Time to declare with Stubbs' 50 methinks.

SA mainly need to bat time to rest Jansen I think. Then bowl India out tomorrow in the 3rd session.

I wonder if England could learn from SA batting (patience first, attack later), and even India's seemingly more determined application.

The actual number doesn't matter anyway, as most Americans would never even get close a single dime of these investments.

I do wonder which is more effective:

Our policy of appeasement? (which does not (or not fully) combat illegal detecting anyway (attached photo of recent example I came across)

Vs. a policy that would require perhaps more enforcement, but also makes the enforcint easier, like the Swiss one.

Still, I represent a minority view and most colleagues are mostly afraid of driving detecting underground and really (and rightly) value the fact that at least there is communication between (parts of) the detecting community and the archaeological field.

So, it could actually increase value of registered finds on the market, which makes being a FLO in the Dutch version to my mind ethically problematic (it clashes with EAA code of conduct).

What is worse (I think) is that the portable antiquities scheme can be regarded as a sort of certificate of authenticity.

A few years ago, I spotted some celtic staters from Holland on eBay where the description included the determination of kind and age by a professor from the scheme.

In Belgium apparently, there is a kind of licensing scheme, so you can only own a detector and use it when registered. This might at least help in keeping track of who is detecting and might help with law enforcement in the case of heritage crime.