Ukraine Crisis

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
I have said "the Ukraine" for so long that it was hard to say it without the "the".
Now that their defense has brought them into the lime-light, I am trying to say just "Ukraine"...like "Uganda".
Practice makes perfect !

I used to use the indefinite article: "a Ukraine". But the style guides learned me against such usage, so now, for the sake of euphony, I say "an Ukraine". Which, if you shift the accent, happens to sound like "a nuke rain".
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Maybe you should just have concentrated on the primary gist - you being sacked.
Sacked for what? Bowling 25 no balls "in a row per over"?

A bowler who did that wouldn't be given another over by his captain and the umpires would probably not let him finish the first.

And you wouldn't get sacked. You might get dropped, but it's a sport. There's always a game to play.

You really do not have a clue, do you?
 
Last edited:

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I used to use the indefinite article: "a Ukraine". But the style guides learned me against such usage, so now, for the sake of euphony, I say "an Ukraine". Which, if you shift the accent, happens to sound like "a nuke rain".
Our style guide has always said "no the," but after the invasion this year, Ukrainian sympathizers started complaining about our "Russian" spelling of some of their cities, so the boss added even more lines to the guide. :|
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
There was nothing "morally justified" about the Iraq war. Up to you if you want to educate yourself on the matter.
OK. So educate myself: what is it about Saddam Hussein you think I need to know? Did he give some tearful "come to Jesus" television interview that I missed?
 

Idolater

"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Our positions have been unequivocally clear from the outset with no deflection or prevarication. Absolutely no tolerance for the despot in the Kremlin along with no excuses or apologies for his and his regime's murderous, terrorist actions. Did it need to be spelled out in larger font for you?
Would it be moral for the US-UK allied forces to invade Russia right now in your opinion? I think it would be moral to invade Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and North Korea right now, along with one or two African countries (maybe more, who's counting the murderous butchers running some of those places?), just to depose their whole form of government, and make them be constitutional liberal democracies, like the US and the UK. We've got separation of powers, independent judiciary, civilian control of the military, rule of law, constitutionalism, and we defend human rights absolutely.

But it doesn't make it prudent, or smart. Just because it's not immoral. I'm pretty sure based on the Ukraine that we could take all of these guys in a world war and win. Their troop numbers and materiel wilt in light of the fact that they're not well-coached, to draw the analogy to sport.

But it doesn't make it a good idea. I just know that we the US-UK alliance need to pony up a fair share of our collective income to subsidize our militaries, in the looming threat of those enumerated and alluded to countries. We need to be able to stomp out any threat posed by any or all of them, and every combination in between, like a bug. Just stomp it out like a big juicy cockroach, splat. Or like a fag, stomp, stomp. Out.

(Cigrits I'm talking about, cigrit butts.)
In cricketing terms you've bowled 25 no balls in a row per over and have subsequently been sacked.
I have to laugh at this lol. This must be exactly how it sounds to you and Stripe when I'm talking NFL American football lol. I love baseball, and I know cricket and baseball are related (baseball borrows some ideas from cricket I think). So I'm just going to write how I process the above, knowing baseball and not cricket.

"Bowling" means nothing to me, it doesn't appear in baseball. "[propelling] balls" that sounds like baseball's pitcher position, the pitcher throws or pitches baseballs, to the catcher. The Pitcher pitches and the Catcher catches, iow lol.

"Balls in a row" appears in baseball parlance. If a pitcher throws three or four balls in a row that's typically not good, and if it's one of the rare times it's not abject failure it's because they were all just outside the strike zone (literally the term used to indicate where the baseball must be pitched in order for it to be a strike instead of a "ball"). By extension if a pitcher throws eight balls in a row, it means that the pitcher just walked at least one and maybe two batters, since throwing four balls (not four baseballs, four "balls" instead of "strikes" or "fouls" (which count as strikes up to two strikes, but then don't count as a strike at all, so that you never strike out by fouling off a pitch, speaking as the batter now) during an at-bat (the at-bat is the batter's turn with the pitcher) puts the batter on base, meaning you didn't record an out, and there is a new baserunner now, who might now go on to score a run. Every at-bat ends with another out and or another run, or with a baserunner.

"Per over" or "in a row per over" doesn't mean anything to me.

"Being sacked" doesn't appear in baseball parlance, but is it anything like being put out? There are three outs per inning in baseball. The defense's job is to record three outs as soon as possible, so that the offense (the batters take their at-bats during the offensive part of the game, when the defense cannot score any runs, they can only try to stop the offense from scoring runs while on defense) ends their at-bats, and your team can go back on offense instead. The pitchers play on defense, they are the one's dueling with the offense's batters, one at a time. If you throw three strikes, including fouls up to but not exceeding two, then the batter is out, and that at-bat ends. The next batter takes the plate, which means begins the next at-bat. The pitcher throws baseballs to the catcher, and the idea is to induce the batter to make another out, where it's by striking out the batter, or getting the batter to hit the baseball into an out in the field.

Professional baseball takes nine innings, an inning is one chance for the offense, followed by one chance for the defense. You get three outs as the offense, per inning. So there are 27 outs that have to be made by the winning team's defense to win the game, three outs per inning, and nine innings per game. Typical games take three-to-four hours.
 

Stripe

Teenage Adaptive Ninja Turtle
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
I have to laugh at this lol. This must be exactly how it sounds to you and Stripe when I'm talking NFL American football lol. I love baseball, and I know cricket and baseball are related (baseball borrows some ideas from cricket I think). So I'm just going to write how I process the above, knowing baseball and not cricket.

"Bowling" means nothing to me, it doesn't appear in baseball. "[propelling] balls" that sounds like baseball's pitcher position, the pitcher throws or pitches baseballs, to the catcher. The Pitcher pitches and the Catcher catches, iow lol.

"Balls in a row" appears in baseball parlance. If a pitcher throws three or four balls in a row that's typically not good, and if it's one of the rare times it's not abject failure it's because they were all just outside the strike zone (literally the term used to indicate where the baseball must be pitched in order for it to be a strike instead of a "ball"). By extension if a pitcher throws eight balls in a row, it means that the pitcher just walked at least one and maybe two batters, since throwing four balls (not four baseballs, four "balls" instead of "strikes" or "fouls" (which count as strikes up to two strikes, but then don't count as a strike at all, so that you never strike out by fouling off a pitch, speaking as the batter now) during an at-bat (the at-bat is the batter's turn with the pitcher) puts the batter on base, meaning you didn't record an out, and there is a new baserunner now, who might now go on to score a run. Every at-bat ends with another out and or another run, or with a baserunner.

"Per over" or "in a row per over" doesn't mean anything to me.

"Being sacked" doesn't appear in baseball parlance, but is it anything like being put out? There are three outs per inning in baseball. The defense's job is to record three outs as soon as possible, so that the offense (the batters take their at-bats during the offensive part of the game, when the defense cannot score any runs, they can only try to stop the offense from scoring runs while on defense) ends their at-bats, and your team can go back on offense instead. The pitchers
play on defense, they are the one's dueling with the offense's batters, one at a time. If you throw three strikes, including fouls up to but not exceeding two, then the batter is out, and that at-bat ends. The next batter takes the plate, which means begins the next at-bat. The pitcher throws baseballs to the catcher, and the idea is to induce the batter to make another out, where it's by striking out the batter, or getting the batter to hit the baseball into an out in the field.

Professional baseball takes nine innings, an inning is one chance for the offense, followed by one chance for the defense. You get three outs as the offense, per inning. So there are 27 outs that have to be made by the winning team's defense to win the game, three outs per inning, and nine innings per game. Typical games take three-to-four hours.
Well, at least you didn't claim to know the game, like Brain did. :ROFLMAO:

A ball is equivalent to a pitch in baseball. A no ball in cricket is somewhat analogous to a ball in baseball, but cricket's wide is a better fit. A no ball is when a bowler's (pitcher's) delivery is illegitimate, usually because of where his feet are.

"Per over" is a reference to one six-ball (six-pitch) set that a bowler is limited to at a time. No balls do not count toward the deliveries in an over, so a bowler having an exceptionally bad day might send down nine deliveries, with only six being legitimate, in an over. Twenty-five no balls in an over simply never happens. Having them "in a row per over" just makes the story being told even more nonsensical.

Being sacked is not a thing in cricket either. I guess Brain thinks sportspeople can be fired from their job for playing badly?

There are 10 outs in a cricket innings and 11 batsmen, who must bat in partnerships. There can be one or two innings per team. There are no strikes. If the batsman fails to hit the ball, there is no penalty except that the opposition might be more productive.

There is almost nothing common to both sports except that there is a ball, a guy who delivers the ball, a batsman and fielders.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Ya know, it's not PC to call Ukraine, "the Ukraine":


In the English-speaking world during most of the 20th century, Ukraine (whether independent or not) was referred to as "the Ukraine".[24] This is because the word ukraina means "borderland"[25] so the definite article would be natural in the English language; this is similar to "Nederlanden", which means "low lands" and is rendered in English as "the Netherlands".[26] However, since Ukraine's declaration of independence in 1991, this usage has become politicised and is now rarer, and style guides advise against its use.[27][28] US ambassador William Taylor said that using "the Ukraine" implies disregard for Ukrainian sovereignty.[29] The official Ukrainian position is that "the Ukraine" is incorrect, both grammatically and politically.[30]



How much is Putin paying you to disregard Ukrainian sovereignty and the advice of style guides?💵
About as much as he's paying me to slag him off along with his odious regime - nowt.

Noted on Ukraine.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Sacked for what? Bowling 25 no balls "in a row per over"?

A bowler who did that wouldn't be given another over by his captain and the umpires would probably not let him finish the first.

And you wouldn't get sacked. You might get dropped, but it's a sport. There's always a game to play.

You really do not have a clue, do you?
Hence the hyperbole Stripe. Obviously a bowler is not going to bowl 25 no balls in a row...

Oh, and people do get sacked in sport, get a grip.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Well, at least you didn't claim to know the game, like Brain did. :ROFLMAO:

A ball is equivalent to a pitch in baseball. A no ball in cricket is somewhat analogous to a ball in baseball, but cricket's wide is a better fit. A no ball is when a bowler's (pitcher's) delivery is illegitimate, usually because of where his feet are.

"Per over" is a reference to one six-ball (six-pitch) set that a bowler is limited to at a time. No balls do not count toward the deliveries in an over, so a bowler having an exceptionally bad day might send down nine deliveries, with only six being legitimate, in an over. Twenty-five no balls in an over simply never happens. Having them "in a row per over" just makes the story being told even more nonsensical.

Being sacked is not a thing in cricket either. I guess Brain thinks sportspeople can be fired from their job for playing badly?

There are 10 outs in a cricket innings and 11 batsmen, who must bat in partnerships. There can be one or two innings per team. There are no strikes. If the batsman fails to hit the ball, there is no penalty except that the opposition might be more productive.

There is almost nothing common to both sports except that there is a ball, a guy who delivers the ball, a batsman and fielders.
Of course it doesn't happen, hence that word - hyperbole. I know the game inside out thanks having being forced to watch it and being bored over and over by it as a kid. Thankfully, it's a lot less drab nowadays.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Would it be moral for the US-UK allied forces to invade Russia right now in your opinion? I think it would be moral to invade Russia, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and North Korea right now, along with one or two African countries (maybe more, who's counting the murderous butchers running some of those places?), just to depose their whole form of government, and make them be constitutional liberal democracies, like the US and the UK. We've got separation of powers, independent judiciary, civilian control of the military, rule of law, constitutionalism, and we defend human rights absolutely.

But it doesn't make it prudent, or smart. Just because it's not immoral. I'm pretty sure based on the Ukraine that we could take all of these guys in a world war and win. Their troop numbers and materiel wilt in light of the fact that they're not well-coached, to draw the analogy to sport.

But it doesn't make it a good idea. I just know that we the US-UK alliance need to pony up a fair share of our collective income to subsidize our militaries, in the looming threat of those enumerated and alluded to countries. We need to be able to stomp out any threat posed by any or all of them, and every combination in between, like a bug. Just stomp it out like a big juicy cockroach, splat. Or like a fag, stomp, stomp. Out.

(Cigrits I'm talking about, cigrit butts.)

I have to laugh at this lol. This must be exactly how it sounds to you and Stripe when I'm talking NFL American football lol. I love baseball, and I know cricket and baseball are related (baseball borrows some ideas from cricket I think). So I'm just going to write how I process the above, knowing baseball and not cricket.

"Bowling" means nothing to me, it doesn't appear in baseball. "[propelling] balls" that sounds like baseball's pitcher position, the pitcher throws or pitches baseballs, to the catcher. The Pitcher pitches and the Catcher catches, iow lol.

"Balls in a row" appears in baseball parlance. If a pitcher throws three or four balls in a row that's typically not good, and if it's one of the rare times it's not abject failure it's because they were all just outside the strike zone (literally the term used to indicate where the baseball must be pitched in order for it to be a strike instead of a "ball"). By extension if a pitcher throws eight balls in a row, it means that the pitcher just walked at least one and maybe two batters, since throwing four balls (not four baseballs, four "balls" instead of "strikes" or "fouls" (which count as strikes up to two strikes, but then don't count as a strike at all, so that you never strike out by fouling off a pitch, speaking as the batter now) during an at-bat (the at-bat is the batter's turn with the pitcher) puts the batter on base, meaning you didn't record an out, and there is a new baserunner now, who might now go on to score a run. Every at-bat ends with another out and or another run, or with a baserunner.

"Per over" or "in a row per over" doesn't mean anything to me.

"Being sacked" doesn't appear in baseball parlance, but is it anything like being put out? There are three outs per inning in baseball. The defense's job is to record three outs as soon as possible, so that the offense (the batters take their at-bats during the offensive part of the game, when the defense cannot score any runs, they can only try to stop the offense from scoring runs while on defense) ends their at-bats, and your team can go back on offense instead. The pitchers play on defense, they are the one's dueling with the offense's batters, one at a time. If you throw three strikes, including fouls up to but not exceeding two, then the batter is out, and that at-bat ends. The next batter takes the plate, which means begins the next at-bat. The pitcher throws baseballs to the catcher, and the idea is to induce the batter to make another out, where it's by striking out the batter, or getting the batter to hit the baseball into an out in the field.

Professional baseball takes nine innings, an inning is one chance for the offense, followed by one chance for the defense. You get three outs as the offense, per inning. So there are 27 outs that have to be made by the winning team's defense to win the game, three outs per inning, and nine innings per game. Typical games take three-to-four hours.
No, it wouldn't, it would be foolhardy and irresponsible beyond words. This isn't a game of "Risk" where war gets played out on a board, this is a precarious situation where we're dealing with an unhinged psychopath and a despotic regime with the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world. If you honestly think that the West could "win" world war three then that's quite a change from your previous about the world becoming glass craters isn't it? Sure, Russia's military is hardly the best in the world, it never has been but once things escalate beyond conventional war then it's a whole new ball game and no country can come out of that without being severely scathed if they survive it at all.

There might be a slight similarity with baseball in regards to a bowler/pitcher 'throwing' a ball towards a batsman but they really are entirely different sports. I don't mind baseball on occasion. They used to show it over here in the UK on a weekend but nowadays not so much, it's more NFL.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
OK. So educate myself: what is it about Saddam Hussein you think I need to know? Did he give some tearful "come to Jesus" television interview that I missed?
Of course not. Don't pretend that the Iraq war was some virtuous campaign by all involved to simply end the tyrant's dictatorship because it wasn't. The UK was just as complicit in an invasion that should not have happened. It's easy enough to read up on this.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
I used to use the indefinite article: "a Ukraine". But the style guides learned me against such usage, so now, for the sake of euphony, I say "an Ukraine". Which, if you shift the accent, happens to sound like "a nuke rain".
In my early years, the only mention of Ukraine was historic recollections of Germany's attempted conquest of the Ukraine.
Back when the nazis tried to run through it, it was a region and not a country.
Like "The South West", or The South.
So you ever say "The Yukon"?
It is just "Yukon", but some things just slide off the tongue easier
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
In my early years, the only mention of Ukraine was historic recollections of Germany's attempted conquest of the Ukraine.
Back when the nazis tried to run through it, it was a region and not a country.
Like "The South West", or The South.
So you ever say "The Yukon"?
It is just "Yukon", but some things just slide off the tongue easier
Why do we say the United States, and not the Canada?

My earliest memories of learning about the region had to do with Potemkin villages.
 

7djengo7

This space intentionally left blank
In my early years, the only mention of Ukraine was historic recollections of Germany's attempted conquest of the Ukraine.
Back when the nazis tried to run through it, it was a region and not a country.
Like "The South West", or The South.
So you ever say "The Yukon"?
It is just "Yukon", but some things just slide off the tongue easier

Yeah. Myself, I couldn't care less about whether or not some people expect or demand I should not say "the Ukraine" as opposed to saying just "Ukraine"; I'm not about to tailor my word choices to suit their self-righteous, bogus moral concerns.
 

Hoping

Well-known member
Banned
Yeah. Myself, I couldn't care less about whether or not some people expect or demand I should not say "the Ukraine" as opposed to saying just "Ukraine"; I'm not about to tailor my word choices to suit their self-righteous, bogus moral concerns.
Does it ever hurt to "play along"?
 
Top