Somerset at the Oval

The way the weather has been he could have been forgiven for wearing the lot.

Nice of Steve to be so welcoming to any Muslims on the group.

Perhaps he had hoped to give them to the homeless.

Just stating a fact with the Met Adelaide. All these protests and not doing a thing when pro Palestine folk have broke the law. As soon as another race does anything they get nicked.
Hate the Met absolute scum.

Oh, so it is something to do with race?

VicNorth wrote:Oh, so it is something to do with race?

Wrong thread! Take it elswhere.

Bit late? Why didn't you say that 36 hours ago?

You are allowed to say non-cricket related things as long as they are "fact"?

VicNorth wrote:Bit late? Why didn't you say that 36 hours ago?

Say what? There is a thread for this stuff that has been put back on, despite the previous one disappearing.

Met 2 tier policing is a fact do yer research guys. Look at their officers attacking women and even killing them.

They let the Muslims live?

Chinaman wrote:

VicNorth wrote:Bit late? Why didn't you say that 36 hours ago?

Say what? There is a thread for this stuff that has been put back on, despite the previous one disappearing.

You didn't point out when this thread first went "off-topic"? Only when I responded.

VicNorth wrote:

Chinaman wrote:

VicNorth wrote:Bit late? Why didn't you say that 36 hours ago?

Say what? There is a thread for this stuff that has been put back on, despite the previous one disappearing.

You didn't point out when this thread first went "off-topic"?  Only when I responded.

Irrelevant because it went off topic.

Chinaman - To be fair, what we got was an off topic comment not very well concealed within an on topic comment. But what would be the point of objecting to the concealed off topic comment on a completely different thread?

It seems odd to me to object to the objections while saying not a dickie bird about Steve's comments on religion, race and police assaults on women. Quite why the last of those gets bracketed with religion and race I don't know, as misogynists are, I would have thought, unlikely to be at the forefront of wokeism.

adelaide wrote:Chinaman - To be fair, what we got was an off topic comment not very well concealed within an on topic comment. But what would be the point of objecting to the concealed off topic comment on a completely different thread?

It seems odd to me to object to the objections while saying not a dickie bird about Steve's comments on religion, race and police assaults on women. Quite why the last of those gets bracketed with religion and race I don't know, as misogynists are, I would have thought, unlikely to be at the forefront of wokeism.

Take this to the Anything But thread. I've already made it perfectly clear that I am no longer discussing off topic threads. If I was I would address Steve's very iffy comments thier.

Chinaman wrote:

adelaide wrote:Chinaman - To be fair, what we got was an off topic comment not very well concealed within an on topic comment. But what would be the point of objecting to the concealed off topic comment on a completely different thread?

It seems odd to me to object to the objections while saying not a dickie bird about Steve's comments on religion, race and police assaults on women. Quite why the last of those gets bracketed with religion and race I don't know, as misogynists are, I would have thought, unlikely to be at the forefront of wokeism.

Take this to the Anything But thread. I've already made it perfectly clear that I am no longer discussing off topic threads. If I was I would address Steve's very iffy comments thier.

Chinaman - You are missing the point, I fear. If The Guardian/Mail prints something offensive, would you expect to see responses in the Guardian/Mail or in the Croydon Advertiser? No, because anyone reading the Mail/Guardian would think nobody objected to the original item, or, worse, that everyone agreed with it.

Same here. Steve's comments don't, we agree, really belong on this current and well-read thread. Only responding on a thread most people probably swerve really doesn't cut the mustard. The place to call out very iffy comments is where those comments appeared.

To reinforce the point, how many people viewing this thread are even aware of the response from Jackers on the Anything but Cricket thread?

Missing the point? On topic, off topic? The trouble is the iffy comments always lead to a completely non cricket subject/discussion/row, which is what's happening with this. I actually don't give a monkey's, apart from the fact I wish I hadn't started the Anything But thread. This is borderline Guest 1,2,3 and Tony Gray stuff of the past.