"Hello - this is the Strauss residence. I'm afraid we can't take your call right now, but please leave a message after the tone and we'll get back to you. If you're phoning from 'Hello magazine about the photoshoot - February 19th is fine."
"Oh, hello Bunnykins, it's me - Andy Pandy.... look, things are getting pretty gruesome down here. Any chance you can do me a favour and phone up on my mobile when I'm batting during the next game (best be quick!!) - tell whoever answers it that my Pater has come down with something pretty nasty, now on his deathbed, asking to see me - that sort of thing... with any luck they 'll put me on the next plane out of here, and I can be back in Blightly before you know it. Ok? Thanks Bunnykins. Byeeee!!"
Monday, January 29, 2007
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Nixon's Not The One
Immediately after the New Zealand debacle, a friend of mine posed a question that has bugged me to such an extent that I felt moved to post about it: -
Has Paul Nixon been picked for his sledging ability alone?
It seems an outlandish suggestion, and an outrageous slur on our wonderful team of selectors, but when you start rationalising it, it starts to make sense. As a batsman he’s no better than Chris Read, and nowhere near as good as ‘Taffy’ Jones, and in terms of actual keeping ability he’s ordinary at best. If they’d wanted a specialist one-day keeper, Matt Prior would surely have been a better bet – and could have filled the ‘pinch hitter’ role at the top of the order leaving Mal Loye free to come in further down the order.
So have things really descended so far that we’re now picking people based purely on their ability to get up the opposition’s noses? A kind of ‘Sinex Strategy’…
If it is, it has no logic whatsoever – although that hasn’t stopped the English selectors before. It’s an idea that might work if you’re playing against Cheltenham Ladies College – but is hardly going to have any tangible impact against Australia, a country where they learn to sledge before learning to talk.
If that is now the criteria let’s not be half-arsed about it – let’s go the whole hog and pick an entire team of acknowledged masters of annoyance, backchat and irritation – an ‘All Gobby XI’ if you will: -
Neil Warnock
Jade Goody
Lilly Allen
Jim Davidson
Vera Duckworth
Gordon Ramsey
Rev Ian Paisley
Bono
Dennis Skinner
Liam Gallagher
Richard Littlejohn
I reckon that side would give Ponting and his men a real run for their money.
And, failing that, could at least provide a more challenging set of interviews for Athers than Freddie, with his plaintive claims of 'spirit' and 'pride'.
Has Paul Nixon been picked for his sledging ability alone?
It seems an outlandish suggestion, and an outrageous slur on our wonderful team of selectors, but when you start rationalising it, it starts to make sense. As a batsman he’s no better than Chris Read, and nowhere near as good as ‘Taffy’ Jones, and in terms of actual keeping ability he’s ordinary at best. If they’d wanted a specialist one-day keeper, Matt Prior would surely have been a better bet – and could have filled the ‘pinch hitter’ role at the top of the order leaving Mal Loye free to come in further down the order.
So have things really descended so far that we’re now picking people based purely on their ability to get up the opposition’s noses? A kind of ‘Sinex Strategy’…
If it is, it has no logic whatsoever – although that hasn’t stopped the English selectors before. It’s an idea that might work if you’re playing against Cheltenham Ladies College – but is hardly going to have any tangible impact against Australia, a country where they learn to sledge before learning to talk.
If that is now the criteria let’s not be half-arsed about it – let’s go the whole hog and pick an entire team of acknowledged masters of annoyance, backchat and irritation – an ‘All Gobby XI’ if you will: -
Neil Warnock
Jade Goody
Lilly Allen
Jim Davidson
Vera Duckworth
Gordon Ramsey
Rev Ian Paisley
Bono
Dennis Skinner
Liam Gallagher
Richard Littlejohn
I reckon that side would give Ponting and his men a real run for their money.
And, failing that, could at least provide a more challenging set of interviews for Athers than Freddie, with his plaintive claims of 'spirit' and 'pride'.
Monday, January 22, 2007
Sit and Deliver
aka - 'The Great Bat & Ball Swindle'
Here’s the ECB programme of international cricket for the upcoming summer.
Assuming you count the two 20/20 games at the Oval as ‘halves’ this means a very healthy 46 days of cricket - though whether or not Mssrs Flintoff, Pietersen and Co will feel ‘healthy’ by the end of it is a moot point…
Now for the gripes - Of those 46 days, no less than 12 are slated for Lords – that’s over 25% at one ground. With the number of international grounds in England increasing almost yearly, is this sort of concentration fair?
Going one step further, 19 out of the 46 days are in London – that’s around 40%. Admittedly, as a Londoner, it’s rather counter-intuitive for me to object to that, bearing in mind both Lords and The Oval lie within a twenty mile radius of the TRSM Towers servants entrance, but I can certainly see why ‘North-South divide’ theorists may be slightly miffed at the geographical concentration of matches in the 'Peoples Republic of Livingstone'.
After geography – let’s deal with the economics. Check out these prices for Test Match tickets. In each case I’ve quoted the cheapest seat followed by the child price in brackets: -
- Headingley 25 (15) Family area, presumably ‘dry’- next cheapest 30 (18)
- Old Trafford 30 (15)
- Durham 27.50 (10)
- Trent Bridge 35 (15)
- The Oval 40 (20)
- Lords (v W Indies) 60 (20)
- Lords (v India) 65 (20)
SIXTY FIVE POUNDS??!!!
That means that Lords is over 50% more expensive than any other ground in the country.
By way of international comparison, the tickets I bought for the MCG in December cost 40 Aussie Dollars each – in each case that was lower tier, twenty rows back from the boundary – a perfect view. At current exchange rates, that’s about 17 pounds each. Before anyone starts muttering about the MCG capacity, guys who went have told me that prices at the other four (smaller) grounds were similar.
My understanding of funding is that all Test Match profits go into the ECB pot and get divvied up around the counties – thus keeping about thirteen of them afloat for another year, but surely that ‘profit’ is after all the grounds have covered their costs for catering and other facilities – and written into that cost must surely be some element of ‘local’ profit, otherwise local caterers and other service providers at Lords wouldn’t bother bidding for the contract. So the sole reason for such astronomical ticket prices is to maximise profit – at the expense of fleecing the average cricket fan.
Yes, even an unreconstructed Socialist like me understands the idea of supply and demand, and that if people are prepared to pay a high price then why not charge it. Also, I’m not quite that much of an anti-traditionalist to accept that there is a certain magnetism about Lords on a Test Match day that everyone should get to experience at least once (plus have the opportunity to go behind the pavilion at lunchtime to marvel that in the 21st Century people still actually behave like that, and play the famous 'hunt the chin' game) but how on earth is everyone going to do that with such high prices?
Why not maximise the profits on the corporate hospitality boxes and use that profit to subsidise some cheaper seats? After all, as we’ve discussed here before, individuals don’t actually pay for those prime location seats – that costs comes out of corporate marketing budgets. Or why not directly subsidise a certain number of seats for each day down to a reasonable level. Don’t forget that once someone is in the ground they’re going to be stumping up for other things – such as food and beer – so the average take per head is much higher than the ticket price.
Quick prediction – by the time the Australians get here in 2009 the cheapest seats at the Lords Test (you know - the obligatory one we always concede at the start of each home Ashes series to get the Aussies off to an unnecessary flyer) will be 75 pounds and the standard price elsewhere will be 100. Don’t forget there’s always a slight premium on Ashes tests at Lords compared to when other teams visit, so the figures could conceivably be higher than that.
One of the four key pillars in the ECB ‘From playground to Test Arena’ statement is
“Enthusing participation and following – especially among young people”
It seems a bit pointless for a kid to be able to pay 20 quid to get in if his Dad can’t afford to get it as well.
One final note – look closely and you’ll see that Edgbaston doesn’t merit a Test Match this summer. On the 2005 Ashes DVD, Mark Nicholas compares the atmosphere at the legendary Edgbaston Test to a rock concert – in contrast to the ‘classical recital’ feeling at Lords. In such a tight game, that supportive atmosphere might just have been the reason for England’s extraordinarily tight victory. For that reason alone, Birmingham deserves a Test Match each summer.
The ECB would say that with seven test match grounds in the UK – shortly to rise to eight when Cardiff joins the list, someone has to miss out – but even my simple maths says 7 grounds into 7 tests this summer goes pretty well – but that’s before you take into account the requirements of the cricket establishment who seem to feel they have a God given right to the lions share of matches leaving the rest to pick over the bones of what’s left.
Bearing in mind all visiting sides tend to raise their game at Lords far more than the alleged home team – thus effectively negating home advantage, why not ask the England team which they’d prefer, an extra test in the ‘neutral’ confines of St John’s Wood, or one in the intimidating atmosphere of Edgbaston – I bet they’d choose the ‘rock concert’ every time.
Here’s the ECB programme of international cricket for the upcoming summer.
Assuming you count the two 20/20 games at the Oval as ‘halves’ this means a very healthy 46 days of cricket - though whether or not Mssrs Flintoff, Pietersen and Co will feel ‘healthy’ by the end of it is a moot point…
Now for the gripes - Of those 46 days, no less than 12 are slated for Lords – that’s over 25% at one ground. With the number of international grounds in England increasing almost yearly, is this sort of concentration fair?
Going one step further, 19 out of the 46 days are in London – that’s around 40%. Admittedly, as a Londoner, it’s rather counter-intuitive for me to object to that, bearing in mind both Lords and The Oval lie within a twenty mile radius of the TRSM Towers servants entrance, but I can certainly see why ‘North-South divide’ theorists may be slightly miffed at the geographical concentration of matches in the 'Peoples Republic of Livingstone'.
After geography – let’s deal with the economics. Check out these prices for Test Match tickets. In each case I’ve quoted the cheapest seat followed by the child price in brackets: -
- Headingley 25 (15) Family area, presumably ‘dry’- next cheapest 30 (18)
- Old Trafford 30 (15)
- Durham 27.50 (10)
- Trent Bridge 35 (15)
- The Oval 40 (20)
- Lords (v W Indies) 60 (20)
- Lords (v India) 65 (20)
SIXTY FIVE POUNDS??!!!
That means that Lords is over 50% more expensive than any other ground in the country.
By way of international comparison, the tickets I bought for the MCG in December cost 40 Aussie Dollars each – in each case that was lower tier, twenty rows back from the boundary – a perfect view. At current exchange rates, that’s about 17 pounds each. Before anyone starts muttering about the MCG capacity, guys who went have told me that prices at the other four (smaller) grounds were similar.
My understanding of funding is that all Test Match profits go into the ECB pot and get divvied up around the counties – thus keeping about thirteen of them afloat for another year, but surely that ‘profit’ is after all the grounds have covered their costs for catering and other facilities – and written into that cost must surely be some element of ‘local’ profit, otherwise local caterers and other service providers at Lords wouldn’t bother bidding for the contract. So the sole reason for such astronomical ticket prices is to maximise profit – at the expense of fleecing the average cricket fan.
Yes, even an unreconstructed Socialist like me understands the idea of supply and demand, and that if people are prepared to pay a high price then why not charge it. Also, I’m not quite that much of an anti-traditionalist to accept that there is a certain magnetism about Lords on a Test Match day that everyone should get to experience at least once (plus have the opportunity to go behind the pavilion at lunchtime to marvel that in the 21st Century people still actually behave like that, and play the famous 'hunt the chin' game) but how on earth is everyone going to do that with such high prices?
Why not maximise the profits on the corporate hospitality boxes and use that profit to subsidise some cheaper seats? After all, as we’ve discussed here before, individuals don’t actually pay for those prime location seats – that costs comes out of corporate marketing budgets. Or why not directly subsidise a certain number of seats for each day down to a reasonable level. Don’t forget that once someone is in the ground they’re going to be stumping up for other things – such as food and beer – so the average take per head is much higher than the ticket price.
Quick prediction – by the time the Australians get here in 2009 the cheapest seats at the Lords Test (you know - the obligatory one we always concede at the start of each home Ashes series to get the Aussies off to an unnecessary flyer) will be 75 pounds and the standard price elsewhere will be 100. Don’t forget there’s always a slight premium on Ashes tests at Lords compared to when other teams visit, so the figures could conceivably be higher than that.
One of the four key pillars in the ECB ‘From playground to Test Arena’ statement is
“Enthusing participation and following – especially among young people”
It seems a bit pointless for a kid to be able to pay 20 quid to get in if his Dad can’t afford to get it as well.
One final note – look closely and you’ll see that Edgbaston doesn’t merit a Test Match this summer. On the 2005 Ashes DVD, Mark Nicholas compares the atmosphere at the legendary Edgbaston Test to a rock concert – in contrast to the ‘classical recital’ feeling at Lords. In such a tight game, that supportive atmosphere might just have been the reason for England’s extraordinarily tight victory. For that reason alone, Birmingham deserves a Test Match each summer.
The ECB would say that with seven test match grounds in the UK – shortly to rise to eight when Cardiff joins the list, someone has to miss out – but even my simple maths says 7 grounds into 7 tests this summer goes pretty well – but that’s before you take into account the requirements of the cricket establishment who seem to feel they have a God given right to the lions share of matches leaving the rest to pick over the bones of what’s left.
Bearing in mind all visiting sides tend to raise their game at Lords far more than the alleged home team – thus effectively negating home advantage, why not ask the England team which they’d prefer, an extra test in the ‘neutral’ confines of St John’s Wood, or one in the intimidating atmosphere of Edgbaston – I bet they’d choose the ‘rock concert’ every time.
Sunday, January 21, 2007
It's a Man's World...
Here at TRSM we're only too willing to offer unsolicited advice to anyone who appears to need it. We're also very much aware that you can learn a lot by how other sportsmen go about their business.
For example: -
If Hershelle Gibbs and all the other sensitive flowers in the South Africa team are getting fed up at the comments they are hearing from spectators, this might be the solution they are looking for!
And if any batsman is getting wound up by the incessant sledging ringing in his ears, how about this as a riposte?
Incidently, guess which player in that second clip would have received the harsher disciplinary penalty? (Answer in the 'comments' below)
For example: -
If Hershelle Gibbs and all the other sensitive flowers in the South Africa team are getting fed up at the comments they are hearing from spectators, this might be the solution they are looking for!
And if any batsman is getting wound up by the incessant sledging ringing in his ears, how about this as a riposte?
Incidently, guess which player in that second clip would have received the harsher disciplinary penalty? (Answer in the 'comments' below)
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Those Were the Days
Believe it or not, there was a time when England had a decent ODI side, and actually used to win tournaments and stuff...
So, how the hell did that happen?
Well, in a shockingly bold move, the England selectors had taken the unprecdented (for them) step of having different captains for the two different forms of the game and the decision to choose Adam Hollioake to skipper the ODI side was extraordinarily radical for a body that up until then had probably thought that the concept of sugar in a cup of tea was rather 'racy'...
Hollioake had a reputation for being outspoken, opinionated and very aggressive out on the pitch - to the point where he'd almost come to blows with members of opposition counties visiting The Oval on more than one occasion. This might have had something to do with the fact that he was born in a land far far away known as 'Australia' where traits such as plain-speaking and a strong desire to win are the general norm... There was no denying, however, that he was an inspirational captain.
The team Hollioake had at his disposal was a wonderful example of a balanced ODI side, containing all the important ingredients for success: -
- A core of experienced one-day batsmen - Stewart, Nick Knight, Hick and Thorpe (how England miss him now). The first three were multi-dimensional, capable of blazing hitting as well as run accumulation, whilst Thorpe was second only to Michael Bevan in terms of working the ball around and chasing down a target.
- A genuine 'pinch hitter' in Ally Brown, and an equally dangerous pure hitter in Matthew Fleming.
- Wicket taking opening bowlers like Dean Headley. (Quick digression here - does anyone else share my view that his premature retirement through injury in 2001 has been hugely underrated?)
- A further core of experienced one-day bowlers, all of whom could score useful runs - Mark Ealham (probably the best one day bowler England have had since Underwood?) Hollioake himself who was a master of the 'six different balls in the over' routine Robert Croft, Dougie Brown, and Fleming.
The presence of ex-Army officer Fleming in the side also added another dimension, in that it prevented opponents sledging getting too out of hand - after all, you aren't going to start abusing someone who has a capability to blow your car up, or enter your room at the dead of night and slit your throat without making a sound are you?!
At the end of that tournament, there were many of us who saw a new dawn of English one-day cricket emerging but within less than nine months the experiment had been abandoned and the slide downhill was so quick that it culminated in the monumental cock up of the 1999 World Cup, from which you could argue, England haven't properly recovered.
If you're after a scapegoat for the downturn, look no further than Alec Stewart. After Mike Atherton quit as England test skipper after the 1998 tour to West Indies, Stewart took over the reins and promptly announced that he wanted to captain England in both forms of the game. Stewart was a wonderful batsman on his day, an excellent keeper, but lacked the cricketing imagination to be a good captain of the one day side.
Had the selectors not used up all their supply of cojones in the original choice of Hollioake, the logical move would have surely been to tell Stewart to stop acting the Prima-Donna, and to give Hollioake a contract to lead the ODI side up to and including the World Cup. A Hollioake side would surely have not succumbed as lamely as the England side ultimately did against South Africa and India in that tournament.
Postscript - Also in that England squad in Sharjah, although not in the side for the final was one B.Hollioake. It's an awful shock to realise that he would have turned just 29 during the Brisbane Test just gone. You can stop and think wistfully about a current England ODI middle order of Pietersen, Hollioake (B) and Flintoff very easy - at least until the room starts getting very 'dusty' and you can't focus on the computer screen anymore.
So, how the hell did that happen?
Well, in a shockingly bold move, the England selectors had taken the unprecdented (for them) step of having different captains for the two different forms of the game and the decision to choose Adam Hollioake to skipper the ODI side was extraordinarily radical for a body that up until then had probably thought that the concept of sugar in a cup of tea was rather 'racy'...
Hollioake had a reputation for being outspoken, opinionated and very aggressive out on the pitch - to the point where he'd almost come to blows with members of opposition counties visiting The Oval on more than one occasion. This might have had something to do with the fact that he was born in a land far far away known as 'Australia' where traits such as plain-speaking and a strong desire to win are the general norm... There was no denying, however, that he was an inspirational captain.
The team Hollioake had at his disposal was a wonderful example of a balanced ODI side, containing all the important ingredients for success: -
- A core of experienced one-day batsmen - Stewart, Nick Knight, Hick and Thorpe (how England miss him now). The first three were multi-dimensional, capable of blazing hitting as well as run accumulation, whilst Thorpe was second only to Michael Bevan in terms of working the ball around and chasing down a target.
- A genuine 'pinch hitter' in Ally Brown, and an equally dangerous pure hitter in Matthew Fleming.
- Wicket taking opening bowlers like Dean Headley. (Quick digression here - does anyone else share my view that his premature retirement through injury in 2001 has been hugely underrated?)
- A further core of experienced one-day bowlers, all of whom could score useful runs - Mark Ealham (probably the best one day bowler England have had since Underwood?) Hollioake himself who was a master of the 'six different balls in the over' routine Robert Croft, Dougie Brown, and Fleming.
The presence of ex-Army officer Fleming in the side also added another dimension, in that it prevented opponents sledging getting too out of hand - after all, you aren't going to start abusing someone who has a capability to blow your car up, or enter your room at the dead of night and slit your throat without making a sound are you?!
At the end of that tournament, there were many of us who saw a new dawn of English one-day cricket emerging but within less than nine months the experiment had been abandoned and the slide downhill was so quick that it culminated in the monumental cock up of the 1999 World Cup, from which you could argue, England haven't properly recovered.
If you're after a scapegoat for the downturn, look no further than Alec Stewart. After Mike Atherton quit as England test skipper after the 1998 tour to West Indies, Stewart took over the reins and promptly announced that he wanted to captain England in both forms of the game. Stewart was a wonderful batsman on his day, an excellent keeper, but lacked the cricketing imagination to be a good captain of the one day side.
Had the selectors not used up all their supply of cojones in the original choice of Hollioake, the logical move would have surely been to tell Stewart to stop acting the Prima-Donna, and to give Hollioake a contract to lead the ODI side up to and including the World Cup. A Hollioake side would surely have not succumbed as lamely as the England side ultimately did against South Africa and India in that tournament.
Postscript - Also in that England squad in Sharjah, although not in the side for the final was one B.Hollioake. It's an awful shock to realise that he would have turned just 29 during the Brisbane Test just gone. You can stop and think wistfully about a current England ODI middle order of Pietersen, Hollioake (B) and Flintoff very easy - at least until the room starts getting very 'dusty' and you can't focus on the computer screen anymore.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
This Charming Man
London Radio DJ Danny Baker once memorably described footballer Dennis Wise, then professionally getting-up-noses for Chelsea FC, as being the 'school snide'. By that he meant an irritating wind-up merchant (or 'agent provocateur' if you don't fancy the London vernacular) happy to provoke and needle opponents, but always on the periphery of any serious trouble, safely out of harms way hiding behind the school bully when any retribution was meted out. The McAvity of the football world for the more literary minded amongst you.
Hershelle Gibbs has always struck me as being the Dennis Wise of the cricketing world.
There's always been something vaguely dislikable about Gibbs. It's nothing serious that I can put my finger on, but just a general sense of unease. For example, I didn't share the shock of most of the cricketing world when news came out that he'd accepted a bribe, and I was equally unsurprised that he'd ultimately bottled it when the chips were down. No surprise at the drug allegations either... and I bet he broke 'Rule One' under cross-examination and shopped his dealer.
In the league of irritability, he's probably in the same division as the sanctimonious Jonty Rhodes (Mike Atherton's autobiography is rather outspoken about Rhodes to say the least!). Batting against SA in the late 1990s, with Rhodes wittering away at point and Gibbs doing the same from midwicket must have been somewhat trying, to say the least.
So this then doesn't come as a huge surprise.
To be honest, as an anti-apartheid campaign veteran, it's still difficult to come up with a considered rational judgment when thinking about the issue of racism and South Africa. It's hard to forget that people like Gibbs, along with most of the South African side, lived their formative years under a repellent system where Makaya Ntini and Ashwell Prince would have probably had to eat in a different restaurant and stay in different hotels to the rest of the South African side. - had they actually been allowed to play in the first place.
So when you read about sensitive white South Africans getting upset because they're copping some abuse from the crowd, (Gibbs in this instance, and Andre Nel in Australia last winter) it's hard not to raise a quizzical eyebrow and point them in the direction of the chapters headed 'Sharpville 1960 ', and 'Soweto 1976' in their history books.
Of course, it's easy for me to say. I've never been on the end of any racist abuse, and have no idea how I'd react if I was - though I've always been an adherent of the 'sticks and stones' school of thought when it comes to verbal confrontation.
On a related issue, remember it was Graeme Smith the Doomsayer who warned that Monty Panesar would receive a load of racist abuse from Australian crowds this winter. As predictions go, it was as wide of the mark as those that said that England would be competitive in the Ashes series. Instead, Monty became a cult favourite amongst the Australian crowd, and not in a patronising way either. There was, and is, genuine respect for his bowling prowess and general enthusiasm - and respect from Australians hard earned.
Hershelle Gibbs has always struck me as being the Dennis Wise of the cricketing world.
There's always been something vaguely dislikable about Gibbs. It's nothing serious that I can put my finger on, but just a general sense of unease. For example, I didn't share the shock of most of the cricketing world when news came out that he'd accepted a bribe, and I was equally unsurprised that he'd ultimately bottled it when the chips were down. No surprise at the drug allegations either... and I bet he broke 'Rule One' under cross-examination and shopped his dealer.
In the league of irritability, he's probably in the same division as the sanctimonious Jonty Rhodes (Mike Atherton's autobiography is rather outspoken about Rhodes to say the least!). Batting against SA in the late 1990s, with Rhodes wittering away at point and Gibbs doing the same from midwicket must have been somewhat trying, to say the least.
So this then doesn't come as a huge surprise.
To be honest, as an anti-apartheid campaign veteran, it's still difficult to come up with a considered rational judgment when thinking about the issue of racism and South Africa. It's hard to forget that people like Gibbs, along with most of the South African side, lived their formative years under a repellent system where Makaya Ntini and Ashwell Prince would have probably had to eat in a different restaurant and stay in different hotels to the rest of the South African side. - had they actually been allowed to play in the first place.
So when you read about sensitive white South Africans getting upset because they're copping some abuse from the crowd, (Gibbs in this instance, and Andre Nel in Australia last winter) it's hard not to raise a quizzical eyebrow and point them in the direction of the chapters headed 'Sharpville 1960 ', and 'Soweto 1976' in their history books.
Of course, it's easy for me to say. I've never been on the end of any racist abuse, and have no idea how I'd react if I was - though I've always been an adherent of the 'sticks and stones' school of thought when it comes to verbal confrontation.
On a related issue, remember it was Graeme Smith the Doomsayer who warned that Monty Panesar would receive a load of racist abuse from Australian crowds this winter. As predictions go, it was as wide of the mark as those that said that England would be competitive in the Ashes series. Instead, Monty became a cult favourite amongst the Australian crowd, and not in a patronising way either. There was, and is, genuine respect for his bowling prowess and general enthusiasm - and respect from Australians hard earned.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Reverse Swing's 115th Dream
How about this as a scenario...
England get totally humiliated by Australia in their remaining three group games, but manage to pick up enough points from games with New Zealand to get into the final.
Someone (Strauss with the bat, Showpony with the ball, Freddie with either...) then uses the preceding humiliation as suitable motivation to turn in a match winning performance and England win the final.
Unjust? - Yes
Unfair? - Yes
Unlikely? - Yes
Enough to keep us laughing all winter if it actually happens? - You bet!
(Don't tell me no one else has thought of this!)
England get totally humiliated by Australia in their remaining three group games, but manage to pick up enough points from games with New Zealand to get into the final.
Someone (Strauss with the bat, Showpony with the ball, Freddie with either...) then uses the preceding humiliation as suitable motivation to turn in a match winning performance and England win the final.
Unjust? - Yes
Unfair? - Yes
Unlikely? - Yes
Enough to keep us laughing all winter if it actually happens? - You bet!
(Don't tell me no one else has thought of this!)
Saturday, January 13, 2007
Undercover
Here's a question that's been bugging me for sometime, and no amount of searching can provide a definitive answer so I thought I'd throw it out into the blogosphere and see if anyone can help.
Simply - what's the history of covering wickets in Test Matches?
My own immediate response was that it came in during the 1970's - it can't have been earlier than that in England otherwise Derek Underwood would have ended up with half the number of test wickets that he eventually did. (Remember The Oval 1968, Lords 1974...)
However, a West Indian friend of mine vividly remembers covers being used in Port of Spain in 1958, which suggests to me that there was no formal ICC policy at the time and covering wickets was done on some sort of ad hoc basis.
Any thoughts?
Simply - what's the history of covering wickets in Test Matches?
My own immediate response was that it came in during the 1970's - it can't have been earlier than that in England otherwise Derek Underwood would have ended up with half the number of test wickets that he eventually did. (Remember The Oval 1968, Lords 1974...)
However, a West Indian friend of mine vividly remembers covers being used in Port of Spain in 1958, which suggests to me that there was no formal ICC policy at the time and covering wickets was done on some sort of ad hoc basis.
Any thoughts?
Friday, January 12, 2007
Quiz Answer
Tony was right - the person so effusive in his praise of the Barmy Army was Jonathan 'Wildchild' Agnew in an interview with ABC News and the end of the 2002/2003 tour. (Follow the comments box to the link Tony provided for the whole interview - saves me having to do it!)
As I said, no prizes, but even had there been I'd have obviously insisted that it be retained in the UK in perpetuity for Tony to stare at wistfully on his visits to these shores...
As I said, no prizes, but even had there been I'd have obviously insisted that it be retained in the UK in perpetuity for Tony to stare at wistfully on his visits to these shores...
Thursday, January 11, 2007
' Bridge over Troubled Water
Sometimes after a severe trauma like a 5-0 whitewash it's the simple things that can bring people back to reality and make you realise that life WILL go on, and the world will keep turning.
For me, it was the 'Nottingham' postmark on the envelope lying on the doormat. That simple red circle of post office ink said that the Trent Bridge Test Match tickets had arrived. A life-affirming moment indeed.
Despite the abject nature of the performance Down Under, which surely reached is nadir in the 20/20 match a few days ago, you needed some sort of reminder that we do still have quite a decent team - just as long as that team doesn't include the name 'Anderson' anywhere. There's a good arguement to say that below Australia (waaaayyyy below Australia actually!) there are a host of other test sides, full of normal flesh and blood humans, that we can hold our own against - and, glory be, actually beat.
This summer should be a cracker - A resurgent West Indies side and the ever threatening and always entertaining Indians. Possibly the last chance to see Lara and Tendulkar - a new crop of young quick bowlers, Dravid, Sehwag, Gayle ("Sarwan, Hinds & Chanderpaul")- another chance to see the ageless Kumble - can't wait!
We always have a good time at Trent Bridge, make a weekend of it by booking into one of the many cheap hotels in Nottingham and take advantage of the 'lively' nightlife, and the fact that you can enjoy a decent night out without fearing the state of your bank balance by the end of it.
The ground itself has a wonderful charm. It's small by Test Match standards - even after recent developments, but even after all the changes it's still got a lovely old-fashioned atmosphere as there are stands from different eras pieced together with different styles. It's old fashioned in a positive way - the tickets stilll look like they've been run off on a John Bull printing kit, the staff are friendly (the gatekeepers actually welcome you to the ground!!) whilst those working in the bars know what they're doing. The traditional lunchtime wander round always unearths a hidden treasure like a souvenir shop that seems untouched since the days of Larwood and Voce, and tiny counters serving food that is actually edible and tasty - a rare combination in an English sports arena.
The 2005 Test was the best cricket watching experience of my life, but then I've never had a bad one in the place where Gary Pratt went from obscurity to legend in an instant.
For me, it was the 'Nottingham' postmark on the envelope lying on the doormat. That simple red circle of post office ink said that the Trent Bridge Test Match tickets had arrived. A life-affirming moment indeed.
Despite the abject nature of the performance Down Under, which surely reached is nadir in the 20/20 match a few days ago, you needed some sort of reminder that we do still have quite a decent team - just as long as that team doesn't include the name 'Anderson' anywhere. There's a good arguement to say that below Australia (waaaayyyy below Australia actually!) there are a host of other test sides, full of normal flesh and blood humans, that we can hold our own against - and, glory be, actually beat.
This summer should be a cracker - A resurgent West Indies side and the ever threatening and always entertaining Indians. Possibly the last chance to see Lara and Tendulkar - a new crop of young quick bowlers, Dravid, Sehwag, Gayle ("Sarwan, Hinds & Chanderpaul")- another chance to see the ageless Kumble - can't wait!
We always have a good time at Trent Bridge, make a weekend of it by booking into one of the many cheap hotels in Nottingham and take advantage of the 'lively' nightlife, and the fact that you can enjoy a decent night out without fearing the state of your bank balance by the end of it.
The ground itself has a wonderful charm. It's small by Test Match standards - even after recent developments, but even after all the changes it's still got a lovely old-fashioned atmosphere as there are stands from different eras pieced together with different styles. It's old fashioned in a positive way - the tickets stilll look like they've been run off on a John Bull printing kit, the staff are friendly (the gatekeepers actually welcome you to the ground!!) whilst those working in the bars know what they're doing. The traditional lunchtime wander round always unearths a hidden treasure like a souvenir shop that seems untouched since the days of Larwood and Voce, and tiny counters serving food that is actually edible and tasty - a rare combination in an English sports arena.
The 2005 Test was the best cricket watching experience of my life, but then I've never had a bad one in the place where Gary Pratt went from obscurity to legend in an instant.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
