deal Sir Andrew Dunford.
>>
>> Scoring 260 runs with 7 wickets has never been done before ?
>
> In the last innings on the fifth day of a test, NO.
Well, it probably has, but of course CricketLeague in his own retarded way
deliberately misrepresents my point because that's all he's capable of.
> I actually hope they do, but think it is highly unlikely.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility for a team to get 427 in the final
innings when they score 140-odd on day four, thus making the runs-per-over
requirement on day five less onerous. Of course that has little to do with
the point I made, which is that a team having reached 161 has barely made a
dent in a target off 427 let alone be considered 'closing in'. The CricInfo
editor obviously realised this because the headline was gone two minutes
later and replaced with something sensible.
Andrew
Rodney
> Pakistan is 161/3 chasing 427. CricInfo's headline screams:
> 'Pakistan close in after Younis ton'
'Twas a quite magnificent innings, so you can understand a
Pakistan-supporting punter's being somewhat upbeat about his side's
chances, especially as it was going at more than four an over at the
time -- but, yes, that was a touch quick on the draw.
--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
"Yon booy could feald eur cannon baal."
An unknown Yorkshireman on Syd Gregory
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Geoff Muldoon
the
<snip>
> dispelled my notions
> about certain cricketers (including the myth of the Protea
> spinner)...temporarily...
Have only seen highlights unfortunately. Is he a real spinner?
GM
Rodney
> Have only seen highlights unfortunately. Is he a real spinner?
What's that s'posed to mean?
p_cricket_guy
> "Geoff Muldoon" <geoff.muld...@trap.gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> It's not beyond the realms of possibility for a team to get 427 in the final
> innings when they score 140-odd on day four, thus making the runs-per-over
> requirement on day five less onerous. Of course that has little to do with
> the point I made, which is that a team having reached 161 has barely made a
> dent in a target off 427 let alone be considered 'closing in'. The CricInfo
> editor obviously realised this because the headline was gone two minutes
> later and replaced with something sensible.
>
> Andrew
Where is Shiva Iyer? Looks like cricinfo guys (who steal stuff from
r.s.c)
saw Andrew's post and changed the headlines.
Geoff Muldoon
> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
> > Have only seen highlights unfortunately. Is he a real spinner?
>
> What's that s'posed to mean?
No second meaning. Is he a genuine spin talent or just someone darting in
nude balls and having a purple patch.
GM
Rodney
The former.
--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
"How I wish I had access to Harris's hilarious words following his
first-ever Test delivery."
Rodney Ulyate
Rodney
> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
>> Rodney says...
>>> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
>>>> Have only seen highlights unfortunately. Is he a real spinner?
>>> What's that s'posed to mean?
>> No second meaning. Is he a genuine spin talent or just someone darting
>> in nude balls and having a purple patch.
> The former.
That, apparently, was my 2,500th post.
--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
"It's Monty Rhodes! It's Jonty Panesar!"
Bumble on some atypically sublime fielding from Monty Panesar
Shikari Shambhu
> Rodney wrote:
> > Geoff Muldoon wrote:
> >> Rodney says...
> >>> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
> >>>> Have only seen highlights unfortunately. Is he a real spinner?
> >>> What's that s'posed to mean?
> >> No second meaning. Is he a genuine spin talent or just someone darting
> >> in nude balls and having a purple patch.
> > The former.
>
> That, apparently, was my 2,500th post.
>
Congratulations for reaching the milestone in less than 10 days.
Rodney
<whimpers dolefully>
Why are you forever picking on me? Arahim's been posting far more
frequently of late than I have.
--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
PS: A fleeting glance at my profile turns up the quite startling fact
that I'm fast approaching a *year* of Usenet life. Alas, woe of all
woes, you'll be seeing comparatively little of me once I get there, for
it'll likely also herald the end of my long vigil of high-school
examination-sitting (an activity about which I was beginning to harbour
serious suspicions of perpetuality). What this means, essentially, is
that I shan't be home nearly as often and so shall have far less time
for my now ritualistic stuffing around on Daddy's computer. By February
next year, indeed, I'll be gone from R.S.C. completely, a
poverty-stricken university student without access to a computer.
PPS: I expect to be mourned.
alvey
> Shikari Shambhu offered:
>> On Oct 5, 11:33 am, Rodney <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Rodney wrote:
>>>> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
>>>>> Rodney says...
>>>>>> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
>>>>>>> Have only seen highlights unfortunately. Is he a real spinner?
>>>>>> What's that s'posed to mean?
>>>>> No second meaning. Is he a genuine spin talent or just someone darting
>>>>> in nude balls and having a purple patch.
>>>> The former.
>>> That, apparently, was my 2,500th post.
>> Congratulations for reaching the milestone in less than 10 days.
>
> <whimpers dolefully>
>
> Why are you forever picking on me? Arahim's been posting far more
> frequently of late than I have.
No he hasn't. He's only made the one post.
>
> PS: A fleeting glance at my profile turns up the quite startling fact
> that I'm fast approaching a *year* of Usenet life. Alas, woe of all
> woes, you'll be seeing comparatively little of me once I get there, for
> it'll likely also herald the end of my long vigil of high-school
> examination-sitting (an activity about which I was beginning to harbour
> serious suspicions of perpetuality). What this means, essentially, is
> that I shan't be home nearly as often and so shall have far less time
> for my now ritualistic stuffing around on Daddy's computer. By February
> next year, indeed, I'll be gone from R.S.C. completely, a
> poverty-stricken university student without access to a computer.
Eh? What sort of uni is it that doesn't allow students free, unlimited net
access Roddles? On in China?
>
> PPS: I expect to be mourned.
Indeed. I'll always recall your filleting of Prakash M with a chuckle. Am
unsure why though as PM has been sliced & diced so very often. Maybe
because of his slinking off sniffing about you being a mere "schoolboy".
alvey
in Briz, wondering what you'll be majoring in. Something English would be
me first pick.
Rodney
> On Sat, 06 Oct 2007 02:58:25 +0200, Rodney wrote:
>> Shikari Shambhu offered:
>>> On Oct 5, 11:33 am, Rodney <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Rodney wrote:
>>>>> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
>>>>>> Rodney says...
>>>>>>> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
>>>>>>>> Have only seen highlights unfortunately. Is he a real spinner?
>>>>>>> What's that s'posed to mean?
>>>>>> No second meaning. Is he a genuine spin talent or just someone darting
>>>>>> in nude balls and having a purple patch.
>>>>> The former.
>>>> That, apparently, was my 2,500th post.
>>> Congratulations for reaching the milestone in less than 10 days.
>> <whimpers dolefully>
>> Why are you forever picking on me? Arahim's been posting far more
>> frequently of late than I have.
> No he hasn't. He's only made the one post.
I was embarrassingly slow in catching on there.
>> PS: A fleeting glance at my profile turns up the quite startling fact
>> that I'm fast approaching a *year* of Usenet life. Alas, woe of all
>> woes, you'll be seeing comparatively little of me once I get there, for
>> it'll likely also herald the end of my long vigil of high-school
>> examination-sitting (an activity about which I was beginning to harbour
>> serious suspicions of perpetuality). What this means, essentially, is
>> that I shan't be home nearly as often and so shall have far less time
>> for my now ritualistic stuffing around on Daddy's computer. By February
>> next year, indeed, I'll be gone from R.S.C. completely, a
>> poverty-stricken university student without access to a computer.
> Eh? What sort of uni is it that doesn't allow students free, unlimited net
> access Roddles? On in China?
Looks like I've a bit of research to do. (My acceptance letter only came
through on Thursday, y'see, and, truth be told, I wasn't expecting it at
all.) Dad's definitely warned me that, if I want to feed my internet
addiction next year, I'm gonna have to get my hands on a personal laptop.
>> PPS: I expect to be mourned.
> Indeed.
Hooray!
> alvey
> in Briz, wondering what you'll be majoring in. Something English would be
> me first pick.
Very good. For want of an appealing alternative, I've decided that I'm
gonna have a crack at forcing my rambling prose into the popular press.
--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
"Baseball and cricket are beautiful and highly stylized medieval war
substitutes, chess made flesh, a mixture of proud chivalry and base --
in both senses - greed."
John Fowles
Shikari Shambhu
> Shikari Shambhu offered:
>
> > On Oct 5, 11:33 am, Rodney <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Rodney wrote:
> >>> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
> >>>> Rodney says...
> >>>>> Geoff Muldoon wrote:
> >>>>>> Have only seen highlights unfortunately. Is he a real spinner?
> >>>>> What's that s'posed to mean?
> >>>> No second meaning. Is he a genuine spin talent or just someone darting
> >>>> in nude balls and having a purple patch.
> >>> The former.
> >> That, apparently, was my 2,500th post.
> > Congratulations for reaching the milestone in less than 10 days.
>
> <whimpers dolefully>
>
> Why are you forever picking on me? Arahim's been posting far more
> frequently of late than I have.
No hard feelings. I was wondering about the total number of your posts
recently and then this came along. I could not let that go. :)
Good luck to you for your higher studies.
CricketLeague
>
> "Geoff Muldoon" <geoff....@trap.gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.21708b1eb...@news.readfreenews.net...
>> CricketLeague says...
>>>
>>> "Andrew Dunford" <adun...@artifax.net> wrote in message
>>
>>> > Pakistan is 161/3 chasing 427. CricInfo's headline screams:
>>> >
>>> > 'Pakistan close in after Younis ton'
>>
>>> Whats the big deal Sir Andrew Dunford.
>>>
>>> Scoring 260 runs with 7 wickets has never been done before ?
>>
>> In the last innings on the fifth day of a test, NO.
>
> Well, it probably has, but of course CricketLeague in his own retarded way
> deliberately misrepresents my point because that's all he's capable of.
Sir Andrew Dunford,
1)
I NEVER begged, blackmailed and threatened anybody here to killfile you like
you did to me while SECRETLY reading EACH and EVERY COMMENT from me.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.sport.cricket/msg/208e08a4d04a7ea3?hl=en&
2) You complain about SILLY things whether they be on cricinfo or in other
posters comments on rsc....
>> I actually hope they do, but think it is highly unlikely.
>
> It's not beyond the realms of possibility for a team to get 427 in the
> final innings when they score 140-odd on day four, thus making the
> runs-per-over requirement on day five less onerous. Of course that has
> little to do with the point I made, which is that a team having reached
> 161 has barely made a dent in a target off 427 let alone be considered
> 'closing in'. The CricInfo editor obviously realised this because the
> headline was gone two minutes later and replaced with something sensible.
>
> Andrew
Big deal.......
Rodney
'Tsall good. What with my examinations keeping me almost permanently
house- and computer-bound, I really don't have much of a life at the mo'.
> Good luck to you for your higher studies.
Thanks, mate.
--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
"In the very breath of its humanity, its sweet simplicities, its
open-air fragrance and charm, the game of cricket appeals to nearly all
men."
A.E. Knight