Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I try to gather my news from as many different sources as possible and draw my own conclusions about what is really going on. You may think that when it come to cricket commentary this is not necessary which is a fair point but it is amusing to compare the different editorial styles.


These are all from the same over.


Firstly, the Beeb - succinct and descriptive.

"More angling across Jimmy from Martin. One slides too far and is called a wide; another climbs like Hillary and almost takes his nose off."


Cricinfo ? pure information with little elaboration

"Martin to Anderson, no run, that's a cracker from Martin, outside off and moves away later, Anderson is beaten as he prods forward."


The Times ? Descriptive and elegant if a little poncy.

"Fabulous delivery from Martin is far too good for Anderson, beating him all end's up. "If you'd edged that you'd know you're in pretty good nick," says Michael Atherton. The pair scamper through for a single and Anderson keeps the batting"


The Guardian ? Irate and petulant.

"Hey guess what everyone? These piece-of-goddamn junk computers than were installed on our desk earlier this week? Well they've crashed again. Words fail me. I'll be back just as soon as me and the rest of the A team have jerry rigged a working website together with Mr T's welding kit, a sheet of iron, some scrap circuit boards and a couple of hub caps."

The Guardian OBO started all the japery. Before them Cricinfo was all "Left alone, no run" ad infinitum - and everyone else just did bare scorecards. Then when the other outlets saw the page impressions the Guardian OBOs were clocking up (often the highest in the whole Guardian Unlimited site) they started going down the same comedy, email us in your thoughts, riffs and routines. Pale imitations, all of them.


An hour and a half of Jimmy and Broady this morning. Not good news for the Enzedders.

The Guardian OBO started all the japery. Before them Cricinfo was all "Left alone, no run" ad infinitum - and everyone else just did bare scorecards. Then when the other outlets saw the page impressions the Guardian OBOs were clocking up (often the highest in the whole Guardian Unlimited site) they started going down the same comedy, email us in your thoughts, riffs and routines. Pale imitations, all of them.


An hour and a half of Jimmy and Broady this morning. Not good news for the Enzedders.

As a long time follower of the Guardian?s commentary I have also watched as the others have tried and for the most part failed to imitate it.


In fact I still remember the first one I read, which was this little rant: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2003/mar/14/cricketworldcup2003.overbyoverreports

  • 3 weeks later...

Anyway, so, after cutting ties with Zimbabwe it seems English cricket has decided that there is no longer any need whatsoever for political correctness. They have therefore handed Paul Collingwood a 4 match ban for being both Northern and a ginger and gone and given the captaincy to a South African and a Boer no the less.


Kevin Peitersen had this to say about it, "To be asked to captain your country is the ultimate honour in sport and I feel privileged and proud.?


I wonder if Graeme Smith knows he has lost his job.


Ps. The author takes no responsibility for any blatant inaccuracies in or offence caused by this post.


Not that anyone ever reads this thread anyway.


So there.

I love the somnambulent sound of leather on willow, the taste of warm beer, the sleepy delivery of Aggers and Boycott on the wireless, those slow sunny/rainbreak days that make the English Summer - and the ripspeed of Graham Napier thrashing 16 sixes in a twenty20. What is going on.

You want cricket literature? Have some of this:


"The American adaptation is devoid of the beauty of cricket played on a lawn of appropriate dimensions, where the white-clad ring of infielders, swanning figures on the vast oval, again and again converge in unison toward the batsman and again and again scatter back to their starting points, a repetition of pulmonary rhythm, as if the field breathed through its luminous visitors."

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Thank you to everyone who has already shared their thoughts on this. Dawson Heights Estate in the 1980s, while not as infamous as some other estates, did have its share of anti-social behaviour and petty crime. My brother often used the estate as a shortcut when coming home from his girlfriend’s house, despite my parents warning him many times to avoid it. Policing during that era had a distinctly “tough on crime” approach. Teenagers, particularly those from working-class areas or minority communities, were routinely stopped, questioned, and in some cases, physically handled for minor infractions like loitering, skateboarding, or underage drinking. Respect for authority wasn’t just expected—it was demanded. Talking back to a police officer could escalate a situation very quickly, often with harsh consequences. This was a very different time. There were no body cameras, dash cams, or social media to hold anyone accountable or to provide a record of encounters. Policing was far more physical and immediate, with few technological safeguards to check officer behaviour. My brother wasn’t known to the police. He held a full-time job at the Army and Navy store in Lewisham and had recently been accepted into the army. Yet, on that night, he ran—not because he was guilty of anything—but because he knew exactly what would happen if he were caught on an estate late at night with a group of other boys. He was scared, and rightfully so.
    • I'm sure many people would look to see if someone needed help, and if so would do something about it, and at least phone the police if necessary if they didn't feel confident helping directly. At least I hope so. I'm sorry you don't feel safe, but surely ED isn't any less safe than most places. It's hardly a hotbed of crime, it's just that people don't post on here if nothing has happened! And before that, there were no highwaymen,  or any murders at all .... In what way exactly have we become "a soft apologetic society", whatever that means?
    • Unless you're 5 years old or have been living in a cave for several decades you can't be for real. I don't believe that you're genuinely confused by this, no one who has access to newspapers, the tv news, the internet would ask this. Either you're an infant, or have recently woken up from a coma after decades, or you're a supercilious tw*t
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...