Kellfire
Blackballed
So basically, you agree with me that most crimes go unpunished, but you have an issue with me pointing that out?
Baffling.
So basically, you agree with me that most crimes go unpunished, but you have an issue with me pointing that out?
Baffling.
Junior
Tour Winner
The thing for me that seems to have gone unnoticed is Alex Hales booting the guy in the head when he was on the ground. I'm glad its over now. How its taken almost a year to sort out a drunken brawl, something that happens up and down the country every Friday and Saturday night, is beyond me.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
Stokes been added to the squad which I suspect was always going to happen if he was cleared - time to move on now , Curran I think will be the one to miss out
GB72
Money List Winner
What you have is a far more complex and much debated point here. Most modern societies have adopted the approach that it better to fail to convict the guilty than it is to wrongly convict the innocent. That is why we maintain the strong burden of proof in criminal trials as opposed to the lesser ‘on the balance of probabilities’ approach in civil trials. On that basis, it would appear in your mind that it is less heinous to convict somebody for something that they may not have done than to risk not convicting a potentially guilty person.
That said, it remains the common man who decides who is guilty and who is not based on our system of being tried by our peers. You will get perverse decisions whereby a jury will not convict someone who is clearly guilty based on the fact that their actions were seen to be in the public good.
Basically, there is no easy answer. Our system is not as one sided as that in America where the type of representation that you can afford hugely influences the outcome of a trial as we have excellent criminal prosecutors and defenders working under the legal aid system.
What I always remember is that it is far easier to prove that someone did something than for someone to prove that they did not as it is very hard to prove a negative and so I think the system is pretty much fair.
Dan2501
Tour Winner
Interestingly Hales booting the bloke in the head was mentioned by Stokes' defence in their closing statement as something that should be looked into as it may have been Hales that caused the injuries to Ali. That'll be a fun conversation point next time they're in an England squad together.
Last edited:
Ah, so a preference for defendants to prove innocence is coupled with an inability to read. Adds up a bit more now.
I think you're looking for the Daily Mail Comments section. You'll slot right in there.
Kellfire
Blackballed
You're the one demonstrating an inability to read, most specifically that you're inferring that I am suggesting the burden of proof be changed when all I actually did was state that "it's sad" that it's so difficult to prosecute a crime.
I offered no alternative solution and did not say I feel it should be guilty until proven innocent.
Daily Mail? Don't be a plum. I'm as much of a snowflake as it's possible to be. I don't take that hate rag seriously at all.
Dan2501
Tour Winner
Been confirmed that Stokes will replace Curran on Saturday.
Tongo
Journeyman Pro
Should have dropped Buttler. But that's one of Ed Smith's whacky new picks so was never going to happen.
yes, Curran offers something different with his bowling and has scored my runs than Buttler anyway
Mudball
Assistant Pro
Sad.. what message does it give the youngster... you can play your heart out, but if you are not a selectors pet then you dont have much chance. Rashid, Butler having a free ride could have made way (unless they expect a turning pitch)
D
Deleted member 1418
Guest
Well at least Curran now knows what he needs to do to get back in - dye his hair ginger, go out on the lash, lamp someone repeatedly, and get banged-up..........🤔😉😂
Dan2501
Tour Winner
3 pints, 10 vodka lemonades and a few jagerbombs would probably kill Sam Curran. I'd probably just scale it down a bit if I was him!
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
If Stokes is going back into the team then it needs to be at the expense of a bowler not a batter or a spinner so that left either Woakes or Curran and after the last test then it was always going to be Curran.
Whether Stokes should be able to play is something that is a different debate - on a cricket perspective Stokes is one of the first names on the tee sheet
Can't argue. He's made some good runs and bowled tidily so hard to see what he's done to justify being dropped.
Mudball
Assistant Pro
So a good days play on Sunday. When the contest is even, the pendulum is in India's favour. There is something comforting about England's collapse consistency. Monday morning session will be interesting.
Piece
Tour Winner
Perhaps time for two new openers? Jennings just isn't good enough and his technique hasn't improved, keeps getting out the same way. Cook looks out of form and a bit disinterested?
you could be right. two down straight away in pretty much every innings recently.
Don't follow CC much now days but is anyone else scoring at the top of the order that could replace them?
I watched the last hour or so yesterday. It was a horrible time for the England batsmen and they did well to survive. However, I didn't see anything in how Jennings batted to suggest he has learnt from his previous spell for England. He stands on the back foot only, he pats back half volleys and looks vulnerable in so many ways (although I accept the ball was dancing around yesterday so that made it look worse) In short he is not the answer.
Cooks time is also up but the big problem is we don't have anyone to take over either openers slot. It is a great time to be an England opener. Score a few runs and the job is yours. Two slots available.
Beezerk
Money List Winner
Come in Mr Cook, your time has been up for some years.
