Ken Gargett

no disrespect, but i'd suggest that this is the greatest example of jumping to conclusions i have ever seen. i am not a medical expert and can only go on what i am told - i have more than enough of them in the family who i trust - but this is not even in the realms of a coincidence. your first article, says a 46 year old died after the shot. but first he went back to work and then had a heart attack later. bit rich to blame the vaccine. the report says that over two million (or possibly over 200,000 - it is a little hard to tell, but it seems 2 mill) got the vaccine and of those some 400 had a reaction and three were hospitalised. just three. and one died from unrelated causes. have you been to india? thirty years ago driving through you could see dead bodies on the sides of roads. the population would be twice what it was now. i'd say that if out of two million, one didn't fall off the perch, that would be more surprising. you then say you found a few others. well the first one is exactly the same article. literally. so hardly convincing. that takes you down to one. that article notes two deaths in israel. one a 75 year old with a history of heart attacks and pre-exisitng illnesses. and he died from a heart attack. there's a shocker. the other an 88 year old who was already suffering from "complicated and severe background illnesses". and these two were out of 650,000 administered vaccines. i'd also suggest that if authorities knew that these deaths were not related then it would be irresponsible not to get that information out there as soon as they reasonably could do so. it is not food for thought. it is pointless scaremongering with absolutely zero evidence. people jumping on conspiracy bandwagons are not going to help this.

it would certainly be a step up from the rubbish we currently serve up!

one of the sites for which i write is WinePilot, a reasonably new site which does reviews of Aussie wines with spirits, beers and offshore wines soon to follow. it is a free site and worthwhile for locals and others interested. https://winepilot.com/ the editor allocates which wines one reviews and some of mine were from a mob called Step by Step making good value fun wines. they have linked all their wines to various celebrities. all entertaining. one of their wines was their Cabernet which they named 'The Boss'. however they linked it, for reasons i will never understand, to someone called amy winehouse (i suppose the wine bit is the link). Spare me! I pointed out that this was an absolute travesty against humanity and that it foretold the imminent end of western civilisation. Or something like that. Got a lovely letter from them to say that they fully agreed and the winehouse person has been removed and Bruce, with Born to Run now inserted and will appear in all their marketing and publicity stuff. i can die happy.

ditto.

welcome. we have some terrific members from portugal.

very kind. may i just say that it is always nice to see members joining in who have taste and discernment. always welcome. as the great norman gunston once said, "behind every star there are many people working behind the scenes. and i have had to carry every one of them".

he says that all the time.

mcgrath was a great bowler and warnie one of a kind. one in a century. our attack was disappointing but i do not think it is fair to lump cummins in this, for me at least. i think he has every chance of finishing his career as our second best quick behind lillee. and he bowled his heart out. hazlewood runs hot and warm but overall doing enough. starc has been the disappointment. but two years ago when he was firing in those yorkers, he was near unstoppable. when was the last time he bowled one? crazy. richardson or abbott looking likely. lyon should do better in fourth innings but he is streets ahead of anything else we have. as an allrounder, green did more than enough as a bat and field but needs to up the bowling. but for a 21 year old, very promising. and the one thing australia does not do is allrounders. no idea why. miller, gilmore, davidson, ron archer. not too many more of quality - and ron archer retired at 22. different days. the batting a real concern. smith and marnus don't fire and we are in the filthy creek sans paddle. warner is past it, i suspect. pucovski looks like a star but he needs to sort the fitness real quick. wade has to go. if you are in the team as a bat, you need to at least score a few fifties. abusing the opposition sounds stupid when you are the worst player on the field. problem is who next? head, burns, renshaw, khawaja all had cracks without solidifying the spot. the young guys like street, sangha, fraser-mcgurk etc are too young and need experience. patterson and henriquies? not sure there. someone needs to stand up. there are spots going. a big problem is paine. but he did so well in the ashes, he has some latitude. but this series was poor. his keeping was not up to international standard and way below the standard we expect in australia - tallon, grout, healy, gilchrist. there were some really bad misses - not just catches - that would have seriously embarrassed me and i never played at anywhere near test level. he is not a great keeper and this series, he was very poor. but the final straw for me was last afternoon when india needed about 22 and 35 balls left. they got an overthrow. just one run but they were all crucial. they got it because paine did not bother to get up to the stumps. he had plenty of time but simply did not bother. so the throw just went past and they got an extra run. no matter how buggered i was i always at least made an effort, but not to bother in those circumstances was unforgivable. and the message it sent to the rest of the team disgraceful. he stays for south africa (not least because no way can you put smith in as captain for the south africans and there is no one else). but on last warning for me. this was a series where the opposition lost all four tosses, lost their captain and one of the world's best two bats after a single test, lost seven top players including most of the attack, was playing away and had the last test at a venue where no visiting team has won for over thirty years and india has never won. but they wanted it ten times more than we did. a low point.

honestly, doing this one was like pet cemetery.

the work place accident free is a cracker! the internet browser sums up my life.

thanks for that. really weird. that is definitely the play but on the clock my telecast had, it never stopped. i really did check it about 3 times. but at least i think i am now up to date with the rules so thanks to all.

that bit i follow - i had the game on tape as i'd be tied up all day - and i replayed it several times to see if that could be possible. i could not see how. but no one seemed at all perturbed about it.

okay, that is a bit different and i am certain that it was running before the ref spotted the ball. it never stopped running.

thanks. curious. but i have seen other examples and been utterly confused. so much appreciated.

i was under the impression that if a player with the ball - WR after a catch or RB on a run - takes the ball over the sideline, the clock is stopped. yesterday in the chiefs browns game, with approx 1.14 left in the first quarter, the runner took the ball over the sideline. he wasn't being tackled. and yet the clock continued to run. not adjusted. nothing said. what am i missing?