leicsmac

Could flip that and say that Oz needed England to bat as horrendously as they did to stay in the game themselves, missing two decent players or not.

The over rates have been shocking today.

That's what I meant by better prepared, better trained and better led in all honesty.

Anyone remember that bit at the end of the "Battle of Zama" in Gladiator where it cut to Proximo laughing his head off at what was going on? Yeah.

Cometh the moment, cometh the man. That's Stokes all over.

They've all brought their best, that's for sure. Need to break this partnership before the close, though.

Bloody hell, this is hostile stuff.

Iamjackscompletelackofsurprise.gif

Agreed, which means England can still get a result rather than this being a foregone conclusion. As some people appeared to think. A great deal of the commentary here went a fair bit beyond mere criticism of some of the shots. Which I'll happily admit were rubbish, I'm just not buying into the the fatalistic "we're doomed" bollocks just yet.

It was judging the teams, pitch and conditions before one side had batted on it, much less two. So yes, it was, and is. This team's results (with the exception of India away) really have done enough in the face of difficult conditions to deserve more faith from folks. Ooop, there goes another.

Good to see Smiths luck run out, too.

Good to see the usual reactionary rubbish after a tough session or two then. All the bowlers look up for it, need them five down by the end of the day to make it roughly even I think. Edit: Aussies getting a surfeit of luck here, too.

We will, in all likelihood, never have to deal with that very particular kind of situation again. The next peril the natural world throws at us, however, may well be worse instead.

There are a few remarkable examples, however, of nations that were apparently better prepared, better trained and better led, and so didn't have to trust to as much luck to weather the storm. And their outcomes speak to how successful they were at that.

Having it be 2002-03 all over again after choosing to bowl wouldn't be great either. Hopefully England will win the toss and Stokes will play the conditions.

Just on this subject? But yes, very much so.

Richard Tice. And RFK Jr for writing the playbook on autistic children that Tice is now reading chapter and verse from.

Don't worry, doesn't directly affect "us" so we don't need to care. Apparently.

The dearth of critical thought (though maybe it was always there, perhaps the internet made it patently obvious) when applied to policymaking, on at least some matters, is going to be highly destructive. That's moving from a probability to an inevitability. In times past, we (society) could get away with being "stupid". Now, however, with the way power and tech have advanced, so have the degree of consequences for that "stupidity".

Quoted for emphasis. We definitely stand at a crossroads as a species, with this and a few other critically important directions to take. And the route taken will affect all of us.

And I likewise saved while working abroad. As you say, it can be done by some. But I - and I like to hope a lot of other people - can and should push back against the sentiment in this and other cases where those "exceptions" are overlooked or appear not to matter. Because when that happens, it's very easy for those people to simply become "acceptable collateral damage" in some kind of social Darwinist ideal.

This is assuming that every person has a family capable of and willing to offer that support, and/or the wherewithal and stability to live with a platonic friend, or even a total stranger, harmoniously. Of course, neither of these things are guaranteed in every case. Once again, presenting this only as a matter of "it's always up to the person" personal responsibility sounds idealistic and good, but really doesn't take into account a lot of personal circumstances, and so is rather reductionist and lacking in empathy. Sometimes, people don't have control over their lives, sometimes the power inequality that clearly exists in modern society (as it has almost always) makes that clear, and sometimes those people need a bit of help, which (as long as people actually think we live in a society rather than Mad Max) those with the capability have a duty of care to provide.

That is a huge problem incoming, agreed. So that means either the way working society operates changes drastically, or (along with other pressures) the inequality will mushroom cloud to a degree that serious civil unrest will become probable to the point of being inevitable.

The Aussie press are the oldest and biggest trolls going when it comes to sport reporting. The only way to get them to shut up is to beat them. Hopefully this team has at least a chance of being up to the job.

Right. We're rapidly approaching a new Gilded Age, only with more sophisticated tech. And the idea that the rising tide of progress is lifting all ships is clearly incorrect - empirical evidence shows that. Wealth inequality is a massive issue and needs to be addressed, if only because other problems can then be addressed in turn.