RobinRobin

Won't be for the referendum and ensuing chaos, certainly.

That's what we all said about Spurs, but ... ... 4-0 clearly

The main core does not have to be the same, it just so happens that the best cricketers are the best cricketers. As you say, Stoneman, Jennings and Hameed have not shown up. The real problem was with Hameed, who seemed destined to be the next Cook, when in India, got injured there and has never got any sort of form back. I am sure that everyone was dancing for joy at the ECB in his first test, but I suppose there have been lots of players over the years who have flattered to deceive. He just seemed to have it all, especially at such a young age.

No one willing to be a martyr to the Brexit cause, it seems

They did try it for a while, but when Bayliss came in he was on his own. He is basically a limited overs coach, anyway, and was brought in for the purpose of winning the World Cup - although it would have been nice to have won the Ashes this year, as well. I am all for separate coaches, in principle, but there still needs to be someone over them who can ensure that players are not burned out, because of competing requirements of those separate coaches. For example, the limited overs coach will want his players in the IPL, but the test coach will want them rested for the summer, or playing red ball cricket at home. Not sure how we handle that, because, in the main, the core of the players is the same for each format.

If only

He is from Yorkshire, though, so regards himself as part of a sovereign nation outside the EU and the UK, already.

The bottom line is that the best batsmen (and bowlers) in the world can and do play all forms of the game. The absolute best players (Kohli, Smith, Williamson), though, can and do play the conditions and occasion, not just the same game each time. We need to coach resilience and perspective, not just "see it - hit it", especially early in an innings or when the match needs to be drawn.

Yes - last time we will see that again for a long time

I reckon Cummings will have given it a second thought, and will not have cared, but Johnson won't have considered it at all, because it has no relevance to "getting Brexit done".

Does that not then give Scotland an option to argue they should be allowed to remain in the CU and SM, because it no longer means a breakup of the Union (and Wales)?

I just love how some people always want someone else to be a martyr for the cause, but are unwilling to be one themselves

Pretty unforgivable, but so was everyone else dropping their shoulders as a result.

So Roy was playing the Warner role

As an aside, it was good to see on the rugby broadcast not one SD sign On the other hand, I suppose he pocketed a large amount of cash from England Rugby and the paying punters which will not go towards NUFC

Politicians (all of them) only answer the question they want to answer, not the one put to them. Interviewers, etc, eventually give up. We need Paxman v Howard questioning

Woakes was hardly being used by him anyway, but yes seems an odd decision to leave him for so long. As I understand it, the pitch does not really suit Overton, which calls into question why they made the decision so early, rather than waiting for the toss.

That's what Johnson is relying on, i.e. that Corbyn will say something stupid, put some of his less strident supporters offside, and split the opposition vote.

Neither did I. Would have preferred Curran

Stop sugar-coating it for fuck's sake

I thought he was at 5

Rafa signed a contract and honoured it.

I see that it is now being argued that VAR should have disallowed Schar's goal, because it touched Hayden's arm, so we were lucky to get a draw I also noted a couple of times on the broadcast when we had shouts for penalties, and there were few if any replays shown. If that had been one of the top four or six (or whatever it is now), we would have seen 43 replays to show it should have been a penalty (even the one where Joe tripped himself).