VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2], 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:24:19 06/21/04 Mon
Author: fizz
Subject: Re: England No.2?
In reply to: Toady 's message, "England No.2?" on 07:59:03 06/21/04 Mon

Anyone else agree that this process cannot fail to continue now that we've got shot of that good for nothing cockney-git Hussain?

I reckon South Africa, India and Sri Lanka would all have something to say about that given that in the last six series against them all we have only won one and lost three. England are a better side now than they were then although I still think both their batsmen and bowlers will have to come through some tougher encounters than in the past 8 months to mentally prove themselves as tough as the aussies, and in losing Nasser they are already down one in that category

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.