PHILINFRANCE

Firstly, if the 100 can inspire youngsters, boys and/or girls, to take up cricket then that can only be a good thing. When I was a young boy growing up in Bristol, I was fortunate in that my father was keen on cricket so we would often play in the garden; in the local park or even, during annual summer holidays, on the beach. In addition, cricket was frequently available on free to air television, BBC 1 and/or 2, so we (as children) became accustomed to watching Test Matches on weekday evenings or, on Sunday afternoons, what was then the John Player 40 over competition. At the close of play, we would replay some of the shots in the garden, just as one used to see young children playing tennis in the local parks (or even in the street!) during Wimbledon, also available on free to air television, and we developed an interest. Unfortunately, if I understand correctly, cricket has not been available on free to air television in the UK for several years, nor, indeed, is it any longer played in many schools: how then, can a child be inspired to take an interest in cricket or take up the game? To this end, a game of quick bash cricket, played by both men and women, on free to air television showing colourful outfits and fireworks cannot fail to attract children's interest and, as I say, this has to be a good thing. Of course, the 100 is not 'traditional' cricket, but, then again, to be fair, nor is 20 over cricket. My gripe with the 100, for I am most certainly not a fan, is the detrimental effect it appears to be having on the traditional tournaments and, more importantly, on the traditional county teams - not to mention our Test team, but that is another story!. I have not the slightest interest in the 100 per se, and certainly not in London Spirit or Welsh Hula Hoops, but I may well tune in later this evening to watch Tom Banton, just as I have tried previously to catch a bit of Will Smeed. On the odd occasion I have watched snatches of the games, I have seen a high standard of cricket, but none of the teams are my team, and that, I suppose, is my point: I truly do not care who wins or loses and, surely, that is what sport is all about, competing but also trying to win, for both players and supporters. I thoroughly enjoyed watching Somerset reserves/youth competing in the Royal London 50 over cup, even though we failed to qualify for the quarter finals, because I had a genuine interest in both the match itself and the result. Roll on 26 August and 30 August.

Glos. had to cancel their match against Middlesex due to a COVID outbreak in their camp.

Something to bear in mind when one consideres that recent defeats to Northants and now Leics were against what were pretty much their first elevens. Whatever happens tomorrow, we have blooded, with varying degrees of success, a number of youngsters, which can only bode well for the main goal, the County Championship.

And, to be fair, so was the previous pass from Pring.

1. Sri Lanka have some pretty impressive non-meat dishes. 2. An interesting analogy, although i must confess that I have never considered it that deeply.

Indeed, it is unfortunate how some people can deride others for their preferences, even when these are not actually being forced upon them. I am a confirmed carnivore; I love a nice rare steak, a tender lamb rack etc., but my wife makes a wonderful lentil soup and a carrot and raisin salad with homemade coleslaw. I enjoy them all: where is the problem?

Come on, be honest. It was at least 170 more than you thought likely when we were 104/5 ?. In truth, I was thinking (hoping) that George Bartlett would finally come good (though, not to the extent that he did) and that we might scrape 200+, bordering 250. I just hope the bowlers or, more pertinently, the fielders don't let us down: a win would surely be enough to see us through, especially with Glamorgan and Yorkshire playing each other in their last match.

I think some of you on here are being quite harsh on poor Messi. In an effort to demonstrate to his faithful Barca supporters just how much the club (and their supporters) meant to him, he did offer to take a 50% drop in salary from his €70M (£60M) annual salary , i.e. a mere £1.1M per week. Unfortunately, Lionel's generous offer was not accepted, and he has now been 'forced' to decamp to Paris, resulting in a huge drop in salary: as has been mentioned, he is now going to be on only £500K per week and, in addition, there is no guarantee that his new accommodation will even have a swimming pool!

It’s a ‘man’ thing for so many reasons. Firstly, only a man is able to appreciate the absolutely excruciating, eye watering pain such a blow causes. Secondly, in that knowledge, only a man would be able to laugh, when he is the cause of a second, similar blow within seconds of the first. Finally, I dare say few, if any, on here have felt sorry for poor old Alex Hales, his questionable character notwithstanding, but have simply laughed at his misfortune. À propos excruciating pain, and in acknowledgment to the female readers of this forum, I understand that childbirth can be pretty painful also.

I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure I read some time ago, pre COVID, that AN and his partner had found/were looking for an apartment down by the harbour. Don’t hold me to it, I have slept several times since I read (or imagined) said article.

Admittedly, I have only seen WS on the Somerset streams, but Goodness, he looks a wonderful talent. À propos poor old (young) Tom Banton, I assume you saw that he was out LBW for a duck. He must be seething with anger at the ECB, dragging him away just as he was coming in to some form and leaving him in the dressing room. I would be furious.

I am not sure having his family in Hungary shows a ‘lack of commitment to the club’. AN’s partner has just given birth to their first child and perhaps, just perhaps, as her partner (AN) is a full time footballer in England, with little time or experience of raising children, she preferred the support of her mother and family in this new and important task. Coupled with the restrictions brought about by this horror that is COVID, perhaps AN is missing his partner and newborn baby, thus is unsettled. It seems quite understandable and normal to me.

Only a surprise for those who have never seen him bat for Somerset. Good Luck to the young man, obviously, but I had visions of him and Tom Lammonby starring in the RL cup final amongst their fellow young Somerset debutants.

Will Smeed, the youngest player in the 100, has just scored a 50. He finished on 65NO from 38 balls.

Just in case you haven't found one: https://daddylive.me/stream/stream-15.php?sport=soccer

À propos Caddick, did I see him earlier with Marcus Trescothick up in the Trent Bridge stand?

Indeed, it was the possible libel issue that was annoying me when the issue was first being discussed on here on the weekend. JB had been charged with ‘assault by beating’; not to be trivialised, but at the lower (lowest?) end of assault charges, and reference was made simply of the ‘victim’ being a woman, i.e. she had not been identified. For all anybody on here knew, the ‘victim’ could have been a neighbour, yet there were some on here who were suggesting that he had attacked or beaten up his wife. Whilst I am sure we all had our suspicions, Sunday was not the time to air them on this forum nor, indeed, would it be prudent to do so at any time prior to the conclusion of his trial. Having said that, I should be astonished were he to be found Not Guilty - his guilt or otherwise will be decided by an experienced magistrate and not a jury of his peers, thus somebody who is less likely to be swayed by his legal team’s argument - for the threshold is very low and he (JB) seems to be suggesting simply that the allegations have been exaggerated. To take a slightly different scenario, if one were to defend oneself against a similar charge by saying ‘Yes, I pushed him, but not as hard as he claims’, surely that would be sufficient to be found guilty of ‘assault by beating’. Time will tell.

I would doubt very much that the club’s legal advisor saw the statement before it was published as, in addition to the ‘victimless crime’ wording, the statement even referred to the matter as being ‘sub judicial’, when the correct term is, of course, sub judice.

As it turned out, an extremely important wicket as well.

Thank You both for your insight. 1. As it has been bothering me since the original Bristol Rovers statement, can either one of you confirm that their suggestion (statement) that the JB incident was a victimless crime (rather than a victimless prosecution) was a crass error? 2. Given that the forthcoming trial will be be held in a magistrates court, rather than Crown Court, i.e. no jury, obviously our comments on this thread as to JB's character and potential guilt are not subject to the usual constraints (possible libel notwithstanding), but are either of you able to advise why JB was granted bail? As @NcnsBcfc says, JB was already on Crown Court bail following the Stendel case and, presumably, there were conditions attached to this bail.

All Three.

A bit harsh, especially as Glamorgan have only lost a few of their first choice eleven to the 100 or the Test team - we have lost 10, including Jack Leach! With all due respect to the team playing today, we are currently Somerset youth or 'reserves', and we most certainly got the wrong end of the toss - on, off, on throughout our innings. Nevertheless, we got an ultimately very respectful 180 - from only 37 overs, remember - and currently have Glamorgan at 57/4; three of the wickets having been taken by our young bowlers, all of whom are debutants in 50 over cricket.

What has Nicola Sturgeon got to do with it?

You, or others in your profession, may be able to elaborate, but I suspect that Bristol Rovers have made a 'slight' mistake in their statement. Where they refer to a 'victimless crime' - a term more often used in, e.g. illegal sex between consenting adults, I suspect they meant to say a 'victimless prosecution', used typically in cases of domestic violence where the 'victim' does not want to press charges, but the Police suspect intimidation from the perpetrator. I should not be at all surprised to see an amended statement from Bristol Rovers tomorrow morning.

I am pretty sure I read somewhere that they are ‘childhood sweethearts’.