|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
And Cook's Clowns do their best to resume what for them is usual service; five wickets down for not many runs.
Ooooh! Have they at last (Cook's team) found a proper opening batsman (Haseeb Hameed)???
Meanwhile, probably best not to mention the recent Australia-South Africa series as far as Australians go. Was that an Australian side bowled out for 85 at home in the Hobart test?
Hah! And Cook's team are now so inept at batting (at least in unfriendly conditions) that they've lost a test-match to Bangladesh. To Bangladesh. (Although at least Cook himself managed a semi-respectable knock in the second innings.)
Well, Morgan's team did okay in the one day series, until the 'real' Pakistan decided to 'turn up'. I think up until then the one day side may have been flattered by the opposition they were playing against.
And Cook's team do indeed snatch a series-draw from the jaws of victory, as Yasir resumes where he left off after the first test, taking five wickets relatively cheaply in the second innings of the Oval test.
Umm. Better performances in two matches immediately after Lords by Cook's team.
brock, no the other one... wrote:
I have no special knowledge of such things, but I assume that UK based companies that would be hit by this are already contingency planning a move to Paris, Frankfurt, or Amsterdam, if whatever deal is hashed out does not include financial passporting. What worries me is that if the uncertainty stretches on too long, they may get to the point in the planning where it is worth executing anyway.
I wouldn't be surprised if some of them move; however, for reasons of costs involved, and/or key staff not being able to relocate, I imagine that not all corporate lenders will relocate, which as far as I can see would result in a reduction of corporate lending available inside the EU.So: is there sufficient slack in the corporate lending sector of the EU (minus the UK) for them to be able to cope with the loss of lenders?
(And indeed, something which had not occurred to me in my previous post: are EU organizations/businesses allowed to borrow outside the EU - in which case it's possibly a moot point whether London is in or out? Given Irontooth's post (which I was originally responding to), I get a sense that there must be some sort of controls or regulations which make it difficult/expensive (or outright illegal) for EU organizations/businesses to borrow (edit: on a 'corporate lending' scale) outside the EU...)
Interesting. Looking at the EU side of things, is there sufficient slack on the corporate lenders front inside the EU (minus the UK) to completely make up for the removal of London from the EU's corporate loans market?
After managing to beat an under-cooked Sri Lanka team, in a series where the first couple of test matches took place on pitches tremendously favourable to Cook's team, normal service has been resumed with Cook's team being thrashed by Pakistan at Lords. Geoffrey Boycott has just said in the post-match interviews/analysis that he doesn't think Pakistan are that much better than Cook's team - a possible omen, given what happened in Australia when he said similar things, that Cook's team are about to go down without winning a single test in the series...
Meanwhile, the women's England teams are having quite a good summer...
I'm not on anyone's negotiating team (and I'd probably be under non-disclosure if I were) so I have no idea what positions are being taken up. What I was commenting on was that George Osbourne and company seemed to be predicting *instant* financial armageddon if the UK voted 'Leave' (including stuff that George Osbourne himself would immediately implement - although maybe Cameron going like that cut George off at the knees on that count) and yet nothing (or at least not in any non-geological sense of the word 'instant') seems to be happening yet.
On a counterpoint to that, I also heard the 'leave' camp boasting during the referendum campaign that the moment the UK left the EU, it would be able to start signing trade deals in all directions with the rest of the world; deals which would mean satisfactory profits and prosperity for the UK, to balance whatever went bye-bye with the EU. (And at least in theory, in a best-case-somewhere-over-the-rainbow scenario, they were right on that. The potential customer base outside the EU is absolutely HUGE; India alone has a population approaching something like twice that of the EU minus UK, and there are China and lower-population-but-wealthier-countries out there too.)
In fairness, the country was also lied to by the 'remain' camp, who promised some sort of financial apocalypse, and George Osborne going crazy with a budget hatchet within days of any 'leave' vote.So far the pound has fallen, but the stockmarket seems to have been bouncing up and down rather than plummeting through the floor, George Osborne had a chance to implement (or at least announce) a budget that would bring the country to its knees - and yet singularly failed to do so - and there seems to have been a shortage of bankers throwing themselves off the top of Canary Wharf or The Gherkin to date or of their institutions going into meltdown.
The country voted (overall) to leave, and yet the four horsemen of the financial apocalypse seem to have decided (thus far - granted that *might* change) to loiter in the bar for a couple of more rounds of drinks, rather than to ride out laying waste to the economy.
Kevin Mack wrote:
The UK has a history of changing national leaders without General Elections in moments of crisis.Winston Churchill replacing Neville Chamberlain in May, 1940, for example...
Charles Evans 25 wrote:
* Main concourse is open these days, but some platforms continue to be closed.
** Fenced off on the east side of the main concourse, that is to say. See post #7 on this thread.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Are you saying that Goshwatta University University Senate doesn't actually do any regulating or governing at all of Goshwatta University???If so, by golly, you may have a point! :)
The Raven Black wrote:
The problem with saying 'The EU is NOT a government' is that it seems to have gone out of its way to deliberately name a lot of its institutions (such as the European Parliament, the various European Presidents, and the European Court of Justice*) as if it were a government.It also has a 'budget'.
For an institution which isn't a government, the EU seems to like dressing up as one a lot - well, either that or the translators really messed up when translating the various names and titles of its departments and functionaries into English... :)
* The European Court of Human Rights (which should NOT be confused with the European Court of Justice) is, of course, actually (at the time of this post) an institution outside of the EU. Not that there aren't some in the UK who apparently confuse the ECHR as being an EU institution, which misconception has possibly been unfortunately aided by European treaty obligations requiring member states in some circumstances to abide by ECHR rulings. :(
Most recent 'official' map pdf of Birmingham New Street Station by Network Rail: Link
The Raven Black wrote:
(edited, typo corrected, minor rewording)The pre-referendum debate/discussion campaign was going on for six months or so. There should have been more than enough time for the 'remain' side to utterly discredit any claims lacking foundation in reality (especially with Nigel Farage's constant assistance by quoting figures that fell apart under scrutiny) that the EU was/is a source of problems. Or at least there should have been enough time assuming the big speakers on the 'remain' side were competent politicians (which admittedly there seems to be some debate about in the UK right now, at least in the case of Jeremy Corbyn - does this lead to a conclusion that Corbyn may have been a crucial weakness in the 'remain' campaign???).
Smarnil le couard wrote:
I'm not trying to say the EU should give a UK that leaves the EU any kind of special deal; I'm saying that, on paper, with so much that should have been lined up in favour of a 'remain' vote, I hope that someone in the EU is thinking 'what the heck just happened?' possibly followed up by 'was that a one-off bizarro situation, or are we going to have to make changes so it doesn't happen elsewhere?'
Hopefully someone in Brussels is asking themself 'what the heck happened here?' over the referendum result. As far as I can see, on paper at least, the 'remain' side should have had the deck stacked in their favour in the run up:
And yet, with all those things nominally in its favour, and on top of that years of those little 'blue flag with five pointed stars' plaques going up in projects all over the UK to announce that 'this was funded by the EU' (and on the Thursday night that the polls closed, Nigel Farage himself said he thought 'remain' had the result in the bag, before he went to bed), the 'remain' side still lost.
Despite all those things, there was still a majority (almost 52% against 48%) of voters who took part who felt sufficiently disenchanted (or at least disconnected) from the EU to give the day to the 'leave' campaign.
I really hope that someone in Brussels is trying to honestly understand what happened, because somehow the EU (as an institution) appears to have become alienated from a lot of at least UK voters...
New Street Station continues to be a building site, of course...
Secret project possibilities:
(Men's) South Africa 50 over series over, 2-3 against Morgan's team.
Meanwhile, the England Women won their 50 over series against South Africa...
South Africa test series over, 2-1 to Cook's team.
Morgan's teams, after a wobbly start, won both the fifty over and twenty over series.
And in the meantime, Australia have defeated New Zealand in a day-night test-match.
News from UAE not good for Cook's team. 0-2 thrashing by Pakistan as Cook's team failed to score fast enough on the last day in the first test match to snatch an improbable win, and then their batting hit self-destruct mode in at least one innings in each of the last two test matches.
Currently looking better news for Australia in their current test series against New Zealand. Potential opportunity to force New Zealand to follow-on with half the match still to go.
I feel that I should clarify that most of my comments to date assess the preconstructed decks in the context of multi-player situations. It's belatedly occurred to me that for one-on-one situations, some of them should possibly be rated differently.
On to 'Eternal Bargain':
Correction: 'Nature of the Beast' also features, in the flying department, 'Eternal Dragon'. Since it's another casting cost 7 double-points-of-white creature, it's as unlikely as 'Archangel' to save the deck from being mauled for the first half dozen or so turns by all manner of faeries and vampires with the odd 'Zombie Drake' or 'Goblin Balloon Brigade' thrown in.
'Nature of the Beast' from the 2013 Commander preconstructed decks has some interesting cards as far as breakdown value goes (including one 'Wrath of God') but has problems as a deck. Apart from one 'Archangel' it seems to be wide open to being attacked by creatures with flying, and at more than half non-basic lands it's in potentially trouble if a turn two 'Dwarven Miner' hits the table.
On the 'technical pacifist' count, Davros pretty much accused the Tennant Doctor of being that in the Journey's End episode.
Mind you, a different Doctor, the Tom Baker one, did do his best to keep one of his companions, Leela, from solving problems by creating a trail of bodies...
Turin the Mad wrote:
Chapter 7 was all home-brewed, good (Sir) Charles. I put in a LOT more work than I used due to the "they have 3 sessions, max, to do-or-die against Sorshen".
Reading about it again, I just picked up that the Arboretum/Menagerie area was apparently 'multi-level', which by the sound of it should have offered lots of scope for strategic positioning of characters/monsters.It seems almost a shame when a detailed location only gets one brief - albeit for an epic fight - outing.
And just to mix things up, in the last two matches of the one day series neither team batting first is able to score enough runs for their bowlers to be able contain the other side.
Progress report for Morgan's team on the fifty over match front... mixed, at best. Won some matches well in home conditions, lost others equally spectacularly, and lose the series 2-3 in the final match.
Been away (bar the odd cricket post) on other websites for a while, and only just caught up with the grand finale.
Hmm. So, Australia bat first in the first two fifty over matches, and win thumping victories; Morgan's team bat first in the third match and win a thumping victory. Pattern emerging here of 'bat first and win'?
Morgan's team win their 20/20 match, and then proceed to imitate a herd of lemmings rushing off a precipice in the first fifty over game, down at Southampton. They were keeping up with the run-rate, they had wickets in hand, and then proceeded to throw away a succession of wickets and control of the game with a succession of needless shots.
There's playing 'positive' cricket, and then there's playing 'reckless' cricket.
Morgan's team nine down and heading for defeat at the time of this post, in a game that earlier it looked like they had an at least outside chance of winning.
Inexperienced players or, if that cannot be used to excuse them, utterly brainless.
And the Southern Stars complete formalities and wrap up the women's Ashes series with one match still to go. They're simply too good for Charlotte Edwards' team in the shorter forms of the game - once the England women lost the test, that was always going to be it, for the England women.
Well. That was unexpected. The Southern Stars' undefeated 20/20 run finally comes to an end at the hands of the England women...
Could be partially a consequence of the multiple changes of personnel on the management/coaching side of things, I suppose, with regard to the fragility of Cook's team.
Okay, they've had a year less between a test series 'down under' and the subsequent one in England, but they've still had eighteen months which would be the traditional gap between a series in England and the following one in Australia.
And Cook's team, at least, have had considerable changes of personnel since the 0-5 thrashing they were handed on the 2013-2014 tour.
And Cook's team do their best to prove it was pure fluke that they won this series, by being hammered by an innings by the Australians in the last test at the Oval.
The way this series has gone, day one has been decisive - whomever had the fortune to win day one, the other side lacked the capacity to seriously fight back from that. Day one of each test match has basically been a knock-out blow, that either side, when on the receiving end of, has proven incapable of coming back from.
England women currently being hammered at Canterbury.
Cook's team, who nobody was expecting to beat the Australians have done so, handily, and the England women, whom I'd have thought were at least even to retain them, are currently going down in smoke and flames, being mercilessly demolished in even the format of the game (test matches) that they're supposedly best at.
That's cricket for you!
Didn't Roald Dahl write stories like this? I'm thinking in particular of his Two Fables collection, although it's been some time since I read it, and I may be misremembering. I think one of the stories in that had a Princess so dazzlingly beautiful that people driven crazy by it threw themselves onto the pikes of her guards, if she went out in public.
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
There is no such thing as cricket anymore..... Hello rugby and New Zealand aren't undefeatable. :-)
Cheer up! Australia are darned near invincible across the shorter forms of cricket, of late, in both the men's and the women's game, or at least versus England (although Charlotte Edwards' squads have tended to do slightly better in such formats against Australia than their male counterparts).
And yes, congratulations on the rugby.
And that's it...
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
The Australian strategy is clearly to let Cook's team get out in front a little bit, so that they feel all over-confident and off-guard, and then the Australians will come speeding up from behind and *CRUSH* them. :DErr, Clarke does know, though, that this is only a five test series, doesn't he?
He might have put himself under a bit of pressure if he was planning on winning it four tests to Australia to three to Cook's team.
Possible refund needed for my day 4 + 5 trent bridge tickets
Might go to Day 4 if Cook's team manage to bat a decent amount of time, and the Australians dig in and bat for something like two days in their second innings.Or if it rains. A lot.
Pretty good bowling figures for Broad. 8 wickets for 15 runs in nine and a half overs...
And 'Extras' was the highest scorer for Australia - at 14 runs...
And that surely must have been the first time in a while that Cook's team has had a field set for a batsman with six slips???
What the heck was that??????