Peter Hopeless, my good friend, is arriving later today and I have
reason to believe that he may dispute my claim to have won a bet
placed in the middle of February.

Here are the details:

From me to him: 

You're ON. £5 it is!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Peter Hopeless 
To: Bryan Cleverdevil 
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 11:10 AM
Subject: Re: Has Dunky Fletcher Gone Mad?

Bet you that England will win at least one test (before Jones
collapses holding his ankle). £5 at evens - probably India will win
the series. No bets too easy.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bryan Cleverdevil 
To: Peter Hopeless 
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: Has Dunky Fletcher Gone Mad?

Huh! The chances are that Jonesy will again succumb to injury, just
you see! I really don't fancy England's chances in India.
 
So please offer me a silly bet and bring some joy into my humdrum
life. Many thanks!
 
----- Original Message ----- 
From: Peter Hopeless 
To: Bryan Cleverdevil 
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 8:27 AM
Subject: Re: Has Dunky Fletcher Gone Mad?

Proof will be in the sort of pudding that gets bowled up during the
next two months. He wants to ensure that Jonesie bowls skidders and
after all he has the name for it.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Bryan Cleverdevil 
To: Peter Hopeless
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 3:33 PM
Subject: Has Dunky Fletcher Gone Mad?

After hiring Mark Thingummy from Somerset, Dunky has now recruited
another nobody (Kevin Slime) from the same county.
 
Surely, if the Somerset coaching staff had been any good then Marcus
Thickky would have scored more than 75 at an average of 15 during the
recent Test Series with Pakistan?
 
CASE FOR THE PLAINTIFF:

The said Simon Jones broke down and was sent home before the 1st Test, see:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/england/4754004.stm

I contend that I have WON the bet ...
 
Because the bet was predicated on England winning a test BEFORE Jones collapses!
 
What I would like is sound legal arguments valid under English Law,
Belgium Law (where he lives), European Law and the Law of Natural
Justice - but only if they support my case.

Please support a fellow GA-ite in his hour of need.

Many thanks!

Bryan

Bryan,
First, read the disclaimer, since you have asked for "sound legal arguments".

Chronologically:
Bryan:
"Huh! The chances are that Jonesy will again succumb to injury, just
you see! I really don't fancy England's chances in India."

Peter (the bet):
"Bet you that England will win at least one test (before Jones
collapses holding his ankle). £5 at evens - probably India will win
the series. No bets too easy."

From your question and email prior to the bet, it seems that the text
of the bet ends with the dash.
BUT:  There follows a full stop, leaving the statement:
"£5 at evens - probably India will win the series."

The premise by both you and Peter was that Jones would participate in
at least one test.  This did not occur, therefore this primary
condition for the bet was not met.  The bet is off.

An interpretation that the bet is really about the whole series is
probably also not on, since you both agree that England doesn't stand
a chance.
HOWEVER, should England's chances improve  - that old "Rule Brittania"
attitude -  you might chose to try to impose this interpretation on
poor old Peter.  He might even accept it in his delight at England's
winning the series  - especially if you immediately wave to the
barkeeper and spend your winnings on a couple of pints.

Cheers, Myo-wc (especially proudly worn after this engagement)  ;-)

O My, Myo

You are truly wonderful by preparing me for my ordeal.

What happened was that Peter readily conceded he had lost.

But equally readily I insisted that I couldn't take the £5 that he
generously offered, so the bet now says that England will not win a
match in the present 3 match series. We'll see.

Later, we went out to dine and, as usual, we had a fight about who
would pay the bill and - Guess What? - YES I won again!

(I'd already 'got at' the waitress who refused to accept any of his
plastic or any of his notes by claiming that they were forgeries.)

So a resounding victory.

Rule Bryan!

So you "got at" the waitress, did you, you old Hussar!
(Why do they refer to themselves as "Shiners"?)

I don't have much respect for Peter, his conceding so quickly, but
maybe he had already thought a step ahead, feeding the kitty.

Since you decided to restate the bet, who has money on England's winning one match?

Needless to say, I feel confirmed in my analysis of the question and
especially in my estimation of your generous character.  Like here, it
is all about been right and not about the money.

Cheers, Myo (in off-duty dress)

O My, Myo

Attention!

Your job (for which you are being handsomely) is to ANSWER questions,
not to ask them!

I've NEVER heard of the 10th Royal Hussars (PWO) being referred to as
'The Shiners'. I shall now ask my fellow Hussars for the lowdown.
These include Sir Norman Wisdom and George Bryan ('Beau') Brummel.

The revised bet for £5 is that England will one Test in the present 3
match series. Peter says they will. However, the 1st was drawn
(contrary to your earlier incorrect advice) and the 2nd is (seemingly)
also heading for a draw.

Stand at Ease

By Order of Trooper Beau C

HI Bryan,
Here is where I saw "Shiners" related to the 1oth Hussars:
http://www.10thhussar.com/
http://sg.msnusers.com/SouthernShinersXRH/shinersathome.msnw
http://sg.msnusers.com/SouthernShinersXRH/reunions.msnw

On a blog that is about 95% in Finnish, someone mentioned that he was
from the 11th Hussars ("Cherypickers") and referred to the 10th as
Shiners.

Maybe you guys were more spit-and-polish?  Shiner was once slang for a
shiny coin: a guinea as I found in and old story, or a dime in US hobo
slang.

Does that make any sense?
Cheers, Myo