Reason for India doing well in the First test ???

[Donny]

Quite simple. India does ok against minnows. Hell, even the declining Aussies can beat the Bleck Ceps. :regular_smile:

[cochise]

That would be "Black Caps" Donny...no mocking of the Kiwi accent please...that would be even worse than calling them Kiwis.

[Donny]

Not at all. That's how they pronounce Black Caps.

[The Outsider]

Not at all. That's how they pronounce Black Caps.

You forgot to attach an audio file.:desiwoman:

[Donny]

You only need to listen to the NZ comms. :regular_smile:

[Mr. Wicket]

Hell' date=' even the declining Aussies can beat the Bleck Ceps. :regular_smile:[/quote'] I have never seen the NZ team referred to as "Bleck Ceps". From what I understand, it is not the name they have chosen for their team. :regular_smile:

[cochise]

Not at all. That's how they pronounce Black Caps.

Yes, I know. "They" being the operative word. However, an Aussie pronouncing it like "them" might be construed as mock, might it not? :regular_smile:

[Donny]

Indeed, it might. :regular_smile:

[cochise]

Slippery fella aren't you? It "might" indeed. :regular_smile:

[Donny]

Actually, 'may' is more correct but I woulldn't want to mock your command of the language.

[Guest Evil Mod Consortium]

Actually' date=' 'may' is more correct but I woulldn't want to mock your command of the language.[/quote'] Wouldn't is spelled with one l. Just pointing it out for correctness, not to mock your spelling. :regular_smile:

[Donny]

You misspelled it as well. :regular_smile:

[cochise]

Actually, 'may' is more correct but I woulldn't want to mock your command of the language.

Precisely why I placed the word in quotes Donny. I was refering to the "escape clause" the word represented in the context of the exchange. Surely, that didn't escape you, did it? :regular_smile: By the way, how can one be "more correct" in this case? It was either correct or it was not. Wouldn't you agree? :regular_smile:

[cochise]

Why don't you agree? Eh? Your post disappeared.

[Donny]

No. Might and may are often confused. So often that it becomes a matter of one being more correct as both meanings are thought to be the same by many. Might is more correctly used with 'have' as it's a past tense of may.

[cochise]

I see. I might have been less correct in my usage of the word than I may have. But I am not yet willing to concede that writing in the past tense and using the word "might" is less correct when not proceeded by the word "have" in every instance. Might it not be, that I may have been quite correct? Or... May it not be, that I might have been quite wrong?

[nikred]

I see. I might have been less correct in my usage of the word than I may have. But I am not yet willing to concede that writing in the past tense and using the word "might" is less correct when not proceeded by the word "have" in every instance. Might it not be, that I may have been quite correct? Or... May it not be, that I might have been quite wrong?

haha........that's funny.:cantstop:

[cochise]

Donny, There are many pages of discussions on this topic...it would appear that they are even discussing the probabilities associated with "may" and "might"...how can we know what is more correct or less correct without judging the semantic context within which it is used? http://www.englishforums.com/English/HeMayComeVsHeMightCome/dvdrz/post.htm http://www.englishforums.com/English/HeMightComeOrHeMayCome/dvrmb/post.htm

Two sentences: 1. He may come tomorrow. 2. He might come tomorrow. Some would state that "might" indicates less likelihood than "may", in such cases. Some might even attempt to assign probabilities in terms of percentages. How reasonable is this? We know that for event E, the sum of the probabilities of all possible outcomes must equal one (or 100%). For instance, if E = a fair roll of a fair die, there are 6 possible outcomes, each with a probability of 1/6. Their sum = 1 = 100%. Now take this example: 3. He may come tomorrow. But then again, he may not. There are two sentences. Each sentence embodies one outcome. Each outcome is presented as of equal probability. Each therefore has a probability of 1/2 = 50%. Now take another sentence: 4. He might come tomorrow. But then again, he might not. Again, we have two sentences, and two possible outcomes of equal probability. So again, each outcome has a probability of 50%. But how can that be, if "might" indicates less likelihood than "may"? ___________ Perhaps we need to be more flexible. Suppose the probability values of "may" and "might" are indeed different, but vary from event to event. In that case, we would expect to see many instances of these two structures: 5. He may do X; but then again, he might not. 6. He might do X; but then again, he may not. Here, for instance, "may" might express a 67% likelihood, and "might" a 33% likelihood, the sum of which would = 100%. If that were the case, in #5, X would be twice as likely as not-X; while in #6, X would be half as likely as not-X. That sounds plausible; and it accords with received "may"/"might" wisdom. Yet the strange thing is, we don't see many sentences of this kind. If you google on 7. "he may * but then again he might not" you'll find very few examples, by comparison with 8. "he may * but then again he may not" The latter (#8) is the common form; the former (#7) is the exception. If "might" and "may" can express differing likelihoods, why don't we combine them to do so more frequently, after the model of #7?

Q: Is there any difference in the meanings of may and might, as in "I may go," and "I might go"? A: In the two examples the correspondent provided, may and might are often used interchangeably. But they are not exact synonyms; The word might is somewhat less definite than may, sometimes expressing a greater degree of doubt. In addition, both may and might contain meanings apart from "possibility," which is their meaning in the examples the reader submitted. May indicates permission rather than possibility in the context "May I go?" May also sometimes expresses purpose, as in, "Write so that the average person may understand." This usage is old-fashioned, however; currently the word can is more often used in this context. Might expresses a condition contrary to fact in constructions like, "She might be here if she had received your letter in time." It is also infrequently used to express polite deference, in a question like, "Might I add a word here?"

Your expert opinion is sought in resolving this confusion at the root of the English language. There will be great howling, wailing and gnashing of teeth until we get to the bottom of this. Not by me though. :regular_smile:

[punjabi_khota]

Perf of seamers on day 1, God on day 2 and 3 and bhajji on day 4. I think the seamers really lay the foundation though.

[Dark Warrior]

Gelling up well and doing gr8 as a team + Mahi's Captaincy + Sachin