South Africa v England, 4th Test, Jo’burg, Jan 14-18

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Rachel (Not Tom) may be too

I think Rachie might be on some sort of rules committee at the MCC.

Not so.
But yeah, she works there.

PS - you DON'T have to be an officil umpire to decree on caught behinds taips.
regular umpiring over the course of 15 years (with or without a piece of paper wth your name on it), ought to suffice (in some cases sheds better than the guy who has the piece of paper!!)

Merlin wrote:

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Rachel (Not Tom) may be too

I think Rachie might be on some sort of rules committee at the MCC.

Not so.
But yeah, she works there.

PS - you have to be an officil umpire to decree on caught behinds taips.
regular umpiring over the course of 15 years (with or without a piece of paper wth your name on it), ought to suffice (in some cases sheds better than the guy who has the piece of paper!!)

The best qualified umpires on the circuit are all too often the most inept - and the most certain they're right because they've been taught so.

Shoeshine wrote:

Merlin wrote:

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Rachel (Not Tom) may be too

I think Rachie might be on some sort of rules committee at the MCC.

Not so.
But yeah, she works there.

PS - you have to be an officil umpire to decree on caught behinds taips.
regular umpiring over the course of 15 years (with or without a piece of paper wth your name on it), ought to suffice (in some cases sheds better than the guy who has the piece of paper!!)

The best qualified umpires on the circuit are all too often the most inept - and the most certain they're right because they've been taught so.

Yep, just like the mouthiest cricketers on forums are usually the shittiest in real life . . .

..............

Fight .............fight ..................fight ............

FFS, looks like England have used up all of their good fortune.

tac wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:

Merlin wrote:

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Rachel (Not Tom) may be too

I think Rachie might be on some sort of rules committee at the MCC.

Not so.
But yeah, she works there.

PS - you have to be an officil umpire to decree on caught behinds taips.
regular umpiring over the course of 15 years (with or without a piece of paper wth your name on it), ought to suffice (in some cases sheds better than the guy who has the piece of paper!!)

The best qualified umpires on the circuit are all too often the most inept - and the most certain they're right because they've been taught so.

Yep, just like the mouthiest cricketers on forums are usually the shittiest in real life . . .

Yep, that's also very true.

Shoeshine wrote:

tac wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:

Merlin wrote:

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Rachel (Not Tom) may be too

I think Rachie might be on some sort of rules committee at the MCC.

Not so.
But yeah, she works there.

PS - you have to be an officil umpire to decree on caught behinds taips.
regular umpiring over the course of 15 years (with or without a piece of paper wth your name on it), ought to suffice (in some cases sheds better than the guy who has the piece of paper!!)

The best qualified umpires on the circuit are all too often the most inept - and the most certain they're right because they've been taught so.

Yep, just like the mouthiest cricketers on forums are usually the shittiest in real life . . .

Yep, that's also very true.

Yep . . . this thread is conjuring memories of CountyPlayer . . . .

Pietersen's just not there mentally at the moment.

Henry wrote:FFS, looks like England have used up all of their good fortune.

You are saying England have been lucky up until now?

tac wrote:Yep . . . this thread is conjuring memories of CountyPlayer . . . .

Didn't he upgrade to TestPlayer?

taipan wrote:

tac wrote:Yep . . . this thread is conjuring memories of CountyPlayer . . . .

Didn't he upgrade to TestPlayer?

He never actually said who he was did he? So just as likely to have been total fantasy.

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:FFS, looks like England have used up all of their good fortune.

You are saying England have been lucky up until now?

Lucky that South Africa haven't been good enough to finish them off.

Face it earlier rather than later Trev ...

- Saffers 105 - 1 ..
- No f**king rain in sight
- Umpires blinder that the one-eyed-willy behind a zipper
- England have to bowl a min of 98 overs today (bar light)

... we're doomed.

Henry wrote:

taipan wrote:

Henry wrote:FFS, looks like England have used up all of their good fortune.

You are saying England have been lucky up until now?

Lucky that South Africa haven't been good enough to finish them off.

Backtracking.