Fortunately, when reading number 2, one can take some solace from number 1.

Emil > 301 was a good score. Just not good enough.

Jacques > If England were to be removed from the competition, SL would take their place. Thus P4E would probably argue for the ejection of England and Sri Lanka.

And why stop there?

Nah, seriously, I do believe the boys were outplayed. Anderson certainly bowled to his best, and let’s not forget the awesome effort from Colingwood and that Shah character. But where the difference in class truly shined through, was with 60-odd from 30-odd balls by Morgan.

And yes, you should not be allowed a runner for being slightly overweight, tired and unfit. (But I’m not saying that out loud).

We also should not forget that 301 isn’t a bad reply – the game was that close. I think even with 10 runners we would not have made the score.
.-= Emil´s last blog ..Broken =-.

My parent’s are both Scottish, but have actually lived here longer than they lived there. They still support Scotland in most things unless South Africa is playing against them, then they support who ever is loosing – until the end and cheer as if they won.

Yes, I know! Can’t take those Scot’s anywhere.
.-= Pamela´s last blog ..Antenatal Classes =-.

Del > Yes, yes, yes, but you’re missing the point – which I made very succinctly in the first reply on this comment thread.
IT DOESN’T MATTER how unfair the ruling; it doesn’t matter how illegible the masking tape; you can’t just take matters into your own hands. Or your own arms. Or whatever. If there is a complaint, if Mr Miller did wrong, then go through the official channels.
Otherwise, you deserve everything you get. Or, in this case, a whole lot more.

Incidentally, the ICC have now back Strauss’ decision, HERE – with the subtext that a fitter Biff might have lasted a bit longer.

Also, why has no-one mentioned this when calling Strauss a “bad sport”?

Cue a Protea “JUSTICE 4″ armband campaign?

DW > I never say you never said that.

Speaking of “official channels to take that through”, keep in mind that one of the reasons that the Boks were so peeved is that “it wasn’t the match citing commissioner or the IRB that brought the charge against us it was in fact the IRB Chief Executive Mr Mike Millar. Apparently he was so incensed at the sight of pieces of white tape with writing on (that none of us sitting in the stands or the TV commentators could even read) that he personally laid the charge. By doing so he personally also insured an even bigger mockery on the judicial system would soon unfold. Mr Millers his actions were in direct contravention of the IRB laws and Regulations which state that the match citing commissioner is the only person who can make such charges and would have had to do so on the match day or within 12 hours. Mr Miller had in fact overstepped his authority by bringing the charges against the IRB Rugby World Champion Springboks and current IRB World Number 1 ranked team.
The independent disciplinary committee found the actions of the IRB Chief Executive contrary to the IRB laws and had no option but to use the lesser charge or less serious charge of bringing the game into disrepute.
In the end the IRB have made it abundantly clear to the world rugby playing nations that its judicial system is fatally flawed. The decision to allow a single citing commissioner full authority to decide on who and which incidents warrant citing has now come home to rest on the IRB’s shoulders.”

I can’t find the article quoted, this is the bit that I emailed to somebody.

Long comment, feel free to edit/delete if needed.
.-= DelBoy´s last blog ..I’ll have iSnack 2.0 on toast please =-.