Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
CharlieinNewMexico
Posts: 3109
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:53 am
Been Liked: 815 times
Has Liked: 527 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by CharlieinNewMexico » Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:08 am

If you’re getting het up about this you’re living a sedate life with no other issues!

IMHO 🤷
These 4 users liked this post: MrTopTier the_fat_shearer Rochdale Cowboy tiger76

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:16 am

Damo wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:19 am
Can we not just describe them as batsman and 6 or 7 people who follow the women's game choose their own definition?
Yes, you can still describe a male batter as a batsman. Hope you sleep better tonight knowing this.

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:17 am

MrTopTier wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:05 am
I played Cricket for nearly 30 years.

Batter was the only terminology I ever used in relation to batting. No idea what the fuss is about.

Batter
Bowler
Keeper
Fielder.

Couldn’t be more straightforward.
The only "fuss" is being caused by the easily offended brigade.

Local cricketer
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 5:46 pm
Been Liked: 412 times
Has Liked: 87 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Local cricketer » Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:20 am

Fantastic news is this and I welcome anything to increase equal rights.

Hopefully fine leg will be the next to go

Culmclaret
Posts: 1547
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 1:12 pm
Been Liked: 472 times
Has Liked: 52 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Culmclaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:33 am

Third person?

kentonclaret
Posts: 6437
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
Been Liked: 969 times
Has Liked: 204 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by kentonclaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:34 am

Local cricketer wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:20 am
Fantastic news is this and I welcome anything to increase equal rights.

Hopefully fine leg will be the next to go

Also the Slips a ladies lace garment often worn underneath a dress. ;)

claretonthecoast1882
Posts: 10088
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
Been Liked: 4161 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by claretonthecoast1882 » Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:39 am

Local cricketer wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:20 am
Fantastic news is this and I welcome anything to increase equal rights.

Hopefully fine leg will be the next to go
It would make sense to keep "silly point" though

Local cricketer
Posts: 2347
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 5:46 pm
Been Liked: 412 times
Has Liked: 87 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Local cricketer » Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:46 am

claretonthecoast1882 wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:39 am
It would make sense to keep "silly point" though
Got to have a silly point when the chinaman is bowling

kentonclaret
Posts: 6437
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2016 4:06 pm
Been Liked: 969 times
Has Liked: 204 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by kentonclaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:59 am

Local cricketer wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:46 am
Got to have a silly point when the chinaman is bowling

The cricketer's bible that is Wisden banned the term chinaman in 2018.

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12345
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Devils_Advocate » Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:03 am

Seems the vast majority of the offended people are the ones who seem upset at a the change itself. I couldn't care less either way myself but there aint half a load of easily offended snowflakes on here upset because some wording to a rulebook they have probably never looked at before in their life has been changed.
This user liked this post: Rochdale Cowboy

nil_desperandum
Posts: 7301
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 5:06 pm
Been Liked: 1823 times
Has Liked: 3948 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by nil_desperandum » Thu Sep 23, 2021 10:25 am

It seems an obvious and simple change to me.
Much better to have one set of laws for both sexes, and as we already have fielders, and bowlers, then having "batter" rather than "batsman / batswoman" makes complete sense.
My feeling is that most young players use the term "batter" rather than "batsman" in any case, and I unconsciously describe my grandson as a promising batter not batsman, so it's a sensible MINOR update to the rules.
Nothing to get upset by here.

Boss Hogg
Posts: 3294
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:34 am
Been Liked: 846 times
Has Liked: 1090 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Boss Hogg » Thu Sep 23, 2021 10:34 am

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:17 am
The only "fuss" is being caused by the easily offended brigade.
:D

NottsClaret
Posts: 3577
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:05 am
Been Liked: 2589 times
Has Liked: 1 time

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by NottsClaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 10:38 am

Good idea, as mentioned it's probably come from junior cricket, there's a lot of girls playing on the same team as lads now. Only the most fragile, sensitive 'man' would have a problem with this.

AlargeClaret
Posts: 4428
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2017 8:55 pm
Been Liked: 1148 times
Has Liked: 180 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by AlargeClaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 11:44 am

You can’t even bowl a Chinaman these days ! Though isn’t “ batter “ a bit close to “ batty” for the Windies?

WadingInDeeper
Posts: 534
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:37 pm
Been Liked: 155 times
Has Liked: 57 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by WadingInDeeper » Thu Sep 23, 2021 1:56 pm

I'm not sure why anyone would have a problem with this, there are plenty of girls in the junior teams and they aren't just there to make up the numbers.

Stayingup
Posts: 5551
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:02 pm
Been Liked: 914 times
Has Liked: 2726 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Stayingup » Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:30 pm

claret2018 wrote:
Wed Sep 22, 2021 3:44 pm
Makes sense. Wish they’d get rid of actress and waitress, you don’t call a female accountant an accountress do you!

Edit, not sure who “they” are but you get my point.
They have. All actors now no matter who wears the pants!!!

Stayingup
Posts: 5551
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:02 pm
Been Liked: 914 times
Has Liked: 2726 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Stayingup » Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:32 pm

Bouncers will have to go.

Stayingup
Posts: 5551
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:02 pm
Been Liked: 914 times
Has Liked: 2726 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Stayingup » Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:35 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:03 am
Seems the vast majority of the offended people are the ones who seem upset at a the change itself. I couldn't care less either way myself but there aint half a load of easily offended snowflakes on here upset because some wording to a rulebook they have probably never looked at before in their life has been changed.
Snowflakes are, generally, upset at something directed at them I think. Here its traditionalists who.might be miffed at this.

BabylonClaret
Posts: 3077
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:51 pm
Been Liked: 707 times
Has Liked: 618 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by BabylonClaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:46 pm

houseboy wrote:
Wed Sep 22, 2021 10:50 pm
Of course it makes sense. Why should it be wrong to differentiate? Why is it deemed offensive? Taking offence has become so fashionable now it is laughable. People should be proud of what they are, not be offended by people referring to it.
Yes - when it makes sense to differentiate. For jobs though an actress does the same thing as an actor - calling them all actors makes sense. Same with waitress really.

Stuff like that simply reinforces the difference for no reason and usually ends up demoting the female counterpart in some way. It's how the patriarchy works
This user liked this post: Rochdale Cowboy

Boss Hogg
Posts: 3294
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:34 am
Been Liked: 846 times
Has Liked: 1090 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Boss Hogg » Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:15 pm

WadingInDeeper wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 1:56 pm
I'm not sure why anyone would have a problem with this, there are plenty of girls in the junior teams and they aren't just there to make up the numbers.
Would a batswoman be any less if a player than a batsman ? Of course not. There’s nothing wrong with ‘batter’ it’s just all this jumping on the PC brigade making sure nobody is offended that’s a nonsense. Soon you won’t be able to have Men’s football and Women’s football. The BBC are working towards this already in my opinion.

Untinted Glasses
Posts: 557
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2018 3:50 pm
Been Liked: 132 times
Has Liked: 152 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Untinted Glasses » Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:17 pm

I must be just very common as I've always called a batter a batter. I've never used the term 'batsman'. Also no one has ever asked me whether I was a batsman or bowler, always 'were you a bowler or batter'.

Stalbansclaret
Posts: 2487
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 9:21 am
Been Liked: 1658 times
Has Liked: 2963 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Stalbansclaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:29 pm

BabylonClaret wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:46 pm
Yes - when it makes sense to differentiate. For jobs though an actress does the same thing as an actor - calling them all actors makes sense. Same with waitress really.

Stuff like that simply reinforces the difference for no reason and usually ends up demoting the female counterpart in some way. It's how the patriarchy works
How do you make that out ? Why would the term actress imply inferiority to actor ? They are just terms enabling more precise description.

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by RingoMcCartney » Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:31 pm

All part of the Globalists plot to "Build back Batter"

I thank you..

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12345
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Devils_Advocate » Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:52 pm

Stayingup wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:35 pm
Snowflakes are, generally, upset at something directed at them I think. Here its traditionalists who.might be miffed at this.
When I read your posts all I see...

Image
This user liked this post: Stayingup

RingoMcCartney
Posts: 10318
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2016 4:45 pm
Been Liked: 2636 times
Has Liked: 2798 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by RingoMcCartney » Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:52 pm

BabylonClaret wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:46 pm
Yes - when it makes sense to differentiate. For jobs though an actress does the same thing as an actor - calling them all actors makes sense. Same with waitress really.

Stuff like that simply reinforces the difference for no reason and usually ends up demoting the female counterpart in some way. It's how the patriarchy works
For years , I'd go to the back of the front door to see if my monthly pay cheque from the Patriarchy had been delivered in the post. Never got a penny.
Attachments
Screenshot_20210923-160108_Chrome.jpg
Screenshot_20210923-160108_Chrome.jpg (191.74 KiB) Viewed 2429 times

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by martin_p » Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:56 pm

Untinted Glasses wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:17 pm
I must be just very common as I've always called a batter a batter. I've never used the term 'batsman'. Also no one has ever asked me whether I was a batsman or bowler, always 'were you a bowler or batter'.
Yep, it’s nothing new.

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Sep 23, 2021 4:08 pm

Boss Hogg wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:15 pm
Would a batswoman be any less if a player than a batsman ? Of course not. There’s nothing wrong with ‘batter’ it’s just all this jumping on the PC brigade making sure nobody is offended that’s a nonsense. Soon you won’t be able to have Men’s football and Women’s football. The BBC are working towards this already in my opinion.
:D

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by martin_p » Thu Sep 23, 2021 4:11 pm

Boss Hogg wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:15 pm
Would a batswoman be any less if a player than a batsman ? Of course not. There’s nothing wrong with ‘batter’ it’s just all this jumping on the PC brigade making sure nobody is offended that’s a nonsense. Soon you won’t be able to have Men’s football and Women’s football. The BBC are working towards this already in my opinion.
Footballers have always been called footballers not fottballmen and footballwomen. Not sure why this is any different.

Bordeauxclaret
Posts: 10272
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 10:36 pm
Been Liked: 3327 times
Has Liked: 1942 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Bordeauxclaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 4:12 pm

I reckon we just need someone crying “sandal wearers” here.
Perhaps even “venomous” if feeling fruity.

Petersa
Posts: 699
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 8:33 am
Been Liked: 201 times
Has Liked: 133 times
Location: South Africa

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Petersa » Thu Sep 23, 2021 4:21 pm

Sitting on the fence on this one.....but I am pretty certain that the most used word in the English language ending in man or men (plural) is ......woman. Not sure if that is PC but the alternative ...lady...seems to be going out of fashion as well

Rileybobs
Posts: 16684
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6895 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Rileybobs » Thu Sep 23, 2021 4:30 pm

You’ve got to be pretty thick, or intentionally missing the point, to think that this is about political correctness or preventing offence (not that either of those are bad things). This is about inclusivity and participation - and if being more thoughtful with terminology helps to encourage more young girls to play cricket then why would you have a problem with that? I mean I know the answer, but I can’t understand why anyone would feel that way.

tiger76
Posts: 25697
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
Been Liked: 4644 times
Has Liked: 9849 times
Location: Glasgow

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by tiger76 » Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:00 pm

I'm baffled this change is causing such a stir, what's the issue with calling a batter a batter, and for any traditionalists this phrasing was used in the 18th century, so it's not a modern fad as many might believe.

Boss Hogg
Posts: 3294
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:34 am
Been Liked: 846 times
Has Liked: 1090 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Boss Hogg » Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:13 pm

Rileybobs wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 4:30 pm
You’ve got to be pretty thick, or intentionally missing the point, to think that this is about political correctness or preventing offence (not that either of those are bad things). This is about inclusivity and participation - and if being more thoughtful with terminology helps to encourage more young girls to play cricket then why would you have a problem with that? I mean I know the answer, but I can’t understand why anyone would feel that way.
If this is aimed at me I can assure you I’m anything but thick. I am all for encouraging girls to play sport. My daughter was playing football at 4 predominantly with boys. This does boil down to PC nonsense though and climbing on the current bandwagon.

Vino blanco
Posts: 5345
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 2:42 pm
Been Liked: 1898 times
Has Liked: 1965 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Vino blanco » Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:24 pm

I have taken the decision to continue to call them batsmen: I do hope I don't get castigated on here.

milkcrate_mosh
Posts: 199
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2021 5:23 pm
Been Liked: 84 times
Has Liked: 19 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by milkcrate_mosh » Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:30 pm

I don't know why people seem to think that the ECB are going to ban them from saying "batsmen", I've been through the rules with a fine toothed comb and I can't find a single reference to the term!

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12345
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Devils_Advocate » Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:35 pm

Vino blanco wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:24 pm
I have taken the decision to continue to call them batsmen: I do hope I don't get castigated on here.
Image

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:28 pm

Boss Hogg wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:13 pm
This does boil down to PC nonsense though and climbing on the current bandwagon.
Or it's about making cricket a game for all:

Jamie Cox, the MCC's assistant secretary for cricket and operations, said: "MCC believes in cricket being a game for all and this move recognises the changing landscape of the game in modern times."

Just depends if you want to form your view based on what the MCC or some anti-woke brainwashing propaganda has to say on the matter.

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12345
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Devils_Advocate » Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:32 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:28 pm
Or it's about making cricket a game for all:

Jamie Cox, the MCC's assistant secretary for cricket and operations, said: "MCC believes in cricket being a game for all and this move recognises the changing landscape of the game in modern times."

Just depends if you want to form your view based on what the MCC or some anti-woke brainwashing propaganda has to say on the matter.
He's already told us he's not thick so he'll be too smart to be hoodwinked by some anti-woke brainwashing propaganda

TheFamilyCat
Posts: 10842
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:56 pm
Been Liked: 5520 times
Has Liked: 208 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by TheFamilyCat » Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:35 pm

Boss Hogg wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 3:15 pm
Would a batswoman be any less if a player than a batsman ? Of course not. There’s nothing wrong with ‘batter’ it’s just all this jumping on the PC brigade making sure nobody is offended that’s a nonsense. Soon you won’t be able to have Men’s football and Women’s football. The BBC are working towards this already in my opinion.
There's nothing wrong with saying "batter" but there's something wrong with the reasons for saying it?

There's been some gold on this thread already and that's without Jakub breaking his silence.

evensteadiereddie
Posts: 9585
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
Been Liked: 3146 times
Has Liked: 10202 times
Location: Staffordshire

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by evensteadiereddie » Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:54 pm

:lol:

gandhisflipflop
Posts: 5500
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:05 pm
Been Liked: 2317 times
Has Liked: 1399 times
Location: Costa del Padihamos beach.

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by gandhisflipflop » Thu Sep 23, 2021 8:05 pm

Stayingup wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 2:35 pm
Snowflakes are, generally, upset at something directed at them I think. Here its traditionalists who.might be miffed at this.
Pointless trying to explain the term to him. He will never understand.

martin_p
Posts: 10368
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2016 3:40 pm
Been Liked: 3764 times
Has Liked: 696 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by martin_p » Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:04 pm

Vino blanco wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:24 pm
I have taken the decision to continue to call them batsmen: I do hope I don't get castigated on here.
No one has suggested you can’t or shouldn’t. This story is about changing the words used in the laws of the game that’s all. Really not sure what the fuss is about.

Boss Hogg
Posts: 3294
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:34 am
Been Liked: 846 times
Has Liked: 1090 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Boss Hogg » Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:32 pm

TheFamilyCat wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 7:28 pm
Or it's about making cricket a game for all:

Jamie Cox, the MCC's assistant secretary for cricket and operations, said: "MCC believes in cricket being a game for all and this move recognises the changing landscape of the game in modern times."

Just depends if you want to form your view based on what the MCC or some anti-woke brainwashing propaganda has to say on the matter.
The first paragraph backs up my point perfectly.

Boss Hogg
Posts: 3294
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 10:34 am
Been Liked: 846 times
Has Liked: 1090 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Boss Hogg » Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:33 pm

Devils_Advocate wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:35 pm
Image
School in the morning ?

dandeclaret
Posts: 3516
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:55 am
Been Liked: 2565 times
Has Liked: 300 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by dandeclaret » Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:36 pm

the MCC believe that cricket is a game for all, but did little to encourage the ECB to mandate full publication of the Yorkshire racism report.

Obviously inclusive.
This user liked this post: Stalbansclaret

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12345
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Devils_Advocate » Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:44 pm

Boss Hogg wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 9:33 pm
School in the morning ?
Good lad, I think some educational learning will be good for you.

Rileybobs
Posts: 16684
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:37 pm
Been Liked: 6895 times
Has Liked: 1471 times
Location: Leeds

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Rileybobs » Thu Sep 23, 2021 11:41 pm

Boss Hogg wrote:
Thu Sep 23, 2021 6:13 pm
If this is aimed at me I can assure you I’m anything but thick. I am all for encouraging girls to play sport. My daughter was playing football at 4 predominantly with boys. This does boil down to PC nonsense though and climbing on the current bandwagon.
It wasn’t aimed at you, but following your post I’d say you’re included.

chipbutty
Posts: 707
Joined: Mon May 09, 2016 11:44 pm
Been Liked: 133 times
Has Liked: 131 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by chipbutty » Thu Sep 23, 2021 11:49 pm

Fanny Batter!

Stayingup
Posts: 5551
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 8:02 pm
Been Liked: 914 times
Has Liked: 2726 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Stayingup » Fri Sep 24, 2021 9:05 am

Its the way its gone in the West. I just wonder what will happen to the Tigress and the Lioness? Future looks bleak for them I think.

Next might LBGT for animals. Who knows. Any 'gay' four leggers down Deadwood way?

Devils_Advocate
Posts: 12345
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2016 2:43 pm
Been Liked: 5202 times
Has Liked: 920 times

Re: Batters now in cricket and not batsmen

Post by Devils_Advocate » Fri Sep 24, 2021 11:06 am

I hate to break it to you but we've known for some time that animals can be both homosexual and bisexual. I hope this doesn't spoil the experience next time your dog is licking your feet with a little too much vigour.
This user liked this post: Stayingup

Post Reply