Love this (and these two blokes):

https://twitter.com/Final_Word_Pod/status/1666894847431565340

Thanks. I really enjoyed that. Spot on.

On Friday, 9 June 2023 at 00:10:52 UTC+1, jack fredricks wrote:
> Thanks. I really enjoyed that. Spot on.

They're superb. Collins (the 2nd bloke) lives over here and has got enormous knowledge on the county championship. I was kind of hoping he might get a bit of a TMS gig - but he's doing the SEN commentary down under.

On 6/8/2023 3:12 PM, Richard Dixon wrote:
> Love this (and these two blokes):
>
> https://twitter.com/Final_Word_Pod/status/1666894847431565340

It's NOT that simplistic.

This is the SEQUENCE of balls which led to Pujara's dismissal.

Most of the balls were ANGLED IN to the stumps.

Moreover, he SAW from the non-strikers end, HOW Gill got bowled
MISJUDGING the angle.

SO, he shouldn't have left that ball alone

13.4
1 Green to Kohli, 1 run

back of a length, angling into the thigh pad, tucked away to long leg. A
ripple of applause and cheering as India's 50 comes up
13.3
•
Green to Kohli, no run

length ball angling in towards off stump, defended into the on side

13.2
•
Green to Kohli, no run

fullish outside off with a hint of outswing. Left alone

13.1
•
Green to Kohli, no run

length ball in the corridor, left alone

12.6
•
Boland to Pujara, no run

length ball angling in towards off stump, defended from the crease into
the on side
12.5
•
Boland to Pujara, no run

ohhhhh, that's just beautiful bowling. He's made Pujara defend his
stumps for the entire over, and then he hits a similar fullush length,
with a similar initial angle towards off stump, and gets it to nip away
and then swing away further. Pujara has to play at it, and he's lucky he
doesn't edge as he gets forward to defend
12.4
•
Boland to Pujara, no run

bouncer, climbs high over Pujara's left shoulder after he gets across to
off stump. Thinks about a hook but it's too high for that
12.3
•
Boland to Pujara, no run

length ball attacking the top of off stump, defended into the on side
12.2
•
Boland to Pujara, no run

again that shuffle towards the ball - not a traditional Pujara movement
- to defend the fullish, off-stumpish ball towards mid-on. He's not
moving a long way but he's getting his weight moving towards the ball
12.1
•
Boland to Pujara, no run

fullish, angling in towards off stump, gets a positive stride forward -
a bit of a shuffle towards the ball rather than one big step - to defend
it back towards the bowler

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 5:16:36 PM UTC+10, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> 13.4 angling into the thigh pad
> 13.2 fullish outside off with a hint of outswing
> 13.1 length ball in the corridor
> 12.6 length ball angling in towards off stump
> 12.5 gets it to nip away and then swing away further
> 12.4 bouncer
> 12.3 length ball attacking the top of off stump
> 12.2 defend the fullish, off-stumpish ball towards mid-on
> 12.1 fullish, angling in towards off stump

There's nothing there that screams "Pujara should've known better".
In fact, outswing is is mentioned twice, and in-swing zero times.
Although the ball was "angled in" a bit.

I think he left on height, not line. It was just a bad call, to a good ball.. It happens.
Anyone who blames Pujara for a defensive shot decision is just a hater.

On 6/9/2023 12:55 AM, jack fredricks wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 5:16:36 PM UTC+10, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> 13.4 angling into the thigh pad
>> 13.2 fullish outside off with a hint of outswing
>> 13.1 length ball in the corridor
>> 12.6 length ball angling in towards off stump
>> 12.5 gets it to nip away and then swing away further
>> 12.4 bouncer
>> 12.3 length ball attacking the top of off stump
>> 12.2 defend the fullish, off-stumpish ball towards mid-on
>> 12.1 fullish, angling in towards off stump
>
> There's nothing there that screams "Pujara should've known better".
> In fact, outswing is is mentioned twice, and in-swing zero times.
> Although the ball was "angled in" a bit.
>
> I think he left on height, not line. It was just a bad call, to a good ball. It happens.
> Anyone who blames Pujara for a defensive shot decision is just a hater.

I DON'T hate Pujara, but he should have DONE WAY BETTER than leaving
that ball AFTER watching Gill getting bowled, misjudging and leaving the
ball AND also the FACT of Pujara having SOOOOO MUCH EXPERIENCE.

Here is a much more comprehensive explanation of WHY Pujara shouldn't
have shouldered arms.

It’s not the easiest of strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and
second-guessing go into it. But to die a stroke-less death is an agony
that has few equivalents in the game. Not even self-goals. The guilt
consumes you like fire.

https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/wtc-final-shubman-gill-cheteshwar-pujara-fail-in-the-art-of-leaving-8653353/

WTC Final: Shubman Gill, Cheteshwar Pujara fail in the art of leaving
Shubman Gill and Cheteshwar Pujara pay the ultimate price for misjudging
the line and length as Aussies make early inroads

Two of India’s key batsmen died a stroke-less death, shouldering arms
and watching the ball bend back to hit the stumps. It’s the most
mind-crushing path to perdition, torn until your next success, with the
guilt of not shielding the ball with your only weapon in hand. You could
have nicked, you could have chopped on, you could have been beaten, but
you could console yourself that you at least played a stroke.

The shocked anguish on the face of victims captures the story. Shubman
Gill was reaction-less after his ill-timed leave of Scott Boland left
his stumps and heart in tatters. There were no signs of a stroke of
indiscretion. He was judging lengths well; moving well. Getting behind
the line and playing the right stroke to the right ball. Gill had
unzipped his innings with a gorgeous punch through extra-cover off Pat
Cummins. Later, he would pull him through long-on for another four. Two
salivating strokes, before an unwatchable error in judgement kicked in.
It was no shrewd set-up, no hooping devil, but a staple in-ducker.
Rather, it was an imagined set-up.

It was just the fourth ball Boland had bowled to Gill. The first three —
all angled in and not seaming either way — were defended stoutly on the
front-foot. Gill sniffed a trap. His instinct would have whispered to
him that the next ball would bend away. But Boland’s deadliest gift is
the one that snakes back in from a good length, he is not much of an
out-swing proponent. So it turned out to be. Gill’s front-foot strode
out. Then it stopped, frozen by the inward angle. The existential
dilemma of Test openers set in — to leave or not to leave. He shouldered
arms, nervously and unsurely. Perhaps, he trusted the bouncy nature of
the deck — Oval is bouncier than most other surfaces in England and you
could at the start of the inning, leave safely on length. Perhaps, he
thought he had covered the line of the ball with his pads outside the
off-stump.

Whatever he imagined was far from reality. It could happen to green
batsmen in England — it was just his third innings in the country. You
hear so much about the virtues of the leave and are almost mentally
bound to execute it. There is little doubt that it’s a prerequisite for
success in any condition — so indispensable that it is the second most
employed (non) stroke in cricket after the forward defensive. Call it
the phantom stroke. It has game changing potential, as one of the
greatest leavers in Test cricket, Geoff Boycott would observe: “Let him
(bowler) see you refusing to drive so that he is tempted to land the
ball a foot closer to you. Then bang. Get on the front foot and drive
the ball away.” At the hands of an efficient purveyor, it becomes as
much an attacking weapon as a defensive one. Without even putting bat on
the ball, it could disrupt the bowler’s thinking. “If a batter is
leaving the ball well, you can see their game is in good order and for
me I thought if they were leaving me easily then they were imposing
themselves on me as well,” former England quick Simon Jones would once say.

Every successful cricketer has it. Then every cricketer had misjudged
the leave at least once, if not more times, in their career. Even some
of the finest leavers could end up misjudging, like Cheteshwar Pujara.
The leave is one of the bricks that had gone into the making of one of
the finest stonewallers of this era. But here, the usual faithful
judgment deserted him. Like Boland, Cameron Green too was angling most
of his balls in. Just one of Green’s five previous balls to Pujara had
shaped away. As were most of the balls he faced off Boland.

Perhaps, Pujara was spooked by the past, where Cummins would make one
ball hold the line after angling in. Boland had produced a similar
delivery in the previous over. Maybe, it was playing in his mind. The
fuller length almost convinced him that the ball would seam away after
landing. Rather, it swerved back in, not lavishly but just enough to peg
his off-stump. He just swayed the bat in shame rather than anger and
rushed back to the solitude of the dressing room. Like Gill, he too was
batting fluently and positively, before the moment of miscalculation.

Should Pujara have hung on the back-foot and defend it, as he so often
does to similar lengths in similar conditions? But in this innings, he
was making a conscious effort to get forward to most of the balls. It
was perhaps to eliminate the half-prod position that he often gets into.
But here, it backfired — there was a bit of predetermination — as he
left a ball that he would have defended comfortably.

Then this is what pitches in England do. They weigh and play on your
mind, they make you imagine, they make you see illusions. Even in the
mind of someone scoring a bucketful of runs in County cricket, and even
in the mind of the most talented young batter. It’s not the easiest of
strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and second-guessing go into it.
But to die a stroke-less death is an agony that has few equivalents in
the game. Not even self-goals. The guilt consumes you like fire.

On 6/8/2023 3:12 PM, Richard Dixon wrote:
> Love this (and these two blokes):
>
> https://twitter.com/Final_Word_Pod/status/1666894847431565340

Those two blokes DIDN'T DO ANY "REAL ANALYSIS".

They merely jumped to conclusions and GOSSIPED about fans reactions.

This columnist ANALYZED Pujara and Gill's shouldering arms.

So, WHO IS BETTER between those two blokes and this columnist Sandip G?

It’s not the easiest of strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and
second-guessing go into it. But to die a stroke-less death is an agony
that has few equivalents in the game. Not even self-goals.

*** The guilt consumes you like fire. ***

https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/wtc-final-shubman-gill-cheteshwar-pujara-fail-in-the-art-of-leaving-8653353/

WTC Final: Shubman Gill, Cheteshwar Pujara fail in the art of leaving

Shubman Gill and Cheteshwar Pujara pay the ultimate price for misjudging
the line and length as Aussies make early inroads

Two of India’s key batsmen died a stroke-less death, shouldering arms
and watching the ball bend back to hit the stumps. It’s the most
mind-crushing path to perdition, torn until your next success, with the
guilt of not shielding the ball with your only weapon in hand. You could
have nicked, you could have chopped on, you could have been beaten, but
you could console yourself that you at least played a stroke.

The shocked anguish on the face of victims captures the story. Shubman
Gill was reaction-less after his ill-timed leave of Scott Boland left
his stumps and heart in tatters. There were no signs of a stroke of
indiscretion. He was judging lengths well; moving well. Getting behind
the line and playing the right stroke to the right ball. Gill had
unzipped his innings with a gorgeous punch through extra-cover off Pat
Cummins. Later, he would pull him through long-on for another four. Two
salivating strokes, before an unwatchable error in judgement kicked in.
It was no shrewd set-up, no hooping devil, but a staple in-ducker.
Rather, it was an imagined set-up.

It was just the fourth ball Boland had bowled to Gill. The first three —
all angled in and not seaming either way — were defended stoutly on the
front-foot. Gill sniffed a trap. His instinct would have whispered to
him that the next ball would bend away. But Boland’s deadliest gift is
the one that snakes back in from a good length, he is not much of an
out-swing proponent. So it turned out to be. Gill’s front-foot strode
out. Then it stopped, frozen by the inward angle. The existential
dilemma of Test openers set in — to leave or not to leave. He shouldered
arms, nervously and unsurely. Perhaps, he trusted the bouncy nature of
the deck — Oval is bouncier than most other surfaces in England and you
could at the start of the inning, leave safely on length. Perhaps, he
thought he had covered the line of the ball with his pads outside the
off-stump.

Whatever he imagined was far from reality. It could happen to green
batsmen in England — it was just his third innings in the country. You
hear so much about the virtues of the leave and are almost mentally
bound to execute it. There is little doubt that it’s a prerequisite for
success in any condition — so indispensable that it is the second most
employed (non) stroke in cricket after the forward defensive. Call it
the phantom stroke. It has game changing potential, as one of the
greatest leavers in Test cricket, Geoff Boycott would observe: “Let him
(bowler) see you refusing to drive so that he is tempted to land the
ball a foot closer to you. Then bang. Get on the front foot and drive
the ball away.” At the hands of an efficient purveyor, it becomes as
much an attacking weapon as a defensive one. Without even putting bat on
the ball, it could disrupt the bowler’s thinking. “If a batter is
leaving the ball well, you can see their game is in good order and for
me I thought if they were leaving me easily then they were imposing
themselves on me as well,” former England quick Simon Jones would once say.

Every successful cricketer has it. Then every cricketer had misjudged
the leave at least once, if not more times, in their career. Even some
of the finest leavers could end up misjudging, like Cheteshwar Pujara.
The leave is one of the bricks that had gone into the making of one of
the finest stonewallers of this era. But here, the usual faithful
judgment deserted him. Like Boland, Cameron Green too was angling most
of his balls in. Just one of Green’s five previous balls to Pujara had
shaped away. As were most of the balls he faced off Boland.

Perhaps, Pujara was spooked by the past, where Cummins would make one
ball hold the line after angling in. Boland had produced a similar
delivery in the previous over. Maybe, it was playing in his mind. The
fuller length almost convinced him that the ball would seam away after
landing. Rather, it swerved back in, not lavishly but just enough to peg
his off-stump. He just swayed the bat in shame rather than anger and
rushed back to the solitude of the dressing room. Like Gill, he too was
batting fluently and positively, before the moment of miscalculation.

Should Pujara have hung on the back-foot and defend it, as he so often
does to similar lengths in similar conditions? But in this innings, he
was making a conscious effort to get forward to most of the balls. It
was perhaps to eliminate the half-prod position that he often gets into.
But here, it backfired — there was a bit of predetermination — as he
left a ball that he would have defended comfortably.

Then this is what pitches in England do. They weigh and play on your
mind, they make you imagine, they make you see illusions. Even in the
mind of someone scoring a bucketful of runs in County cricket, and even
in the mind of the most talented young batter. It’s not the easiest of
strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and second-guessing go into it.
But to die a stroke-less death is an agony that has few equivalents in
the game. Not even self-goals. The guilt consumes you like fire.

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 9:55:39 AM UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 6/8/2023 3:12 PM, Richard Dixon wrote:
> > Love this (and these two blokes):
> >
> > https://twitter.com/Final_Word_Pod/status/1666894847431565340
> Those two blokes DIDN'T DO ANY "REAL ANALYSIS".
>
> They merely jumped to conclusions and GOSSIPED about fans reactions.
>
> This columnist ANALYZED Pujara and Gill's shouldering arms.
>
> So, WHO IS BETTER between those two blokes and this columnist Sandip G?
> It’s not the easiest of strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and
> second-guessing go into it. But to die a stroke-less death is an agony
> that has few equivalents in the game. Not even self-goals.
> *** The guilt consumes you like fire. ***
> https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/wtc-final-shubman-gill-cheteshwar-pujara-fail-in-the-art-of-leaving-8653353/
>
> WTC Final: Shubman Gill, Cheteshwar Pujara fail in the art of leaving
>
> Shubman Gill and Cheteshwar Pujara pay the ultimate price for misjudging
> the line and length as Aussies make early inroads
>
>
> Two of India’s key batsmen died a stroke-less death, shouldering arms
> and watching the ball bend back to hit the stumps. It’s the most
> mind-crushing path to perdition, torn until your next success, with the
> guilt of not shielding the ball with your only weapon in hand. You could
> have nicked, you could have chopped on, you could have been beaten, but
> you could console yourself that you at least played a stroke.
>
> The shocked anguish on the face of victims captures the story. Shubman
> Gill was reaction-less after his ill-timed leave of Scott Boland left
> his stumps and heart in tatters. There were no signs of a stroke of
> indiscretion. He was judging lengths well; moving well. Getting behind
> the line and playing the right stroke to the right ball. Gill had
> unzipped his innings with a gorgeous punch through extra-cover off Pat
> Cummins. Later, he would pull him through long-on for another four. Two
> salivating strokes, before an unwatchable error in judgement kicked in.
> It was no shrewd set-up, no hooping devil, but a staple in-ducker.
> Rather, it was an imagined set-up.
>
> It was just the fourth ball Boland had bowled to Gill. The first three —
> all angled in and not seaming either way — were defended stoutly on the
> front-foot. Gill sniffed a trap. His instinct would have whispered to
> him that the next ball would bend away. But Boland’s deadliest gift is
> the one that snakes back in from a good length, he is not much of an
> out-swing proponent. So it turned out to be. Gill’s front-foot strode
> out. Then it stopped, frozen by the inward angle. The existential
> dilemma of Test openers set in — to leave or not to leave. He shouldered
> arms, nervously and unsurely. Perhaps, he trusted the bouncy nature of
> the deck — Oval is bouncier than most other surfaces in England and you
> could at the start of the inning, leave safely on length. Perhaps, he
> thought he had covered the line of the ball with his pads outside the
> off-stump.
>
> Whatever he imagined was far from reality. It could happen to green
> batsmen in England — it was just his third innings in the country.. You
> hear so much about the virtues of the leave and are almost mentally
> bound to execute it. There is little doubt that it’s a prerequisite for
> success in any condition — so indispensable that it is the second most
> employed (non) stroke in cricket after the forward defensive. Call it
> the phantom stroke. It has game changing potential, as one of the
> greatest leavers in Test cricket, Geoff Boycott would observe: “Let him
> (bowler) see you refusing to drive so that he is tempted to land the
> ball a foot closer to you. Then bang. Get on the front foot and drive
> the ball away.” At the hands of an efficient purveyor, it becomes as
> much an attacking weapon as a defensive one. Without even putting bat on
> the ball, it could disrupt the bowler’s thinking. “If a batter is
> leaving the ball well, you can see their game is in good order and for
> me I thought if they were leaving me easily then they were imposing
> themselves on me as well,” former England quick Simon Jones would once say.
>
> Every successful cricketer has it. Then every cricketer had misjudged
> the leave at least once, if not more times, in their career. Even some
> of the finest leavers could end up misjudging, like Cheteshwar Pujara.
> The leave is one of the bricks that had gone into the making of one of
> the finest stonewallers of this era. But here, the usual faithful
> judgment deserted him. Like Boland, Cameron Green too was angling most
> of his balls in. Just one of Green’s five previous balls to Pujara had
> shaped away. As were most of the balls he faced off Boland.
>
> Perhaps, Pujara was spooked by the past, where Cummins would make one
> ball hold the line after angling in. Boland had produced a similar
> delivery in the previous over. Maybe, it was playing in his mind. The
> fuller length almost convinced him that the ball would seam away after
> landing. Rather, it swerved back in, not lavishly but just enough to peg
> his off-stump. He just swayed the bat in shame rather than anger and
> rushed back to the solitude of the dressing room. Like Gill, he too was
> batting fluently and positively, before the moment of miscalculation.
>
> Should Pujara have hung on the back-foot and defend it, as he so often
> does to similar lengths in similar conditions? But in this innings, he
> was making a conscious effort to get forward to most of the balls. It
> was perhaps to eliminate the half-prod position that he often gets into.
> But here, it backfired — there was a bit of predetermination — as he
> left a ball that he would have defended comfortably.
>
> Then this is what pitches in England do. They weigh and play on your
> mind, they make you imagine, they make you see illusions. Even in the
> mind of someone scoring a bucketful of runs in County cricket, and even
> in the mind of the most talented young batter. It’s not the easiest of
> strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and second-guessing go into it.
> But to die a stroke-less death is an agony that has few equivalents in
> the game. Not even self-goals. The guilt consumes you like fire.

Hmmmm... sounds as though the Indians might have listened to the Chinese Soldiers video recently ... RH

On 6/9/2023 2:36 AM, Robert Henderson wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 9:55:39 AM UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> On 6/8/2023 3:12 PM, Richard Dixon wrote:
>>> Love this (and these two blokes):
>>>
>>> https://twitter.com/Final_Word_Pod/status/1666894847431565340
>> Those two blokes DIDN'T DO ANY "REAL ANALYSIS".
>>
>> They merely jumped to conclusions and GOSSIPED about fans reactions.
>>
>> This columnist ANALYZED Pujara and Gill's shouldering arms.
>>
>> So, WHO IS BETTER between those two blokes and this columnist Sandip G?
>> It’s not the easiest of strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and
>> second-guessing go into it. But to die a stroke-less death is an agony
>> that has few equivalents in the game. Not even self-goals.
>> *** The guilt consumes you like fire. ***
>> https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/wtc-final-shubman-gill-cheteshwar-pujara-fail-in-the-art-of-leaving-8653353/
>>
>> WTC Final: Shubman Gill, Cheteshwar Pujara fail in the art of leaving
>>
>> Shubman Gill and Cheteshwar Pujara pay the ultimate price for misjudging
>> the line and length as Aussies make early inroads
>>
>>
>> Two of India’s key batsmen died a stroke-less death, shouldering arms
>> and watching the ball bend back to hit the stumps. It’s the most
>> mind-crushing path to perdition, torn until your next success, with the
>> guilt of not shielding the ball with your only weapon in hand. You could
>> have nicked, you could have chopped on, you could have been beaten, but
>> you could console yourself that you at least played a stroke.
>>
>> The shocked anguish on the face of victims captures the story. Shubman
>> Gill was reaction-less after his ill-timed leave of Scott Boland left
>> his stumps and heart in tatters. There were no signs of a stroke of
>> indiscretion. He was judging lengths well; moving well. Getting behind
>> the line and playing the right stroke to the right ball. Gill had
>> unzipped his innings with a gorgeous punch through extra-cover off Pat
>> Cummins. Later, he would pull him through long-on for another four. Two
>> salivating strokes, before an unwatchable error in judgement kicked in.
>> It was no shrewd set-up, no hooping devil, but a staple in-ducker.
>> Rather, it was an imagined set-up.
>>
>> It was just the fourth ball Boland had bowled to Gill. The first three —
>> all angled in and not seaming either way — were defended stoutly on the
>> front-foot. Gill sniffed a trap. His instinct would have whispered to
>> him that the next ball would bend away. But Boland’s deadliest gift is
>> the one that snakes back in from a good length, he is not much of an
>> out-swing proponent. So it turned out to be. Gill’s front-foot strode
>> out. Then it stopped, frozen by the inward angle. The existential
>> dilemma of Test openers set in — to leave or not to leave. He shouldered
>> arms, nervously and unsurely. Perhaps, he trusted the bouncy nature of
>> the deck — Oval is bouncier than most other surfaces in England and you
>> could at the start of the inning, leave safely on length. Perhaps, he
>> thought he had covered the line of the ball with his pads outside the
>> off-stump.
>>
>> Whatever he imagined was far from reality. It could happen to green
>> batsmen in England — it was just his third innings in the country. You
>> hear so much about the virtues of the leave and are almost mentally
>> bound to execute it. There is little doubt that it’s a prerequisite for
>> success in any condition — so indispensable that it is the second most
>> employed (non) stroke in cricket after the forward defensive. Call it
>> the phantom stroke. It has game changing potential, as one of the
>> greatest leavers in Test cricket, Geoff Boycott would observe: “Let him
>> (bowler) see you refusing to drive so that he is tempted to land the
>> ball a foot closer to you. Then bang. Get on the front foot and drive
>> the ball away.” At the hands of an efficient purveyor, it becomes as
>> much an attacking weapon as a defensive one. Without even putting bat on
>> the ball, it could disrupt the bowler’s thinking. “If a batter is
>> leaving the ball well, you can see their game is in good order and for
>> me I thought if they were leaving me easily then they were imposing
>> themselves on me as well,” former England quick Simon Jones would once say.
>>
>> Every successful cricketer has it. Then every cricketer had misjudged
>> the leave at least once, if not more times, in their career. Even some
>> of the finest leavers could end up misjudging, like Cheteshwar Pujara.
>> The leave is one of the bricks that had gone into the making of one of
>> the finest stonewallers of this era. But here, the usual faithful
>> judgment deserted him. Like Boland, Cameron Green too was angling most
>> of his balls in. Just one of Green’s five previous balls to Pujara had
>> shaped away. As were most of the balls he faced off Boland.
>>
>> Perhaps, Pujara was spooked by the past, where Cummins would make one
>> ball hold the line after angling in. Boland had produced a similar
>> delivery in the previous over. Maybe, it was playing in his mind. The
>> fuller length almost convinced him that the ball would seam away after
>> landing. Rather, it swerved back in, not lavishly but just enough to peg
>> his off-stump. He just swayed the bat in shame rather than anger and
>> rushed back to the solitude of the dressing room. Like Gill, he too was
>> batting fluently and positively, before the moment of miscalculation.
>>
>> Should Pujara have hung on the back-foot and defend it, as he so often
>> does to similar lengths in similar conditions? But in this innings, he
>> was making a conscious effort to get forward to most of the balls. It
>> was perhaps to eliminate the half-prod position that he often gets into.
>> But here, it backfired — there was a bit of predetermination — as he
>> left a ball that he would have defended comfortably.
>>
>> Then this is what pitches in England do. They weigh and play on your
>> mind, they make you imagine, they make you see illusions. Even in the
>> mind of someone scoring a bucketful of runs in County cricket, and even
>> in the mind of the most talented young batter. It’s not the easiest of
>> strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and second-guessing go into it.
>> But to die a stroke-less death is an agony that has few equivalents in
>> the game. Not even self-goals. The guilt consumes you like fire.
>
>
> Hmmmm... sounds as though the Indians might have listened to the Chinese Soldiers video recently ... RH
>

Sounded like you wet and shit in your panties when you merely heard the
word "DEATH" in a benign sentence.

On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:59:59 AM UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> On 6/9/2023 2:36 AM, Robert Henderson wrote:
> > On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 9:55:39 AM UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
> >> On 6/8/2023 3:12 PM, Richard Dixon wrote:
> >>> Love this (and these two blokes):
> >>>
> >>> https://twitter.com/Final_Word_Pod/status/1666894847431565340
> >> Those two blokes DIDN'T DO ANY "REAL ANALYSIS".
> >>
> >> They merely jumped to conclusions and GOSSIPED about fans reactions.
> >>
> >> This columnist ANALYZED Pujara and Gill's shouldering arms.
> >>
> >> So, WHO IS BETTER between those two blokes and this columnist Sandip G?
> >> It’s not the easiest of strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and
> >> second-guessing go into it. But to die a stroke-less death is an agony
> >> that has few equivalents in the game. Not even self-goals.
> >> *** The guilt consumes you like fire. ***
> >> https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/wtc-final-shubman-gill-cheteshwar-pujara-fail-in-the-art-of-leaving-8653353/
> >>
> >> WTC Final: Shubman Gill, Cheteshwar Pujara fail in the art of leaving
> >>
> >> Shubman Gill and Cheteshwar Pujara pay the ultimate price for misjudging
> >> the line and length as Aussies make early inroads
> >>
> >>
> >> Two of India’s key batsmen died a stroke-less death, shouldering arms
> >> and watching the ball bend back to hit the stumps. It’s the most
> >> mind-crushing path to perdition, torn until your next success, with the
> >> guilt of not shielding the ball with your only weapon in hand. You could
> >> have nicked, you could have chopped on, you could have been beaten, but
> >> you could console yourself that you at least played a stroke.
> >>
> >> The shocked anguish on the face of victims captures the story. Shubman
> >> Gill was reaction-less after his ill-timed leave of Scott Boland left
> >> his stumps and heart in tatters. There were no signs of a stroke of
> >> indiscretion. He was judging lengths well; moving well. Getting behind
> >> the line and playing the right stroke to the right ball. Gill had
> >> unzipped his innings with a gorgeous punch through extra-cover off Pat
> >> Cummins. Later, he would pull him through long-on for another four. Two
> >> salivating strokes, before an unwatchable error in judgement kicked in..
> >> It was no shrewd set-up, no hooping devil, but a staple in-ducker.
> >> Rather, it was an imagined set-up.
> >>
> >> It was just the fourth ball Boland had bowled to Gill. The first three —
> >> all angled in and not seaming either way — were defended stoutly on the
> >> front-foot. Gill sniffed a trap. His instinct would have whispered to
> >> him that the next ball would bend away. But Boland’s deadliest gift is
> >> the one that snakes back in from a good length, he is not much of an
> >> out-swing proponent. So it turned out to be. Gill’s front-foot strode
> >> out. Then it stopped, frozen by the inward angle. The existential
> >> dilemma of Test openers set in — to leave or not to leave. He shouldered
> >> arms, nervously and unsurely. Perhaps, he trusted the bouncy nature of
> >> the deck — Oval is bouncier than most other surfaces in England and you
> >> could at the start of the inning, leave safely on length. Perhaps, he
> >> thought he had covered the line of the ball with his pads outside the
> >> off-stump.
> >>
> >> Whatever he imagined was far from reality. It could happen to green
> >> batsmen in England — it was just his third innings in the country. You
> >> hear so much about the virtues of the leave and are almost mentally
> >> bound to execute it. There is little doubt that it’s a prerequisite for
> >> success in any condition — so indispensable that it is the second most
> >> employed (non) stroke in cricket after the forward defensive. Call it
> >> the phantom stroke. It has game changing potential, as one of the
> >> greatest leavers in Test cricket, Geoff Boycott would observe: “Let him
> >> (bowler) see you refusing to drive so that he is tempted to land the
> >> ball a foot closer to you. Then bang. Get on the front foot and drive
> >> the ball away.” At the hands of an efficient purveyor, it becomes as
> >> much an attacking weapon as a defensive one. Without even putting bat on
> >> the ball, it could disrupt the bowler’s thinking. “If a batter is
> >> leaving the ball well, you can see their game is in good order and for
> >> me I thought if they were leaving me easily then they were imposing
> >> themselves on me as well,” former England quick Simon Jones would once say.
> >>
> >> Every successful cricketer has it. Then every cricketer had misjudged
> >> the leave at least once, if not more times, in their career. Even some
> >> of the finest leavers could end up misjudging, like Cheteshwar Pujara.
> >> The leave is one of the bricks that had gone into the making of one of
> >> the finest stonewallers of this era. But here, the usual faithful
> >> judgment deserted him. Like Boland, Cameron Green too was angling most
> >> of his balls in. Just one of Green’s five previous balls to Pujara had
> >> shaped away. As were most of the balls he faced off Boland.
> >>
> >> Perhaps, Pujara was spooked by the past, where Cummins would make one
> >> ball hold the line after angling in. Boland had produced a similar
> >> delivery in the previous over. Maybe, it was playing in his mind. The
> >> fuller length almost convinced him that the ball would seam away after
> >> landing. Rather, it swerved back in, not lavishly but just enough to peg
> >> his off-stump. He just swayed the bat in shame rather than anger and
> >> rushed back to the solitude of the dressing room. Like Gill, he too was
> >> batting fluently and positively, before the moment of miscalculation.
> >>
> >> Should Pujara have hung on the back-foot and defend it, as he so often
> >> does to similar lengths in similar conditions? But in this innings, he
> >> was making a conscious effort to get forward to most of the balls. It
> >> was perhaps to eliminate the half-prod position that he often gets into.
> >> But here, it backfired — there was a bit of predetermination — as he
> >> left a ball that he would have defended comfortably.
> >>
> >> Then this is what pitches in England do. They weigh and play on your
> >> mind, they make you imagine, they make you see illusions. Even in the
> >> mind of someone scoring a bucketful of runs in County cricket, and even
> >> in the mind of the most talented young batter. It’s not the easiest of
> >> strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and second-guessing go into it.
> >> But to die a stroke-less death is an agony that has few equivalents in
> >> the game. Not even self-goals. The guilt consumes you like fire.
> >
> >
> > Hmmmm... sounds as though the Indians might have listened to the Chinese Soldiers video recently ... RH
> >
> Sounded like you wet and shit in your panties when you merely heard the
> word "DEATH" in a benign sentence.

Yep, it's definitely Chinese Soldiers that has put the wind up them... RH

On 6/9/2023 6:07 AM, Robert Henderson wrote:
> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 10:59:59 AM UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>> On 6/9/2023 2:36 AM, Robert Henderson wrote:
>>> On Friday, June 9, 2023 at 9:55:39 AM UTC+1, FBInCIAnNSATerroristSlayer wrote:
>>>> On 6/8/2023 3:12 PM, Richard Dixon wrote:
>>>>> Love this (and these two blokes):
>>>>>
>>>>> https://twitter.com/Final_Word_Pod/status/1666894847431565340
>>>> Those two blokes DIDN'T DO ANY "REAL ANALYSIS".
>>>>
>>>> They merely jumped to conclusions and GOSSIPED about fans reactions.
>>>>
>>>> This columnist ANALYZED Pujara and Gill's shouldering arms.
>>>>
>>>> So, WHO IS BETTER between those two blokes and this columnist Sandip G?
>>>> It’s not the easiest of strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and
>>>> second-guessing go into it. But to die a stroke-less death is an agony
>>>> that has few equivalents in the game. Not even self-goals.
>>>> *** The guilt consumes you like fire. ***
>>>> https://indianexpress.com/article/sports/cricket/wtc-final-shubman-gill-cheteshwar-pujara-fail-in-the-art-of-leaving-8653353/
>>>>
>>>> WTC Final: Shubman Gill, Cheteshwar Pujara fail in the art of leaving
>>>>
>>>> Shubman Gill and Cheteshwar Pujara pay the ultimate price for misjudging
>>>> the line and length as Aussies make early inroads
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Two of India’s key batsmen died a stroke-less death, shouldering arms
>>>> and watching the ball bend back to hit the stumps. It’s the most
>>>> mind-crushing path to perdition, torn until your next success, with the
>>>> guilt of not shielding the ball with your only weapon in hand. You could
>>>> have nicked, you could have chopped on, you could have been beaten, but
>>>> you could console yourself that you at least played a stroke.
>>>>
>>>> The shocked anguish on the face of victims captures the story. Shubman
>>>> Gill was reaction-less after his ill-timed leave of Scott Boland left
>>>> his stumps and heart in tatters. There were no signs of a stroke of
>>>> indiscretion. He was judging lengths well; moving well. Getting behind
>>>> the line and playing the right stroke to the right ball. Gill had
>>>> unzipped his innings with a gorgeous punch through extra-cover off Pat
>>>> Cummins. Later, he would pull him through long-on for another four. Two
>>>> salivating strokes, before an unwatchable error in judgement kicked in.
>>>> It was no shrewd set-up, no hooping devil, but a staple in-ducker.
>>>> Rather, it was an imagined set-up.
>>>>
>>>> It was just the fourth ball Boland had bowled to Gill. The first three —
>>>> all angled in and not seaming either way — were defended stoutly on the
>>>> front-foot. Gill sniffed a trap. His instinct would have whispered to
>>>> him that the next ball would bend away. But Boland’s deadliest gift is
>>>> the one that snakes back in from a good length, he is not much of an
>>>> out-swing proponent. So it turned out to be. Gill’s front-foot strode
>>>> out. Then it stopped, frozen by the inward angle. The existential
>>>> dilemma of Test openers set in — to leave or not to leave. He shouldered
>>>> arms, nervously and unsurely. Perhaps, he trusted the bouncy nature of
>>>> the deck — Oval is bouncier than most other surfaces in England and you
>>>> could at the start of the inning, leave safely on length. Perhaps, he
>>>> thought he had covered the line of the ball with his pads outside the
>>>> off-stump.
>>>>
>>>> Whatever he imagined was far from reality. It could happen to green
>>>> batsmen in England — it was just his third innings in the country. You
>>>> hear so much about the virtues of the leave and are almost mentally
>>>> bound to execute it. There is little doubt that it’s a prerequisite for
>>>> success in any condition — so indispensable that it is the second most
>>>> employed (non) stroke in cricket after the forward defensive. Call it
>>>> the phantom stroke. It has game changing potential, as one of the
>>>> greatest leavers in Test cricket, Geoff Boycott would observe: “Let him
>>>> (bowler) see you refusing to drive so that he is tempted to land the
>>>> ball a foot closer to you. Then bang. Get on the front foot and drive
>>>> the ball away.” At the hands of an efficient purveyor, it becomes as
>>>> much an attacking weapon as a defensive one. Without even putting bat on
>>>> the ball, it could disrupt the bowler’s thinking. “If a batter is
>>>> leaving the ball well, you can see their game is in good order and for
>>>> me I thought if they were leaving me easily then they were imposing
>>>> themselves on me as well,” former England quick Simon Jones would once say.
>>>>
>>>> Every successful cricketer has it. Then every cricketer had misjudged
>>>> the leave at least once, if not more times, in their career. Even some
>>>> of the finest leavers could end up misjudging, like Cheteshwar Pujara.
>>>> The leave is one of the bricks that had gone into the making of one of
>>>> the finest stonewallers of this era. But here, the usual faithful
>>>> judgment deserted him. Like Boland, Cameron Green too was angling most
>>>> of his balls in. Just one of Green’s five previous balls to Pujara had
>>>> shaped away. As were most of the balls he faced off Boland.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps, Pujara was spooked by the past, where Cummins would make one
>>>> ball hold the line after angling in. Boland had produced a similar
>>>> delivery in the previous over. Maybe, it was playing in his mind. The
>>>> fuller length almost convinced him that the ball would seam away after
>>>> landing. Rather, it swerved back in, not lavishly but just enough to peg
>>>> his off-stump. He just swayed the bat in shame rather than anger and
>>>> rushed back to the solitude of the dressing room. Like Gill, he too was
>>>> batting fluently and positively, before the moment of miscalculation.
>>>>
>>>> Should Pujara have hung on the back-foot and defend it, as he so often
>>>> does to similar lengths in similar conditions? But in this innings, he
>>>> was making a conscious effort to get forward to most of the balls. It
>>>> was perhaps to eliminate the half-prod position that he often gets into.
>>>> But here, it backfired — there was a bit of predetermination — as he
>>>> left a ball that he would have defended comfortably.
>>>>
>>>> Then this is what pitches in England do. They weigh and play on your
>>>> mind, they make you imagine, they make you see illusions. Even in the
>>>> mind of someone scoring a bucketful of runs in County cricket, and even
>>>> in the mind of the most talented young batter. It’s not the easiest of
>>>> strokes — judgment, prudence, reflexes and second-guessing go into it.
>>>> But to die a stroke-less death is an agony that has few equivalents in
>>>> the game. Not even self-goals. The guilt consumes you like fire.
>>>
>>>
>>> Hmmmm... sounds as though the Indians might have listened to the Chinese Soldiers video recently ... RH
>>>
>> Sounded like you wet and shit in your panties when you merely heard the
>> word "DEATH" in a benign sentence.
>
> Yep, it's definitely Chinese Soldiers that has put the wind up them... RH

Just the word "DEATH" in a benign sentence "TRIGGERS FEAR" in western
whites MINDS.

I am the ONLY person on the planet who KNOWS THIS "FOR A FACT".

A WHITE MAN is an OXYMORON - Whites are a RACE of fucking COWARDS n PUSSIES
https://groups.google.com/g/misc.survivalism/c/5YYq6QlQ0PI/m/cb_SR32SAAAJ