FootballNews

Anyone know what tv company has the rights to it?

Being shared between Nine and Fox Sports

Cantona69 wrote:Being shared between Nine and Fox Sports

as long as it's on free to air then I'm happy! Will just have to put up with the 9 commentary though

God is an Englishman wrote:

Cantona69 wrote:Being shared between Nine and Fox Sports

as long as it's on free to air then I'm happy! Will just have to put up with the 9 commentary though

stream it live...

God is an Englishman wrote:

Cantona69 wrote:Being shared between Nine and Fox Sports

as long as it's on free to air then I'm happy! Will just have to put up with the 9 commentary though

I feel for you.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Cantona69 wrote:Being shared between Nine and Fox Sports

as long as it's on free to air then I'm happy! Will just have to put up with the 9 commentary though

Foxtel are usuing the Sky Commentary team,which is good news.

Not long to go now. England still firm favourites but there is a slight hint of optimism for Australia given some of the cobwebs seem to have been swept clean and Boof making some bold decisions - opening batsmen being a start.
Will be interesting to see the starting eleven for the Aussies with some positions anyone's guess at this point.

Our bowlers firing is the key, if they don't we are farrked...

Still won't be the white wash I was thinking a few weeks back.

don't think anything has changed, who's this new opening bloke?

Your bowlers need to fire and whip through the top 4/5 quickly. If they get a start then you're fucked. England seem to have issues when the top batsmen go cheaply. The tail can wag but doesn't seem to wag when the pressure's on them.

As for your batsmen, no clark - no australia.

It's hard to pick a 2nd australian who would get into the England side at the moment.

Will your government help you to play a pakistani in time. Typical convicts really - if you're rubbish, get someone without any blood links at all and call them australian

God is an Englishman wrote:don't think anything has changed, who's this new opening bloke?

Your bowlers need to fire and whip through the top 4/5 quickly. If they get a start then you're shiraz. England seem to have issues when the top batsmen go cheaply. The tail can wag but doesn't seem to wag when the pressure's on them.

As for your batsmen, no clark - no australia.

It's hard to pick a 2nd australian who would get into the England side at the moment.

Will your government help you to play a pakistani in time. Typical convicts really - if you're rubbish, get someone without any blood links at all and call them australian

Of course they will, doesn't matter the color of government they know what is important.... Sounds like the whinging has already started

Steve#4 wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:don't think anything has changed, who's this new opening bloke?

Your bowlers need to fire and whip through the top 4/5 quickly. If they get a start then you're shiraz. England seem to have issues when the top batsmen go cheaply. The tail can wag but doesn't seem to wag when the pressure's on them.

As for your batsmen, no clark - no australia.

It's hard to pick a 2nd australian who would get into the England side at the moment.

Will your government help you to play a pakistani in time. Typical convicts really - if you're rubbish, get someone without any blood links at all and call them australian

Of course they will, doesn't matter the color of government they know what is important.... Sounds like the whinging has already started

Well come it's ridiculous that you're even changing the laws of the country to speed up someones immigration status

How have the laws been changed...?

Steve#4 wrote:How have the laws been changed...?

you're attempting to speed up a process. I believe the law currently states that you must be a resident for 2 years before citizenship is allowed. The law is looking to be changed to allow this to be shortened for sports people who will bring significant exposure to the country.

In other words one law for most but if you can get into our national side then we'll speed it all up for you. That is just laughable.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Steve#4 wrote:How have the laws been changed...?

you're attempting to speed up a process. I believe the law currently states that you must be a resident for 2 years before citizenship is allowed. The law is looking to be changed to allow this to be shortened for sports people who will bring significant exposure to the country.

In other words one law for most but if you can get into our national side then we'll speed it all up for you. That is just laughable.

Yet having a great great great grandmother from the old country qualifies you virtually without exception. That's just as if not more laughable.

Bomber wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:

Steve#4 wrote:How have the laws been changed...?

you're attempting to speed up a process. I believe the law currently states that you must be a resident for 2 years before citizenship is allowed. The law is looking to be changed to allow this to be shortened for sports people who will bring significant exposure to the country.

In other words one law for most but if you can get into our national side then we'll speed it all up for you. That is just laughable.

Yet having a great great great grandmother from the old country qualifies you virtually without exception. That's just as if not more laughable.

NO it doesn't, but a grand parent does. That's the law of the land, no government is trying to change that. Only one player is using the grand parentage rule to get his passport, the others are using parentage.

Comparing someone with English blood to a bloke off the boat that the law is being changed to allow him to play

I dont think this bloke is in the ashes squad, so what are you worried about? You'll still have more "foreigners" in your team.

Bomber wrote:I dont think this bloke is in the ashes squad, so what are you worried about? You'll still have more "foreigners" in your team.

We won't have any foreigners in the team.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Bomber wrote:I dont think this bloke is in the ashes squad, so what are you worried about? You'll still have more "foreigners" in your team.

We won't have any foreigners in the team.

They are all foreigners to us.

God is an Englishman wrote:

Steve#4 wrote:How have the laws been changed...?

you're attempting to speed up a process. I believe the law currently states that you must be a resident for 2 years before citizenship is allowed. The law is looking to be changed to allow this to be shortened for sports people who will bring significant exposure to the country.

In other words one law for most but if you can get into our national side then we'll speed it all up for you. That is just laughable.

So the law has been changed now....So anyone can get citizenship straight off the bat....Hmmmm, can you show me the documentation where this has been changed?

A mate told me he has been here for 4 years....

God is an Englishman wrote:don't think anything has changed, who's this new opening bloke?

Your bowlers need to fire and whip through the top 4/5 quickly. If they get a start then you're shiraz. England seem to have issues when the top batsmen go cheaply. The tail can wag but doesn't seem to wag when the pressure's on them.

As for your batsmen, no clark - no australia.

It's hard to pick a 2nd australian who would get into the England side at the moment.

Will your government help you to play a pakistani in time. Typical convicts really - if you're rubbish, get someone without any blood links at all and call them australian

why would any ozzie want to play in the "unwashed" pommy side???


as for the paki, shall we go through the "foreigners" in the pom list???

bubu wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:don't think anything has changed, who's this new opening bloke?

Your bowlers need to fire and whip through the top 4/5 quickly. If they get a start then you're shiraz. England seem to have issues when the top batsmen go cheaply. The tail can wag but doesn't seem to wag when the pressure's on them.

As for your batsmen, no clark - no australia.

It's hard to pick a 2nd australian who would get into the England side at the moment.

Will your government help you to play a pakistani in time. Typical convicts really - if you're rubbish, get someone without any blood links at all and call them australian

why would any ozzie want to play in the "unwashed" pommy side???


as for the paki, shall we go through the "foreigners" in the pom list???

well only 1 of them would get in anyway.

Yes, please do. I would love to see your list of these foreigners.

God is an Englishman wrote:

bubu wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:don't think anything has changed, who's this new opening bloke?

Your bowlers need to fire and whip through the top 4/5 quickly. If they get a start then you're shiraz. England seem to have issues when the top batsmen go cheaply. The tail can wag but doesn't seem to wag when the pressure's on them.

As for your batsmen, no clark - no australia.

It's hard to pick a 2nd australian who would get into the England side at the moment.

Will your government help you to play a pakistani in time. Typical convicts really - if you're rubbish, get someone without any blood links at all and call them australian

why would any ozzie want to play in the "unwashed" pommy side???


as for the paki, shall we go through the "foreigners" in the pom list???

well only 1 of them would get in anyway.

Yes, please do. I would love to see your list of these foreigners.

birth place is where I consider nationality, not passport entitlements!
as for only 1 player....


no AUSSIE would EVER want to play for the "unwashed"!

bubu wrote:birth place is where I consider nationality, not passport entitlements!
as for only 1 player....


no AUSSIE would EVER want to play for the "unwashed"!

where were you born again?

Please name 2 players who would get into the England side at the moment? You could make an argument for a 2nd, I don't think he would but possibly.

God is an Englishman wrote:

bubu wrote:birth place is where I consider nationality, not passport entitlements!
as for only 1 player....


no AUSSIE would EVER want to play for the "unwashed"!

where were you born again?

Please name 2 players who would get into the England side at the moment? You could make an argument for a 2nd, I don't think he would but possibly.

I've already answered that, ps theres a hint in my avatar

ur NOT listening, as usual!
why WOULD ANY OZZIE WANT TO PLAY IN THE UNWASHED POM SIDE????

bubu wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:

bubu wrote:birth place is where I consider nationality, not passport entitlements!
as for only 1 player....


no AUSSIE would EVER want to play for the "unwashed"!

where were you born again?

Please name 2 players who would get into the England side at the moment? You could make an argument for a 2nd, I don't think he would but possibly.

I've already answered that, ps theres a hint in my avatar

ur NOT listening, as usual!
why WOULD ANY OZZIE WANT TO PLAY IN THE UNWASHED POM SIDE????

Can you show me where you've answered that, especially as you don't have an avatar?

to be in a team capable of winning!

Boof wouldn't be a bad choice for coach!

Not sure Clarke would have the stomach for an England dressing room - he'd probably get a bit sooky with the banter and the MASSIVE amount of urine that could be taken from him - he does open himself - at least KP would have a rival for the most vain though.

I know England wouldn't have kicked out a plyer of Symonds quality just because the captain didn't like him same as Katich.

God is an Englishman wrote:

bubu wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote:

where were you born again?

Please name 2 players who would get into the England side at the moment? You could make an argument for a 2nd, I don't think he would but possibly.

I've already answered that, ps theres a hint in my avatar

ur NOT listening, as usual!
why WOULD ANY OZZIE WANT TO PLAY IN THE UNWASHED POM SIDE????

Can you show me where you've answered that, especially as you don't have an avatar?

to be in a team capable of winning!

ok my profile u numpty
any team is CAPABLE of winning dodo!

bubu wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote: Can you show me where you've answered that, especially as you don't have an avatar?

to be in a team capable of winning!

ok my profile u numpty
any team is CAPABLE of winning dodo!

So you get something wrong and I'm the numpty. It says your location, I don't believe you're there for a moment. It doesn't mention where you're born.

Now, can you show me where you've answered that or shall I add it to the questions you run away and hide from rather than answer?

God is an Englishman wrote:

bubu wrote:

God is an Englishman wrote: Can you show me where you've answered that, especially as you don't have an avatar?

to be in a team capable of winning!

ok my profile u numpty
any team is CAPABLE of winning dodo!

So you get something wrong and I'm the numpty. It says your location, I don't believe you're there for a moment. It doesn't mention where you're born.

Now, can you show me where you've answered that or shall I add it to the questions you run away and hide from rather than answer?

not only are u blind but stupid!!!


add it to the list, ur boring me now

can't even answer where you were born and you call me stupid