PHILINFRANCE

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’.

1. Look up the meaning of Straw Man Argument - I suggested this to a previous poster, but it would seem it applies equally to you. 2. Look up the meaning of ‘Assault by Beating’, the offence with which JB has been charged. There is no suggestion or allegation that JB has beaten a woman, his wife or any other woman - apart from in The Sun and from some ill-informed posters on this thread. So would I, but I don’t think you need to worry. I consider it unlikely JB will be found guilty of ‘beating a woman’.

The only ‘fact’ at present is the Police statement, which refers to a charge of ‘Assault by Beating’ whereby an unnamed woman, i.e. by extension, not necessarily JB’s wife, suffered a head injury. My somewhat nonsensical concoction of the circumstances above was just that, i.e. nonsensical, but, à la Kevin Keegan, I would just love it to transpire in Court tomorrow that the unfortunate woman assaulted was anybody but Mrs B, and for both Mr and Mrs B to sue the above mentioned rags for libel.

OK, so not ‘just’ The Sun; I see The Daily Mirror, The Mag Co., Fan Banter and other, similarly ‘reputable’ sources have also stated that JB has been accused of assaulting his wife. I remain comfortable with my previous statement that I am not aware of any reputable media source stating that JB assaulted his wife: he may well have done, and I have no doubt all will be revealed in Court, but it just really annoys me when people make frivolous accusations without any justification.

Really? I am sure you are correct, but I have only seen the article in The Sun. Perhaps you would provide a link. 1. Look up the meaning of Straw Man Argument. 2. Imagine a scenario where, one evening, following a bit of neighbourly friction, Mr and Mrs JB invite their neighbours over for a drInk in an attempt to rekindle their previously friendly relationship. Unfortunately, relations remain frosty, too many drinks are consumed and a heated, bordering on violent confrontation ensues between JB and his (male) neighbour. Mrs neighbour tries to intervene and is pushed away by JB, banging her head on a shelf, resulting in a slight scratch and a drop of blood. Mr neighbour, outraged at the ‘assault’ on his wife, calls the Police, who arrive and arrest JB, resulting in charges and tomorrow’s Court appearance. Mrs B, as I am sure you are aware, issues a statement confirming that she has not accused JB of being violent towards her. OK - this is just a little story concocted on a quiet Sunday afternoon, but in no legal source nor in any reliable media article have I seen it mentioned that JB has assaulted his wife and, moreover and quite clearly, nor would I, nor have I, condoned violence against a woman - or, indeed, against anybody!

Just for the record, I believe you may be jumping the gun and, with respect, suggest you may wish to reconsider, or even delete, your statement. Unless I am mistaken, JB has been charged with ‘Assault by Beating’ after a woman suffered a head injury. Nowhere, apart from on this thread and in an article in The Sun , have I seen it mentioned that the woman in question was JB’s wife. Quite a serious accusation to make without evidence.

I have glanced at a few of the 100 matches, both women and men, and, to be fair, there seems to be little difference in the standard compared to T20. My concern/problem with the 100 format is not so much the standard of play but, rather, how an unnecessary new tournament diminishes two perfectly good existing ones, just so that BBC can have their exclusive tournament. In addition, of course, and this is probably more of a personal grievance, the 100 deprives Taunton and Bristol of a first class cricket tournament during the summer months, to the benefit of Cardiff - hardly a traditional hot bed of cricket - and I feel it difficult, impossible even, to form any allegiance to a franchise such as, e.g. Welsh Fire. On a slightly different subject, did anybody see Roelof’s catch last night?

Done and Done. Thank You and Good Night ?.

I said I would no longer respond to you, so apologise for doing so. I should just like to say that you shouldn’t hesitate to post as you have as much right as anybody on this forum to post and say (subject to the usual limits) whatever you want and in whatever manner you wish. You should be aware, however, that you (and your posts) will undoubtedly receive sarcastic responses, such is the nature of a forum - if I may say so, however, just try and ignore such responses or, if you really must reply, try not to respond aggressively so as to avoid any risk of being banned.

Not a school prefect, just rather puerile humour. I said I wouldn’t prolong this, and you may rest assured that this will be my last post (to you) on this thread. I should also like to assure you (before you block me) that it has never been my intention to get you banned - I would not do that to any poster on this forum; indeed, I am sceptical as to whether it would be possible even were I to try. I apologise for making what I considered amusing, albeit clearly sarcastic, responses to your posts and shall intrude no longer. Best Wishes for the upcoming season.