Log in

No account? Create an account
Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
I quote an e-mail I sent to an Australian colleague regarding the cricket..
Please answer me this.

England score 687 for 19 on aggregate, requiring two innings to do it.
Australia score 674 for 6 on aggregate, only requiring one innings.

What the hell sort of sport awards a draw for that? In what sense were the two evenly matched?

Not to mention the fact that from about noon yesterday, every England fan out there had their fingers crossed hoping for "four more hours of nothing". What true sports fan values scraping an undeserved draw over actually playing the damned game?

All in all, rather a bad example of the sport (if you can call it sport with the English attitude). Granted, the closing seconds got pretty exciting, but at the cost of a real competition, and an entire day's worth of negative defensive cricket..

Silly game...
And that's about all I have to say about that.. Really not a good advertisement for the game, when the result can so poorly match the performance - by every conceivable measure Australia won it, to be denied by what is effectively a technicality.

It's funny that "it's just not cricket" is a saying intended to suggest that something is unjust or otherwise not quite right. In this case, I would say that this match was just not cricket...

  • 1
Ponting was having a HUGE whinge on the television today about this.

Well, nobody likes a whinging Aussie, but he sort of has a point :o)

Man, it's crap like that that makes me weep for both sides of the "rivalry." It totally is the way cricket works, and if the roles were reversed, we'd be totally over the moon about the brave battling lower order and England would be the sour pusses. Australia didn't get the last wicket. We need to suck it up.

  • 1