West Indies Skittles England for 51 Runs


west_indies_cricket

It’s nearly impossible to not get blown away when the West Indies routs England for only 51 runs to win the first Test match in the Wisden Trophy Series. In what has been described as a spell of a lifetime, Jerome Taylor electrified the West Indian fans taking English scalp after English scalp reminiscent of the former glory day of West Indies Cricket. Fans cheered, danced and tapped the back of their TV sets in Trinidad as stumps and bails became dislodged at Sabina Park Oval in Jamaica. It was like a David Copperfield illusion and West Indians were wiping their eyes not of tears but in disbelief.

It was an almost flawless all round team performance from Chris Gale and the Windies which started with centuries from Gale and Sarwan. The game was about even this morning when the West Indies made a mere seventy five run first innings lead. This lead, however, proved insurmountable for England. It was not clear if it was simply the intensity of the West Indian bowling or the seventy five run lead, but England appeared to not have any fight in them after they lost their first wicket.  A five day Test Match was over in just three and a half. This shortened Test Match will no doubt affect match revenues but it will be made up for in the next Test as West Indian fans rally round the West Indies!

Congratulations to the Team and I hope to be posting a similar blog post next match!

The UDECOTT Defense


appellate-argument1There are two teams of high-power lawyers defending UDECOTT at the Commission of Enquiry, which means citizens of Trinidad and Tobago are paying millions of dollars, times two, to represent (or is it defend) itself against itself. The people at UDECOTT would argue they didn’t ask for the Commission of Enquiry (and for good reason) but now the Commission is a fact of life, it has to defend itself with all its might, all its soul, and all the taxpayer’s dollars it can, once again, lay its hands on.

The teams of lawyers representing UDECOTT are saying their client is being unfairly attacked which I take to mean their client would prefer to be fairly attacked but have no problem with an attack, per se. That, however, is a layman’s view and subject to misinterpretation by even an average lawyer. I don’t know if these lawyers are that clever or worth the money they are being paid but as far as I am concerned these lawyers are inciting thoughts of violence when the word attack is used in the same sentence with the word UDECOTT. Instead, these lawyers should have used the more passive synonym for attack, bother and say “UDECOTT just doesn’t want to be bothered.”

When highly paid lawyers are being paid big taxpayers’ dollars to defend something that cannot be defended they beg for the stadium not to be consider as a typical example of their client’s work. This is similar to a man being sentenced for robbery saying “look how many people you can’t prove I robbed.” I would be the first to agree that lawyers have to do their job which is to represent their clients to the best of the lawyers’ ability, even if that means they ( the lawyers) have to stand up in full view of the public and bray like an ass. It seems the law is not the only ass in town and taxpayers continue to fund stables of them.