Is anyone here on strike?

Anyone here work in the UK public sector?

No and Yes- but I had the day off anyway. Don't ask - it's a long story.

No.

No Merls, I didn't think you would be......

No. I defended the last three balls of the previous over, so it's "over to you, partner".


Incidentally, since when has being the one to face the bowling been called "IN strike" rather than "ON strike"? The former seems to have crept in, where I always used and use the latter. Is it some sort of sanitising right-wing political correctness gone mad?

No Merls, I didn't think you would be......

Exactly.

A totally pointless exercize ... bearing in mind that less than 25 % of the public sector workforce voted for "strike action".

Where's Scargill when you need him?

Perhaps it's some sort of Strine/Saffie/Snoozer twang that's getting you all confused?

Oh, and i'll tell you what has crept into the cricketing language in a big way and I hate it- "batter." I mean FFS, it's so f*cking baseball....Michael Clarke and the Gen Y Aussies are the worst. But i've heard God's own KP say it as well.

Is "batter" some form of political correctness gone mad to avoid the 'discriminating' batsMAN. I mean, FFS!

Maybe it's because they go fishing outside the off stump so much.

Eh ?!

Fish > Batter

I would have been had I not been sacked.

Fish>Batter>Blatter>Racist chatter>Don't matter>Shake hands then scatter.

In fairness, if it's a Pidge or a Chris Martin, "batsman" is rather too complimentary a term.

Whereas you cannot deny that they are holding a bat. Thus qualifying as a batter.

Henry wrote:Fish>Batter>Blatter>Racist chatter>Don't matter>Shake hands then scatter.

After you've had a nice little natter?

Hold on a mo .... I'm still trying to work out Fish>Batter ...

vilkrang wrote:I would have been had I not been sacked.

I didn't think you were sacked, Vilks. I thought you had just not been kept on.

It might seem immaterial, but the difference is there is no suggestion of fault of your own in the latter.

Henry wrote:Fish>Batter>Blatter>Racist chatter>Don't matter>Shake hands then scatter.

Very good Trev ... here's a Quality Street ...

Merlin wrote:Hold on a mo .... I'm still trying to work out Fish>Batter ...

It's the sort of thing that makes you fatter.

And harder to flatter.

PeterCS wrote:In fairness, if it's a Pidge or a Chris Martin, "batsman" is rather too complimentary a term.

Whereas you cannot deny that they are holding a bat. Thus qualifying as a batter.

"Chris Martin is the new bat holder for New Zealand. Or is his bat the new Chris Martin holder? Anyway, doesn't matter. He's out. Bowled first ball for 0."

Batter out, neck and crop.

= new KFC speciality.

PeterCS wrote:

Merlin wrote:Hold on a mo .... I'm still trying to work out Fish>Batter ...

It's the sort of thing that makes you fatter.

And harder to flatter.

Ah ... okay.
That explains things ..............I think.

Of course, if you are someone like Bob Willis, sometimes you don't even qualify as a "batter".

When it can be denied that you are holding a bat, going out to bat ...

Maybe Chris Martin should tuck his bat under his arm, throw off his pads, and go on strike as a batsman. "I refuse to accept yet another cut to my batting average", he would say.




Coat.

PeterCS wrote:

vilkrang wrote:I would have been had I not been sacked.

I didn't think you were sacked, Vilks. I thought you had just not been kept on.

It might seem immaterial, but the difference is there is no suggestion of fault of your own in the latter.

I suppose, though the end result is the same.