I have a vague recollection that an Aussie was captain in the last decade or so.
Enforce the follow on or knock it about a bit to run up the score?
Plenty of time in the game and the wicket is falling apart already, can’t see them chasing down the lead you have in any case.
1 Like
No I wouldn’t enforce the follow-on; I am sure the crowd would like to see some decent batting first.
1 Like
Very naive performance from the home team, failed to read the pitch correctly and embarrassed themselves with some loose shots.
2 Likes
It’s pretty arrogant, that some random American is sitting on here telling someone from the UK how UK government is operating. That’s like someone from the back woods of Wyoming trying to educate a Jamaican about island life. 
Google be giving folks intellectual superpowers. LOL
7 Likes
Raab was de facto performing the duties of Acting Prime Minister, but was never Acting Prime Minister de jure.
It has to do with the fact that the Queen directly appoints the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister cannot delegate a succession order, though theoretically the Queen herself could. Instead, Johnson deputized Raab to perform certain tasks.
Now, lets use the theoretical situation that Johnson’s situation had been worse than what it actually was. Suppose he was rendered unconscious and would be out of commission for multiple weeks.
In that situation, to maintain continuity of government, the Queen would have to exercise her Royal Prerogative to remove Johnson as Prime Minister and ask Raab to form a government, which would make Raab Prime Minister. When Johnson recovered, the Queen would discharge Raab and restore Johnson.
2 Likes
I wait with interest more posts on this subject.
Without a link to an arbitrary newspaper article how can we believe this well researched and accurate post?
Ol’ Raab himself, huh?
It needs the imprimatur of one who has great knowledge.
I would assume that this is something any British subject would be taught by or in high school in their British Government class. 
Yeah, we don’t really have those.
It’s more about how to develop just the right amount of guilt for our imperial past.
We did give them cricket and railways, you know…
There you go again… .
Well the facts certainly show you’ve got nothing to back up your claims. I do.
FACT: Bojo is the PM and has been the PM since he was sworn in as PM. No-one else has been PM - acting or otherwise.
What…stating the fact that some people, no matter how much they search/copy & paste from google doesn’t make them the expert/authority on EVERYTHING.
Still wondering how some random american is going to tell someone from or maybe reside in another country how that persons respective country’s government work. Instead of trying so hard in proving yourself in front of a bunch anonymous people, how bout respecting perspective/experience of others who may know more than you.
You’re not in danger in leaving the cool kids table, so no need in being a “try hard”.
Take it up with the UK press who universally reported it.
According to the Institute for Government think tank, prime ministers continue in office unless they resign or die.
It adds: “While political parties usually have the ability to appoint an ‘acting leader’ if the leader resigns or is incapacitated, there is no formal ‘acting prime minister’ role. He or she would be prime minister until they chose to resign or if their cabinet forced them out.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-politics-52193461
So, to repeat what has already been stated -
Johnson remained PM
There can only be one PM, clue PRIME minister
Raab took over some but not all the duties
Raab could not take over all the duties
You can have an acting leader of the Tory party but there is not such thing as an acting PM
And the entire UK press acclaimed him to be the “Acting Prime Minister”.
I’ll go with that.
