Hatin' Hayden

Just to make us all feel good about kiwis, follow this link to read their opinions of the aussies.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/blogs/sidelineslogger/2008/02/29/hatin-matthew-hayden/

tweaking

look! when langer's not around, he has to tweak his own nipple!

Sri Lanka B

So thanks to the IPL, Lalit fucking Modi and the various pusillanimous cowards sitting on cricket boards around the world, we end up with a Sri Lanka B team touring next year. What a pile of shit. We should refuse to play them. It's an insult. Or we should play a B team ourselves. Or maybe some kind of theme team. How about an eleven made up entirely of finger-spinning all-rounders?
KP (?)
Blackwell
Patel
Swann
errmm...

WELL PUT KING CRICKET

HAYDEN:

“I think this series is tailor-made for guys like me.”

If this series doesn’t entail cricketers standing on a podium, motionless, while a crowd of people point and laugh uproariously, then this series isn’t tailor-made for Hayden.

Sorry for being inattentive to our little blog...

WELL PUT KING CRICKET

HAYDEN:

“I think this series is tailor-made for guys like me.”

If this series doesn’t entail cricketers standing on a podium, motionless, while a crowd of people point and laugh uproariously, then this series isn’t tailor-made for Hayden.

this is disturbing. (from king cricket.) look at how langer is lovingly caressing hayden's nipple. disgusting.

Game

This game is pretty good. Just move the mouse to control the bat.

http://www.foddy.net/Cricket.html

This was just after Mr Ryder put his hand through a toilet window just prior to a ODI in New Zealand. Apparently, it 'was too painful to bat'. Really?

King Cricket

http://www.lancs.tv/index.php?PHPSESSID=1e05891e2ad64a38b4aeb84b3907dfa0&p=0&vid=229&sm=1

This is sort of amusing. The link is from King Cricket website, which is quite amusing, and also features this:

Symonds: Pick me - I’m not a knob now
Bowled on September 16th, 2008 by King Cricket
Ever since he was sent home from Australia’s one-day series against Bangladesh, speculation has been rife about Andrew Symonds. Specifically, that speculation has centred on exactly what kind of aquatic creature molested him as a child.
Some say it was a turbot, some say a merman. Taken as a whole, the evidence seems to point towards it being an in-season dugong or manatee.
In the past week, Symonds has shrugged off this lifelong scar and has now declared himself ready for Test cricket again.

Also this:

Jesse Ryder’s back
Bowled on September 15th, 2008 by King Cricket
Is broad and pudgy and malleable like plasticine. It’s an amorphous, wobbling built-in cushion so he can lie down anywhere and feel comfortable.
It’s also a trap. When Jesse Ryder needs to take all that weight off his feet, he plonks himself down and leans into his back’s exquisitely welcoming blubber. It may offer excellent lumbar support, but from this position he’s unable to rise again. He flails around like an upturned beetle until a passing forklift spies him and rescues him from his plight.

Vox

I've just invited Big Jim & Matty Thomas to join our little foray into multi-author blog/libel activity.

On that note, if anyone wants further invitations to be issued, just email me with the details of the person and I'll do the necessary.

This is quite interesting...

I recently looked at the scorecard for the 1882 Oval Test, and the auditor in me noticed that Fred Spofforth of Australia had bowled 36.3 of the 71.3 overs that England faced. Surely this means that he must have bowled consecutive overs at some stage? I immediately ruled out the possibility that Cricinfo has printed an error, and leapt to the conclusion that the Aussies had cheated, the match should be awarded to England, and all subsequent Ashes matches have been a travesty and sham. Or have I missed something? asked Tom Allkins
Well, as it turns out you haven't destroyed the whole Ashes legend, which started after Australia won that match at The Oval in 1882. Gerald Brodribb's book Next Man In, a fascinating look at how the Laws of Cricket evolved over the years, reveals that the original 1744 code of Laws allowed the bowler to change ends just once during an innings, but allowed him to bowl successive overs when he did. In 1870 this law was tweaked slightly: "Provided he does not bowl more than two overs in succession, a bowler may change ends twice but no more often in an innings." So that's what happened in that 1882 match, and in several others around this time. In 1889 the law was amended again, to allow the bowler to change ends as often as he liked, but removing the ability to bowl successive overs, which remains the case today.

disturbing...

why is this very disturbing?

Stanford- lover of the game or emissary of satan?

How do people feel about the stanford business? I instinctively feel it's odious and ridiculous, fucking black bats and silver stumps- exactly what you would expect to happen if a yank got hold of our game. The stanford league in the windies just looked cheap and nasty on the telly, although it is anything but, obviously. I don't care about whether money motivates the players or not, but it feels suspiciously like the ECB has sold their (and therefore all of English cricket's) soul to one bloke who represents nobody but just happens to have shitloads of cash. I will, of course, be watching every ball.

family members on film

I think that this is my dad 'starring' in the film 'Maurice'. He's the one on the right. I didn't realise that there is such a thing as a 'gay' pull shot.

I think that this is my dad 'starring' in the film 'Maurice':

Is that 22 yards?

Young jarman

Alex please put up the footage of your son's tidy debut for YMCA?

Young jarms

Could you please upload the footage of young

Cigarettes and, probably, alcohol.

The purveyor of moon-balls to whom I referred was not the Snapester, but actually our own PattyC of course, Dumbo.

Sorry if my contribution lacked the requisite bile, allow me to atone by launching a scathing and pointless attack on one of the all-time greats, Mr. Shane Warne, who is a fat bully and a coward. I watched a documentary on telly which included how him and that other all-time great TWAT McGrath helped ruin the career of a promising young black SA batsman who had been included mainly due to quotas. They are both pathetic bullies who deserve our contempt. The English crowd who sang to Warne in '05 'we only wish you were English' are all idiotic, simpering wankers who were actually singing 'we only wish we were aussies' and they should all fuck off there immediately.

Pass the toast rack

I've seen a certain Bristol based cricketer's 'moon ball' turn in a way that surely contravenes several laws of physics. You won't find it youtube, mind.

who turns it more?

Sorry, I'm bored and enjoying the miracle of youtube cricket.

Warne

OR

Murali

OR:

Gile-o

OR:

Tuffers

bradmanesque

Should 'bradmanesque' become a word; or should the word really be 'Vaughanesque'?

Or should Aussies just fuck off?

That was village; utter village.

Moo!

Great little article on the Guardian website today about the village final day at Lords.

Particularly like the hijacking of the scoreboard for some juvenilia.

Ian Bell

is a twat

For evidence that this is the case see:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtj6WeGbwyE

and then

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CqAor_NoiM

What a twat...

Warne and McGrath

It is too early to say whether warne, mcgrath etc. were once in a lifetime players or products of the Aussie cricketing machine.

I strongly suspect the former is correct as the current crop seem to me to be technically excellent but moderately talented players. The coaching system added to the nature of Aussie pitches helps in the development of good batting techniques as well as extreme patience and accuracy from bowlers. There will normally be a large crop of very good players to be picked from. But will they be as good as the 2002 team continually? I seriously doubt it. All this Aussie triumphalism about their cricketing prowess seems to me revisionist. But the fall which befell the West Indies when they were last in the position of Australia is, I think, unlikely to occur. More competitive test cricket, however, is likely over the next couple of years.

England's cricketing conundrum

Most of England keepers in recent years have one of the following batting styles: unothodox accumulators of ones and twos, limited to one great shot, or hard-hitting bludgeoners. The similarity between all these three groups – which includes read, jones, russell, ambrose, mustard and probably even knott – is that they are good for test fifties now and again, and will average around the late-20s. I saw Prior on debut, when he made a century against the West Indies, and it was clear he was not a batsman which fell into any of these categories. I personally think that he is better than Collingwood and most of the rest in the wings: without a doubt he should bat at 6 in the test team. Furthermore, Alec Stewart has said all season that his keeping has improved dramatically and from the one-dayers he seems to be right. I can’t remember Foster’s batting too well, but I recall it seemed a cut above the competitors (no pun intended), and his keeping is brilliant: he should deputise.