GOOGLIES & CHINAMEN
An Occasional Cricketing Journal
Edition 98
February 2011
Ashes Matters
I have been inundated with Ashes jokes and must thank Ken Molloy, Bill Groombridge, Bob Peach and Lady Merilion amongst others for forwarding them to me. Here is a selection:
A policeman in Adelaide pulled over a driver who had been weaving in and out of the traffic. He approached the car window and said "Sir I need you to blow into this breathalyzer". The man reaches into his pocket and produces a doctor's note. On it was written: "This man suffers from chronic asthma. Do not make him perform any action that may leave him short of breath".
The policeman said "Okay then I need you to come and give a blood sample" The man produced another letter. This one said:
"This man is a haemophiliac. Please do not cause him to bleed in any way".
So the officer said: "Right, I need a urine sample then".
The man produces a third letter from his pocket.
It read: "This man plays Cricket for Australia, please don't take the piss out of him"
Q. What would Jimmy Anderson be if he was Australian?
A. An all rounder.
Ring Ring......“Hello - Australian team dressing room”“Hello mate...Can I speak to Ricky Ponting please?”“Sorry mate - he’s just gone out to bat...”“It's OK - I'll hold....”
A bloke walks into a brothel and says: "I'm a bit kinky, how much for total humiliation?"
The madam replies $60.
"Wow, what do I get for that?" he says.
She says: "A baggy green cap and an Australia cricket shirt”.
A lady walked into a Police Station and the desk Sergeant said "Can I help you?"
"Yes" she said, "I'd like to report a case of sexual assault".
"Where did it happen?" the Sergeant asked.
"In the park just down the road" she replied.
"Can you describe what happened?"
"Yes, I was walking along the footpath in the park near the trees when a man jumped out of the bushes and dragged me in there, removed my underwear then he dropped his pants to his knees and had his way with me".
“Could you give me a description of him?"
"Yes, he was wearing white shoes, long white trousers, a white shirt and he had these two big long pads from his feet up to and over his knees, one on each leg".
"Sounds to me like he was a cricketer, most probably a batsman", said the Sergeant.
"Yes", said the lady, "He was an Aussie Cricketer".
"That's very observant", said the Sergeant, "You worked that out from his accent?"
"No", she replied. "I worked it out because he wasn't in for very long".
Q. How bad is the Australian batting?
A. Well, the selectors are thinking of moving Extras up the batting order.
Q. What do you call an Australian with 100 runs against his name?
A. A bowler.
Billy was at school this morning in the outback and the teacher asked all the children what there fathers did for a living.
All the typical answers came out, Fireman, Policeman, Salesman, Chippy, Captain of Industry etc, but Billy was being uncharacteristically quiet and so the teacher asked him about his father.
"My father is an exotic dancer in a gay club and takes off all his clothes in front of other men. Sometimes if the offer is really good, he'll go out with a man, rent a cheap hotel room and let them sleep with him."
The teacher quickly set the other children some work and took little Billy aside to ask him if that was really true.
"No" said Billy, "He plays cricket for Australia but I was just too embarrassed to say."
An Australian school teacher explains to her class that she supports the Australian cricket team. She asks her students to raise their hands if they, too, support the Australian cricket teams. Everyone in the class raises their hand except one little girl.
The teacher looks at the girl with surprise and says, "Janie, why didn't you raise your hand?" "Because I don't support the Australian cricket team," she replied. The teacher, still shocked, asked, "Well, if you are not a Fan of the Australian cricket team, then who are you a fan of?" "I am an England fan, and proud of it," Janie replied.
The teacher could not believe her ears. "Janie, why pray tell are you an England fan?" "Because my mum is an England fan, and my dad is an England fan, so I'm an England fan too!" "Well," said the teacher in an obviously annoyed tone, "that is no reason for you to be an England fan. You don't have to be just like your parents all of the time. What if your mom were a moron and your dad were a moron, what would you be then?"
"Then," Janie smiled, "I'd support the Australian cricket team."
Ashes Reflections by the Professor
The Professor contrived to watch the lot either on the grounds themselves or on his sofa
A few thoughts on the successful cessation of hostilities overseas:
1. I watched every ball bowled in the first two tests and the bulk of the last three as a result of which, as someone said, I have developed jet-lag in my sitting room.
2. Before the ex-post rationalisation (that Australia was rubbish) becomes conventional wisdom (we beat them…ergo they were hopeless) it might be well to remember what the situation was like ex-ante. No one would have said, beforehand, that a team containing Ponting, Hussey, Haddin, Clarke, Bollinger and Johnson could be called rubbish. Last year Bollinger and Katich were in the ICC test team of the year and Johnson was the ICC player of the year the season before. Ponting is widely regarded in Australia as being their best batsman since Bradman. Self-evidently they did not live up to their billing but that was not really evident until Melbourne. In Brisbane the England captain was out to the third ball of the match and we limped to 260 with Cook looking as if he could get out at any moment. Had he done so the side could easily have fallen apart. Sitting in the crowd on the third day with Hussey and Haddin hitting the ball all over the park giving Australia a 200-run first innings lead, it felt very much like business as usual for travelling England supporters. Similarly, going down for 180 and 120 at Perth didn’t seem like the obvious reaction to playing particularly rubbish opposition.
3. All the obvious stuff will be written and said about the excellent England performances: Cook’s runs, Anderson’s wickets, Prior’s (much criticised but highly effective) wicket keeping and runs and all the others who “stepped up to the plate”, “came to the party” and god-knows what other puerile platitudes, and it was brilliant to watch. Perhaps of even greater significance was the erratic form of the Australian bowlers; the Barmy Army’s scatological description of Johnson’s bowling was about right and Siddle only once (at Brisbane) reproduced his irresistible Headingley form.
However, a couple of other things come to mind:
Selection – England coped much better with injury than Australia – Tremlett was the right pick for Perth and Bresnan for the last two. The latter, in particular, was a bold choice. We have not always been kind to selectors in the pages of this journal but it would be fair to concede that here they got it right. I talked to Geoff Miller in Adelaide and he said that the Flower/Strauss combination was so solid that it gave the selectors little to do…so perhaps that was the reason. England hardly noticed the loss of Broad (his two wickets and first ball duck had hardly made an impact in any event). By comparison, the loss in particular of Harris and Katich was, I suggest, of far greater significance to Australia.
Pitches – The anxiety about Swann clearly lead to the preparation of fairly un-Australian pitches. The upshot, of course, was Anderson’s 24 wickets. If having the groundsmen against them was not enough the weather also conspired to make England feel very much at home. It was really only the second and third days at Adelaide that were boiling hot, and the Australian team was in the field for most of that. Otherwise the weather was also decidedly un-Australian.
Run outs - (or should it be “runs out”). It hardly counts as bad luck that the openers kept running themselves out but each one was vital. Why anyone, when you have the best part of a week to play the game, should go for a risky run only they will know – but they played a major part and in each case provided a break-through that did not seem to be coming from the bowlers. Similarly, had Hussey resisted a slog in the second innings at Adelaide he might well have been there when the rains came and we would have been one down going to Melbourne. That might not have been “fair” because we had played all the cricket…but then so did Australia in Cardiff.
Fielding – Has there ever been a better England fielding side? In addition to the run outs the catching has been stunning. With a couple of finger-tip blemishes it has effectively been a case of, “if you sick it, you’re out”. When could you ever say that about an England side? I remember teams of the 50s and 60s where you only expected about half the chances to be caught. We all have a rosy glow of (say) Cowdrey as a great slipper – do you recall him ever taking a catch like some of Collingwood’s, or Swann’s, or…?
Referrals – I’m not a fan of the referral system. I don’t think players should have a sanctioned right to challenge decisions. I am, however, a big fan of umpires checking their decisions for accuracy and the England team was the major beneficiary of that habit. I assume that it is technically possible for the umpire to get an almost instant computer-aided judgement on decisions (the was-it-a-no-ball, did-it-pitch-in-line, etc., rigmarole is just, I assume, an audience-related device) there is, therefore no real need for the game to stop at all – the umpire could just get a beep in his ear for “out” (or whatever) the moment the appeal is made. I feel sure the software already exists. This, it might be argued, diminishes still further the umpire’s role, but that is happening anyway and it would be considerably better than being made to look foolish by being over-ruled by a machine.
Support – I know you don’t approve James, but the Barmy Army and all the travelling England supporters cannot fail to have an impact on the performance of professional sportsmen. What other sport and what other country provides fans in these numbers travelling these distances for this length of time? It was marvellous to be there and “gentlemen in England now abed…” Several times, when players were interviewed, they said it was like playing at home. Given that the fans were English, the weather was English and the pitches were English the poor old Aussies didn’t stand a chance. Shame!
Now that really is ex-post wisdom.
Ray Matters
I am delighted that Lord Ray has become a regular correspondent again
A magnificent result! To my mind what it demonstrates is that the old virtues will always prevail - line and length, without which all seam or other movement are useless; and the ability to occupy the crease for long periods, otherwise known as concentration. Add to that the old nostrum about holding catches and what that produces, and you have a winning formula.
Another result is that it has shown that the series would have been won without the PPS. His one big innings was made coming in under no pressure - only 60 or 70 needed for a lead and bowlers with their morale already patently destroyed. Almost certainly, we would have got a sufficient lead even if he had got out early. I like to look at averages and subtract a batsman's biggest innings and see what the average looks like then. It usually gives a reliable guide to actual worth. On this basis, the PPS lies in fifth or sixth position with a paltry average. In other words, the real work was done by the others, with Cook and Strauss, going in against fresh bowlers and a new ball, and Trott, paramount. When will the penny drop with the selectors? We would be far stronger with Morgan. As for the sun revolving around.....sorry, his resignation of the captaincy - I thought he was pushed but there, silly me - having been done as part of a long term plan, well! Cannot ECB afford a shrink for this man?
England Matters
The Great Jack Morgan sent me the following
Only Colly and possibly Broady had disappointing series and even the axed Finny must be fairly happy with his 14 Ashes wickets. I was particularly pleased with the "reserve" pace bowlers Tremlett and Bresnan (especially as plenty of people will tell you that it is no good expecting county stalwarts to make the step up to Test cricket; Swanny and Trotty are other good examples of this) and I am now hoping that there will be good competition for bowling places, which we should have had from the start. There is also now competition (I hope) for one batting place, but I think the other five are pretty safe. Given Prior's form in Sydney, it would be no surprise to see him return to the ODI set-up.
With Jimmy, Broady, Finny, Bressy, Tremmy, Shahzady, Onionsy and Woakesy we now appear to have a good depth in our pace bowling, which is surprising really as we have only fairly recently lost a whole squad of pace bowlers: Hoggy, Harmy, Freddy, Jonesy and Sidey. This may also mean that there is no way back for the likes of Mahmoody and Plunketty.
Did Colly do a deal that enabled him to avoid an embarrassing dropping as long as he retired at the end of the series? Colly is going to continue in ODIs and T20, but there is little evidence that he will be good enough. Everyone seems to be assuming that Eoin will take over from Colly in Tests, but I am not so sure. One of the problems is that, modest though his bowling is, Colly is the closest we have to a fifth bowler and we must have someone who is capable of filling in for a few overs to give the four a break. I have seen Trotty, Belly and KP all bowl quite well at times, but they are not up to fifth bowler standard... more like sixth, seventh and eighth bowlers. I am therefore thinking that chaps like R Bopara and L Wright will come into contention because they are good batsmen and are nearly good enough bowlers to be awarded allrounder status.
Of the five captains to win Ashes series in Australia during our lifetime, the three Middx captains now outnumber the two from Yorkshire. Perhaps you could pen a learned paper on the significance of this for the next T&X?
Sexist Matters
I suspect that more than a handful of readers have felt sympathy over the views expressed by Messrs Gray and Keys. I happened to be watching live the match at Molyneux and when the officials came out it was truly weird to see what looked like a schoolgirl acting as one of the linesmen. She presumably is a fully qualified referee and could have taken over as ref if the match referee had been injured. In the event her decision making was faultless despite the views of the experts.
But that doesn’t stop the situation from changing the face of football. The crowd behaviour at professional matches is largely a letting off steam exercise and foul language and sexist comments and chants are common place regarding all forms of sexual preference. But will this have to change? The racist taunts have been eliminated at most grounds. Will the sexist ones have to go now?
It can only be a matter of time before Sian or one of her sisterhood is selected to officiate a premiership match. What impact will this have on the players? They show scant regard for the authority of most of the male refs. Will their appalling intimidatory behaviour get better or worse?
The various Match of the Day programmes are frequently fronted by women with Gaby Logan (nee Yorath) to the fore. On the radio there are some female commentators. Do men want their preserve opened up to sexual equality?
When I played cricket women were welcome in the tea room and also in the scorebox but would we have wanted them officiating? How would Bill Hart have reacted to an LBW appeal being turned down by a lady in a Chanel coat? How long will it be before a Betty Bowden officiates in a test match?
Ken Molloy has his camera with him most of the time and he sent me the following as Sian Massey prepared to do duty at Molyneux.
Correcting the Great Man Matters
I received the following from Alan Ashton
Can you point out to the "great Jack Morgan" that Don Shelley does not write the short match reports in the annual review which he criticises every year? He should read the review more carefully as the author's name is given. The trouble is the reports are written straight after the match and without the benefit of the scorecard which goes below the report. The final version is, unhappily, not proof read as far as I know.
And then the following from Don Shelley
I was somewhat disappointed to read Jack Morgan's article under 'Middlesex Matters' that "D Shelley's match reports in the Annual Review
are as riddled with errors as usual and the infection seems to be spreading to A Jones's comments on Second XI matters".
Whilst I write the review of the season, I do not write any of the individual match reports (and never have) - the reports are actually written by Alan Ashton and this is stated before the start of the report section. I never see the match reports otherwise I would have amended where necessary - I will suggest to the staff who put the review together that I proof-read Alan's reports before they go to print. The only match reporting I do is daily reports which are posted on the Middlesex CCC website. I do always hope to achieve total accuracy in my review section, but I acknowledge that the odd error may have slipped through.
Surely they didn’t think that they would get away without a detailed response? The Great Jack Morgan responded:
Perhaps we could pursue this and enable a solution to be found? We know that Alan has to write the reports straight after the match, but we do not know why and neither do we know why he does not have "the benefit of the scorecard": this seems very weird because i) scorecards are usually available very soon after the end of the match; ii) one can always keep one's own scorecard up to date; iii) D Shelley would surely provide any missing information; and iv) other sources of information such as teletext and various websites are usually updated instantaneously or very soon after events. Even weirder is the fact that Alan more or less admits that this situation leads to errors, but nobody thinks to correct the hastily written reports before they appear in the Review! For an early season match in April, a hurried report often containing mistakes is preserved in aspic for eight months until it is published unamended in the Review in December! This is astonishing. What we need to do is to persuade someone to check Alan's hasty reports sometime before they appear in the Review. Alan himself could do the job, or Don Shelley perhaps, or Vinny the Cod or maybe the best person would be editor Rebecca Hart. How can we make sure that this happens because I cannot be the only one who is irritated by unnecessary errors?
Referral Matters
Peter Webster sent the following to the Professor
With respect to challenging umpires decisions it has been shown by technology on numerous occasions that umpires have made errors. I can see no reason why errors should not be corrected. As an ex umpire ( Middlesex & Herts. League, average ability) I would have been glad of any assistance from a machine or a robot. In what other aspect of life would you object to an injustice being overturned? Cricketers, given the chance cheat ( eg keepers claiming catches down the leg side which clearly brushed a pad or shirt ), technology helps to counter this, but it does require a challenge from a batsman. England have had tours to Australia when not a single LBW was given; this could not happen now with the sanction of a challenge.
The posh papers sometimes argue that because technology is not 100% accurate (eg Bell c Haddin) it should not be used at all. Rubbish-it is getting better all the time and in any case who would argue the since MRI scanners only detect 80% of cancers that they should not be used?
I think that the choice is between accepting all the technology, with challengers, delays, big screen replays, tantrums and having none at all (as in S.A v India). You cannot pick the bits that you like.
My point is not that you shouldn't use technology - quite the reverse, it is here let's use it. Indeed we have to since the TV will continue to use it in their coverage and so the genie is out of the box (literally!)
The Professor replied
My point is about the players right of challenge - and I have two objections:
1. I think a sanctioned right to challenge is a bad idea - it quickly leads to unsanctioned challenges and to the sort of thing I mentioned - a fielder saying he wasn't sure so could the umpire check - thus saving using up a challenge if an appeal might be anticipated as being unsuccessful.
2. The 2-challenges rule. The rationale is, of course, that if there were not a limit the players would challenge everything (an India-Pakistan test would only have about 20 overs bowled in a day). But what happens when the 2 are used up? We revert to how things used to be. In other words when the two are used up all the arguments for using technology collapse in a heap. If the crucial thing is to "get the decision right" how come this ceases to apply after two unsuccessful challenges? Potentially you could have all four challenges used up in the first over and the rest of the innings played out as it used to be. You can't have it both ways - if you "want to get the decision right" you must always want that, you can't take refuge in saying that captains ought to have been better at guessing when to challenge. If the decision is the thing, it is always the thing.
Minor Counties Matters
To get you in the mood for the 2011 season which starts in February here is The Great Jack Morgan’s final report from 2010
Cheshire batted first in the Minor Counties Championship (Western Division) match v Berkshire at Finchampstead and had crawled to only 25 for 3 halfway through the (140 minute) pre-lunch session against Kyle Hodnett (Middx 2s) and Steve Wheeler (ex- Somerset 2s, Warks 2s and Worcs 2s), but that was when left-hander Jimmy Duffy started to take control. They lost another wicket at 77, but then Andrew Hall joined Duffy and played an excellent supporting role as Duffy flayed the bowling to all parts of the Berkshire countryside. Gradually, Hall began to make his own contribution and the stand grew to 261 before Duffy fell to Wheeler for 172. Skipper Hall went on to 111* before declaring 2 overs before the compulsory closure on 354 for 6, Wheeler finishing with 4 for 41 and Hodnett 2 for 70. The Berks reply initially looked like a one-man show as their star batsman Jono McLean (ex-Hants) dominated proceedings, but then he found a sound partner in skipper Bjorn Mordt (66) as 121 were added for the third wicket. McLean continued to a magnificent 182, but then Hodnett, who had made 3 noughts in 3 innings (in my presence) for Middx 2s this season, struck a beautifully timed 70* to take Berks to 390 for 6 at the closure after 90 overs, off-spinner Nathan Dumelow (ex-Derbys) taking 3-129 and Richard Logan (who has played for 4 first class counties and at least 2 minor ones, including Berks) 2-117. The Cheshire response got off to a disastrous start as 2 wickets fell in the first over of the innings (bowled by Wheeler), but Ben Spendlove (ex-Derbys and Notts) immediately brought Cheshire straight back into the match with some wonderful strokeplay. 20 year old opener Jonny Kettle (ex- Lancs 2s) kept him company in a third wicket stand of 209 before Spendlove fell to Wheeler for 136. A “minor” collapse followed as Cheshire sought quick runs, but Kettle was growing in confidence and when he was joined by Danny Berry runs flowed freely again as an unbroken 120 was added for the sixth wicket with Kettle finishing on 129* and Berry on 63*; Wheeler was again the best bowler with 3 for 91. The declaration at 366 for 5 set Berks a very fair 331 to win in what looked to be 70 overs (but such is the pace at which overs are bowled in minor counties cricket that 80 would have been bowled if the match had gone on to the death) as Cheshire needed the win in order to catch up with the leaders Berks. Mike Roberts batted well for 49, but he lost star man McLean for only 18 and Berks looked to be struggling at 122 for 4. However, Carl Crowe (ex-Leics) strode to the crease and soon had the scoreboard moving at a cracking rate and, in the company of Steve Naylor (ex-Middx 2s), had put the home side on course for victory when the match turned completely around during one over from Logan which straddled the tea interval. With the fourth ball of the over, Logan had Crowe given out lbw for a very fine 54 (ending the partnership of 88 with Naylor) and with the last ball of the over (after tea), Logan bowled Hodnett for nought (his 4th duck in 5 innings in my presence). Naylor (48*) continued to resist, but he could not protect the tail and Berks collapsed to 254 all out, losing by 76. Logan's 5 for 85 was the decisive contribution in the final innings and he was assisted by fellow opening bowler Jimmy Hawley (2 for 80) and left arm spinner Johnny Fawcett (2 for 34).
Buckinghamshire are the reigning Minor Counties Champions, but they have not been enjoying a successful season so far and did no better in the Eastern Division Championship match against Cumberland at Slough. Cumberland batted first and opener James Lowe and keeper Ikram Ullah both made useful contributions of 48, but it was Gary Pratt (ex-Durham) who played the dominant innings of the match with an excellent 169. Pratt found the ideal partner in 18 year old Alex Atkinson who hit a rapid 101 as the pair put on 193 for the fifth wicket and took the visitors to 410 for 7 at the compulsory closure which is a record score for a 90 over innings in my presence. Veteran seamer Simon Stanway was the best of the home bowlers with 3 for 99. Bucks were soon in trouble when they batted and sank to a dismal 110 for 8 before keeper David Cranfield-Thompson (66) and Sam Cherry (33) put on 99 for the ninth wicket which allowed Bucks to reach 212 all out. Another veteran seamer Marcus Sharp impressed with 3 for 26. Skipper Pratt declined to enforce the follow on as Cumberland looked for quick runs instead and found just the men in Lowe (102) and Ullah (51) as the visitors closed on 232 for 9 at the end of day 2, a lead of 430. Stanway, off-spinner Cherry and left arm swinger Paul Sawyer all picked up three wickets. Some of us felt that a declaration late on day 2 would have served Cumberland well, but Pratt decided to declare just before the start of play on day 3. Bucks had no chance of winning and soon confirmed this by slipping to 15 for 3, but then Bobby Sher joined Warren Miller (41) in a stand of 77 for the fifth wicket. Now Sher combined with 20 year old Mick Payne to put on 106 and some even thought that Bucks might have a chance after all. But when Sher was finally dismissed for 106 and Payne followed for 57, the only other resistance came from Cranfield-Thompson with a stubborn 40. Cumberland won by 149 runs, though they were deep into the minimum of 17 overs of the last hour before the final wicket fell. Sharp was again the best bowler with 4 for 57, while medium pacer Martyn Evans helped out with 3 for 46.
Old Danes Matters
Each year at the Old Danes Gathering some new (old) faces appear and the 2010 event was no exception. Doug Slade had taken on mythical status at previous events when his appearance was anticipated but not realised. However, he duly appeared in 2011 and he is on the right in this photo. To his left are staunch Rangers and Middlesex men Les Berry and Jeff Coleman.
Googlies Hundred
The Professor and I noticed that the hundredth edition of Googlies will be published at the beginning of April. We thought that this landmark should not be overlooked and came up with the idea of holding a lunch to celebrate the event. We hoped that we would be joined by many of the contributors over the years since the first edition in January 2003 but there is really no reason why anyone who has enjoyed the newsletter should not join us. It will probably be held in April or May and probably will be in the London area. To enable us to plan for this momentous event would you please indicate if you would like to join us on this occasion? The Professor has offered to coordinate this event and so please reply to him at: [email protected].
South Hampstead Dinner
Communication isn’t the strong point at South Hampstead these days and so for any alumni interested the annual dinner is taking place on Friday 1 April in the clubhouse. Bob Peach is organising a sixties table and your place can be booked by calling Ken James on 0208 965 1254.
Football Matters
Douglas Miller sent this: “One of your more distinguished readers (identity preserved) yearns to know the source of your endless supply of ladies who seem to have mislaid their clothes. I think it is only curiosity, not kinkiness. I should love to be able to tell him the answer.” I passed this on to Andrew Baker himself who was puzzled as he told me that he had never noticed his team’s kit shortage. But he was pleased to hear of Douglas’ concern and would like to engage his (or his friend’s) services in selecting a new colour scheme for their away kit. So Douglas please select from the following:
Googlies and Chinamen
is produced by
James Sharp
Broad Lee House
Combs
High Peak
SK23 9XA
Tel & fax: 01298 70237
Email: [email protected]
An Occasional Cricketing Journal
Edition 98
February 2011
Ashes Matters
I have been inundated with Ashes jokes and must thank Ken Molloy, Bill Groombridge, Bob Peach and Lady Merilion amongst others for forwarding them to me. Here is a selection:
A policeman in Adelaide pulled over a driver who had been weaving in and out of the traffic. He approached the car window and said "Sir I need you to blow into this breathalyzer". The man reaches into his pocket and produces a doctor's note. On it was written: "This man suffers from chronic asthma. Do not make him perform any action that may leave him short of breath".
The policeman said "Okay then I need you to come and give a blood sample" The man produced another letter. This one said:
"This man is a haemophiliac. Please do not cause him to bleed in any way".
So the officer said: "Right, I need a urine sample then".
The man produces a third letter from his pocket.
It read: "This man plays Cricket for Australia, please don't take the piss out of him"
Q. What would Jimmy Anderson be if he was Australian?
A. An all rounder.
Ring Ring......“Hello - Australian team dressing room”“Hello mate...Can I speak to Ricky Ponting please?”“Sorry mate - he’s just gone out to bat...”“It's OK - I'll hold....”
A bloke walks into a brothel and says: "I'm a bit kinky, how much for total humiliation?"
The madam replies $60.
"Wow, what do I get for that?" he says.
She says: "A baggy green cap and an Australia cricket shirt”.
A lady walked into a Police Station and the desk Sergeant said "Can I help you?"
"Yes" she said, "I'd like to report a case of sexual assault".
"Where did it happen?" the Sergeant asked.
"In the park just down the road" she replied.
"Can you describe what happened?"
"Yes, I was walking along the footpath in the park near the trees when a man jumped out of the bushes and dragged me in there, removed my underwear then he dropped his pants to his knees and had his way with me".
“Could you give me a description of him?"
"Yes, he was wearing white shoes, long white trousers, a white shirt and he had these two big long pads from his feet up to and over his knees, one on each leg".
"Sounds to me like he was a cricketer, most probably a batsman", said the Sergeant.
"Yes", said the lady, "He was an Aussie Cricketer".
"That's very observant", said the Sergeant, "You worked that out from his accent?"
"No", she replied. "I worked it out because he wasn't in for very long".
Q. How bad is the Australian batting?
A. Well, the selectors are thinking of moving Extras up the batting order.
Q. What do you call an Australian with 100 runs against his name?
A. A bowler.
Billy was at school this morning in the outback and the teacher asked all the children what there fathers did for a living.
All the typical answers came out, Fireman, Policeman, Salesman, Chippy, Captain of Industry etc, but Billy was being uncharacteristically quiet and so the teacher asked him about his father.
"My father is an exotic dancer in a gay club and takes off all his clothes in front of other men. Sometimes if the offer is really good, he'll go out with a man, rent a cheap hotel room and let them sleep with him."
The teacher quickly set the other children some work and took little Billy aside to ask him if that was really true.
"No" said Billy, "He plays cricket for Australia but I was just too embarrassed to say."
An Australian school teacher explains to her class that she supports the Australian cricket team. She asks her students to raise their hands if they, too, support the Australian cricket teams. Everyone in the class raises their hand except one little girl.
The teacher looks at the girl with surprise and says, "Janie, why didn't you raise your hand?" "Because I don't support the Australian cricket team," she replied. The teacher, still shocked, asked, "Well, if you are not a Fan of the Australian cricket team, then who are you a fan of?" "I am an England fan, and proud of it," Janie replied.
The teacher could not believe her ears. "Janie, why pray tell are you an England fan?" "Because my mum is an England fan, and my dad is an England fan, so I'm an England fan too!" "Well," said the teacher in an obviously annoyed tone, "that is no reason for you to be an England fan. You don't have to be just like your parents all of the time. What if your mom were a moron and your dad were a moron, what would you be then?"
"Then," Janie smiled, "I'd support the Australian cricket team."
Ashes Reflections by the Professor
The Professor contrived to watch the lot either on the grounds themselves or on his sofa
A few thoughts on the successful cessation of hostilities overseas:
1. I watched every ball bowled in the first two tests and the bulk of the last three as a result of which, as someone said, I have developed jet-lag in my sitting room.
2. Before the ex-post rationalisation (that Australia was rubbish) becomes conventional wisdom (we beat them…ergo they were hopeless) it might be well to remember what the situation was like ex-ante. No one would have said, beforehand, that a team containing Ponting, Hussey, Haddin, Clarke, Bollinger and Johnson could be called rubbish. Last year Bollinger and Katich were in the ICC test team of the year and Johnson was the ICC player of the year the season before. Ponting is widely regarded in Australia as being their best batsman since Bradman. Self-evidently they did not live up to their billing but that was not really evident until Melbourne. In Brisbane the England captain was out to the third ball of the match and we limped to 260 with Cook looking as if he could get out at any moment. Had he done so the side could easily have fallen apart. Sitting in the crowd on the third day with Hussey and Haddin hitting the ball all over the park giving Australia a 200-run first innings lead, it felt very much like business as usual for travelling England supporters. Similarly, going down for 180 and 120 at Perth didn’t seem like the obvious reaction to playing particularly rubbish opposition.
3. All the obvious stuff will be written and said about the excellent England performances: Cook’s runs, Anderson’s wickets, Prior’s (much criticised but highly effective) wicket keeping and runs and all the others who “stepped up to the plate”, “came to the party” and god-knows what other puerile platitudes, and it was brilliant to watch. Perhaps of even greater significance was the erratic form of the Australian bowlers; the Barmy Army’s scatological description of Johnson’s bowling was about right and Siddle only once (at Brisbane) reproduced his irresistible Headingley form.
However, a couple of other things come to mind:
Selection – England coped much better with injury than Australia – Tremlett was the right pick for Perth and Bresnan for the last two. The latter, in particular, was a bold choice. We have not always been kind to selectors in the pages of this journal but it would be fair to concede that here they got it right. I talked to Geoff Miller in Adelaide and he said that the Flower/Strauss combination was so solid that it gave the selectors little to do…so perhaps that was the reason. England hardly noticed the loss of Broad (his two wickets and first ball duck had hardly made an impact in any event). By comparison, the loss in particular of Harris and Katich was, I suggest, of far greater significance to Australia.
Pitches – The anxiety about Swann clearly lead to the preparation of fairly un-Australian pitches. The upshot, of course, was Anderson’s 24 wickets. If having the groundsmen against them was not enough the weather also conspired to make England feel very much at home. It was really only the second and third days at Adelaide that were boiling hot, and the Australian team was in the field for most of that. Otherwise the weather was also decidedly un-Australian.
Run outs - (or should it be “runs out”). It hardly counts as bad luck that the openers kept running themselves out but each one was vital. Why anyone, when you have the best part of a week to play the game, should go for a risky run only they will know – but they played a major part and in each case provided a break-through that did not seem to be coming from the bowlers. Similarly, had Hussey resisted a slog in the second innings at Adelaide he might well have been there when the rains came and we would have been one down going to Melbourne. That might not have been “fair” because we had played all the cricket…but then so did Australia in Cardiff.
Fielding – Has there ever been a better England fielding side? In addition to the run outs the catching has been stunning. With a couple of finger-tip blemishes it has effectively been a case of, “if you sick it, you’re out”. When could you ever say that about an England side? I remember teams of the 50s and 60s where you only expected about half the chances to be caught. We all have a rosy glow of (say) Cowdrey as a great slipper – do you recall him ever taking a catch like some of Collingwood’s, or Swann’s, or…?
Referrals – I’m not a fan of the referral system. I don’t think players should have a sanctioned right to challenge decisions. I am, however, a big fan of umpires checking their decisions for accuracy and the England team was the major beneficiary of that habit. I assume that it is technically possible for the umpire to get an almost instant computer-aided judgement on decisions (the was-it-a-no-ball, did-it-pitch-in-line, etc., rigmarole is just, I assume, an audience-related device) there is, therefore no real need for the game to stop at all – the umpire could just get a beep in his ear for “out” (or whatever) the moment the appeal is made. I feel sure the software already exists. This, it might be argued, diminishes still further the umpire’s role, but that is happening anyway and it would be considerably better than being made to look foolish by being over-ruled by a machine.
Support – I know you don’t approve James, but the Barmy Army and all the travelling England supporters cannot fail to have an impact on the performance of professional sportsmen. What other sport and what other country provides fans in these numbers travelling these distances for this length of time? It was marvellous to be there and “gentlemen in England now abed…” Several times, when players were interviewed, they said it was like playing at home. Given that the fans were English, the weather was English and the pitches were English the poor old Aussies didn’t stand a chance. Shame!
Now that really is ex-post wisdom.
Ray Matters
I am delighted that Lord Ray has become a regular correspondent again
A magnificent result! To my mind what it demonstrates is that the old virtues will always prevail - line and length, without which all seam or other movement are useless; and the ability to occupy the crease for long periods, otherwise known as concentration. Add to that the old nostrum about holding catches and what that produces, and you have a winning formula.
Another result is that it has shown that the series would have been won without the PPS. His one big innings was made coming in under no pressure - only 60 or 70 needed for a lead and bowlers with their morale already patently destroyed. Almost certainly, we would have got a sufficient lead even if he had got out early. I like to look at averages and subtract a batsman's biggest innings and see what the average looks like then. It usually gives a reliable guide to actual worth. On this basis, the PPS lies in fifth or sixth position with a paltry average. In other words, the real work was done by the others, with Cook and Strauss, going in against fresh bowlers and a new ball, and Trott, paramount. When will the penny drop with the selectors? We would be far stronger with Morgan. As for the sun revolving around.....sorry, his resignation of the captaincy - I thought he was pushed but there, silly me - having been done as part of a long term plan, well! Cannot ECB afford a shrink for this man?
England Matters
The Great Jack Morgan sent me the following
Only Colly and possibly Broady had disappointing series and even the axed Finny must be fairly happy with his 14 Ashes wickets. I was particularly pleased with the "reserve" pace bowlers Tremlett and Bresnan (especially as plenty of people will tell you that it is no good expecting county stalwarts to make the step up to Test cricket; Swanny and Trotty are other good examples of this) and I am now hoping that there will be good competition for bowling places, which we should have had from the start. There is also now competition (I hope) for one batting place, but I think the other five are pretty safe. Given Prior's form in Sydney, it would be no surprise to see him return to the ODI set-up.
With Jimmy, Broady, Finny, Bressy, Tremmy, Shahzady, Onionsy and Woakesy we now appear to have a good depth in our pace bowling, which is surprising really as we have only fairly recently lost a whole squad of pace bowlers: Hoggy, Harmy, Freddy, Jonesy and Sidey. This may also mean that there is no way back for the likes of Mahmoody and Plunketty.
Did Colly do a deal that enabled him to avoid an embarrassing dropping as long as he retired at the end of the series? Colly is going to continue in ODIs and T20, but there is little evidence that he will be good enough. Everyone seems to be assuming that Eoin will take over from Colly in Tests, but I am not so sure. One of the problems is that, modest though his bowling is, Colly is the closest we have to a fifth bowler and we must have someone who is capable of filling in for a few overs to give the four a break. I have seen Trotty, Belly and KP all bowl quite well at times, but they are not up to fifth bowler standard... more like sixth, seventh and eighth bowlers. I am therefore thinking that chaps like R Bopara and L Wright will come into contention because they are good batsmen and are nearly good enough bowlers to be awarded allrounder status.
Of the five captains to win Ashes series in Australia during our lifetime, the three Middx captains now outnumber the two from Yorkshire. Perhaps you could pen a learned paper on the significance of this for the next T&X?
Sexist Matters
I suspect that more than a handful of readers have felt sympathy over the views expressed by Messrs Gray and Keys. I happened to be watching live the match at Molyneux and when the officials came out it was truly weird to see what looked like a schoolgirl acting as one of the linesmen. She presumably is a fully qualified referee and could have taken over as ref if the match referee had been injured. In the event her decision making was faultless despite the views of the experts.
But that doesn’t stop the situation from changing the face of football. The crowd behaviour at professional matches is largely a letting off steam exercise and foul language and sexist comments and chants are common place regarding all forms of sexual preference. But will this have to change? The racist taunts have been eliminated at most grounds. Will the sexist ones have to go now?
It can only be a matter of time before Sian or one of her sisterhood is selected to officiate a premiership match. What impact will this have on the players? They show scant regard for the authority of most of the male refs. Will their appalling intimidatory behaviour get better or worse?
The various Match of the Day programmes are frequently fronted by women with Gaby Logan (nee Yorath) to the fore. On the radio there are some female commentators. Do men want their preserve opened up to sexual equality?
When I played cricket women were welcome in the tea room and also in the scorebox but would we have wanted them officiating? How would Bill Hart have reacted to an LBW appeal being turned down by a lady in a Chanel coat? How long will it be before a Betty Bowden officiates in a test match?
Ken Molloy has his camera with him most of the time and he sent me the following as Sian Massey prepared to do duty at Molyneux.
Correcting the Great Man Matters
I received the following from Alan Ashton
Can you point out to the "great Jack Morgan" that Don Shelley does not write the short match reports in the annual review which he criticises every year? He should read the review more carefully as the author's name is given. The trouble is the reports are written straight after the match and without the benefit of the scorecard which goes below the report. The final version is, unhappily, not proof read as far as I know.
And then the following from Don Shelley
I was somewhat disappointed to read Jack Morgan's article under 'Middlesex Matters' that "D Shelley's match reports in the Annual Review
are as riddled with errors as usual and the infection seems to be spreading to A Jones's comments on Second XI matters".
Whilst I write the review of the season, I do not write any of the individual match reports (and never have) - the reports are actually written by Alan Ashton and this is stated before the start of the report section. I never see the match reports otherwise I would have amended where necessary - I will suggest to the staff who put the review together that I proof-read Alan's reports before they go to print. The only match reporting I do is daily reports which are posted on the Middlesex CCC website. I do always hope to achieve total accuracy in my review section, but I acknowledge that the odd error may have slipped through.
Surely they didn’t think that they would get away without a detailed response? The Great Jack Morgan responded:
Perhaps we could pursue this and enable a solution to be found? We know that Alan has to write the reports straight after the match, but we do not know why and neither do we know why he does not have "the benefit of the scorecard": this seems very weird because i) scorecards are usually available very soon after the end of the match; ii) one can always keep one's own scorecard up to date; iii) D Shelley would surely provide any missing information; and iv) other sources of information such as teletext and various websites are usually updated instantaneously or very soon after events. Even weirder is the fact that Alan more or less admits that this situation leads to errors, but nobody thinks to correct the hastily written reports before they appear in the Review! For an early season match in April, a hurried report often containing mistakes is preserved in aspic for eight months until it is published unamended in the Review in December! This is astonishing. What we need to do is to persuade someone to check Alan's hasty reports sometime before they appear in the Review. Alan himself could do the job, or Don Shelley perhaps, or Vinny the Cod or maybe the best person would be editor Rebecca Hart. How can we make sure that this happens because I cannot be the only one who is irritated by unnecessary errors?
Referral Matters
Peter Webster sent the following to the Professor
With respect to challenging umpires decisions it has been shown by technology on numerous occasions that umpires have made errors. I can see no reason why errors should not be corrected. As an ex umpire ( Middlesex & Herts. League, average ability) I would have been glad of any assistance from a machine or a robot. In what other aspect of life would you object to an injustice being overturned? Cricketers, given the chance cheat ( eg keepers claiming catches down the leg side which clearly brushed a pad or shirt ), technology helps to counter this, but it does require a challenge from a batsman. England have had tours to Australia when not a single LBW was given; this could not happen now with the sanction of a challenge.
The posh papers sometimes argue that because technology is not 100% accurate (eg Bell c Haddin) it should not be used at all. Rubbish-it is getting better all the time and in any case who would argue the since MRI scanners only detect 80% of cancers that they should not be used?
I think that the choice is between accepting all the technology, with challengers, delays, big screen replays, tantrums and having none at all (as in S.A v India). You cannot pick the bits that you like.
My point is not that you shouldn't use technology - quite the reverse, it is here let's use it. Indeed we have to since the TV will continue to use it in their coverage and so the genie is out of the box (literally!)
The Professor replied
My point is about the players right of challenge - and I have two objections:
1. I think a sanctioned right to challenge is a bad idea - it quickly leads to unsanctioned challenges and to the sort of thing I mentioned - a fielder saying he wasn't sure so could the umpire check - thus saving using up a challenge if an appeal might be anticipated as being unsuccessful.
2. The 2-challenges rule. The rationale is, of course, that if there were not a limit the players would challenge everything (an India-Pakistan test would only have about 20 overs bowled in a day). But what happens when the 2 are used up? We revert to how things used to be. In other words when the two are used up all the arguments for using technology collapse in a heap. If the crucial thing is to "get the decision right" how come this ceases to apply after two unsuccessful challenges? Potentially you could have all four challenges used up in the first over and the rest of the innings played out as it used to be. You can't have it both ways - if you "want to get the decision right" you must always want that, you can't take refuge in saying that captains ought to have been better at guessing when to challenge. If the decision is the thing, it is always the thing.
Minor Counties Matters
To get you in the mood for the 2011 season which starts in February here is The Great Jack Morgan’s final report from 2010
Cheshire batted first in the Minor Counties Championship (Western Division) match v Berkshire at Finchampstead and had crawled to only 25 for 3 halfway through the (140 minute) pre-lunch session against Kyle Hodnett (Middx 2s) and Steve Wheeler (ex- Somerset 2s, Warks 2s and Worcs 2s), but that was when left-hander Jimmy Duffy started to take control. They lost another wicket at 77, but then Andrew Hall joined Duffy and played an excellent supporting role as Duffy flayed the bowling to all parts of the Berkshire countryside. Gradually, Hall began to make his own contribution and the stand grew to 261 before Duffy fell to Wheeler for 172. Skipper Hall went on to 111* before declaring 2 overs before the compulsory closure on 354 for 6, Wheeler finishing with 4 for 41 and Hodnett 2 for 70. The Berks reply initially looked like a one-man show as their star batsman Jono McLean (ex-Hants) dominated proceedings, but then he found a sound partner in skipper Bjorn Mordt (66) as 121 were added for the third wicket. McLean continued to a magnificent 182, but then Hodnett, who had made 3 noughts in 3 innings (in my presence) for Middx 2s this season, struck a beautifully timed 70* to take Berks to 390 for 6 at the closure after 90 overs, off-spinner Nathan Dumelow (ex-Derbys) taking 3-129 and Richard Logan (who has played for 4 first class counties and at least 2 minor ones, including Berks) 2-117. The Cheshire response got off to a disastrous start as 2 wickets fell in the first over of the innings (bowled by Wheeler), but Ben Spendlove (ex-Derbys and Notts) immediately brought Cheshire straight back into the match with some wonderful strokeplay. 20 year old opener Jonny Kettle (ex- Lancs 2s) kept him company in a third wicket stand of 209 before Spendlove fell to Wheeler for 136. A “minor” collapse followed as Cheshire sought quick runs, but Kettle was growing in confidence and when he was joined by Danny Berry runs flowed freely again as an unbroken 120 was added for the sixth wicket with Kettle finishing on 129* and Berry on 63*; Wheeler was again the best bowler with 3 for 91. The declaration at 366 for 5 set Berks a very fair 331 to win in what looked to be 70 overs (but such is the pace at which overs are bowled in minor counties cricket that 80 would have been bowled if the match had gone on to the death) as Cheshire needed the win in order to catch up with the leaders Berks. Mike Roberts batted well for 49, but he lost star man McLean for only 18 and Berks looked to be struggling at 122 for 4. However, Carl Crowe (ex-Leics) strode to the crease and soon had the scoreboard moving at a cracking rate and, in the company of Steve Naylor (ex-Middx 2s), had put the home side on course for victory when the match turned completely around during one over from Logan which straddled the tea interval. With the fourth ball of the over, Logan had Crowe given out lbw for a very fine 54 (ending the partnership of 88 with Naylor) and with the last ball of the over (after tea), Logan bowled Hodnett for nought (his 4th duck in 5 innings in my presence). Naylor (48*) continued to resist, but he could not protect the tail and Berks collapsed to 254 all out, losing by 76. Logan's 5 for 85 was the decisive contribution in the final innings and he was assisted by fellow opening bowler Jimmy Hawley (2 for 80) and left arm spinner Johnny Fawcett (2 for 34).
Buckinghamshire are the reigning Minor Counties Champions, but they have not been enjoying a successful season so far and did no better in the Eastern Division Championship match against Cumberland at Slough. Cumberland batted first and opener James Lowe and keeper Ikram Ullah both made useful contributions of 48, but it was Gary Pratt (ex-Durham) who played the dominant innings of the match with an excellent 169. Pratt found the ideal partner in 18 year old Alex Atkinson who hit a rapid 101 as the pair put on 193 for the fifth wicket and took the visitors to 410 for 7 at the compulsory closure which is a record score for a 90 over innings in my presence. Veteran seamer Simon Stanway was the best of the home bowlers with 3 for 99. Bucks were soon in trouble when they batted and sank to a dismal 110 for 8 before keeper David Cranfield-Thompson (66) and Sam Cherry (33) put on 99 for the ninth wicket which allowed Bucks to reach 212 all out. Another veteran seamer Marcus Sharp impressed with 3 for 26. Skipper Pratt declined to enforce the follow on as Cumberland looked for quick runs instead and found just the men in Lowe (102) and Ullah (51) as the visitors closed on 232 for 9 at the end of day 2, a lead of 430. Stanway, off-spinner Cherry and left arm swinger Paul Sawyer all picked up three wickets. Some of us felt that a declaration late on day 2 would have served Cumberland well, but Pratt decided to declare just before the start of play on day 3. Bucks had no chance of winning and soon confirmed this by slipping to 15 for 3, but then Bobby Sher joined Warren Miller (41) in a stand of 77 for the fifth wicket. Now Sher combined with 20 year old Mick Payne to put on 106 and some even thought that Bucks might have a chance after all. But when Sher was finally dismissed for 106 and Payne followed for 57, the only other resistance came from Cranfield-Thompson with a stubborn 40. Cumberland won by 149 runs, though they were deep into the minimum of 17 overs of the last hour before the final wicket fell. Sharp was again the best bowler with 4 for 57, while medium pacer Martyn Evans helped out with 3 for 46.
Old Danes Matters
Each year at the Old Danes Gathering some new (old) faces appear and the 2010 event was no exception. Doug Slade had taken on mythical status at previous events when his appearance was anticipated but not realised. However, he duly appeared in 2011 and he is on the right in this photo. To his left are staunch Rangers and Middlesex men Les Berry and Jeff Coleman.
Googlies Hundred
The Professor and I noticed that the hundredth edition of Googlies will be published at the beginning of April. We thought that this landmark should not be overlooked and came up with the idea of holding a lunch to celebrate the event. We hoped that we would be joined by many of the contributors over the years since the first edition in January 2003 but there is really no reason why anyone who has enjoyed the newsletter should not join us. It will probably be held in April or May and probably will be in the London area. To enable us to plan for this momentous event would you please indicate if you would like to join us on this occasion? The Professor has offered to coordinate this event and so please reply to him at: [email protected].
South Hampstead Dinner
Communication isn’t the strong point at South Hampstead these days and so for any alumni interested the annual dinner is taking place on Friday 1 April in the clubhouse. Bob Peach is organising a sixties table and your place can be booked by calling Ken James on 0208 965 1254.
Football Matters
Douglas Miller sent this: “One of your more distinguished readers (identity preserved) yearns to know the source of your endless supply of ladies who seem to have mislaid their clothes. I think it is only curiosity, not kinkiness. I should love to be able to tell him the answer.” I passed this on to Andrew Baker himself who was puzzled as he told me that he had never noticed his team’s kit shortage. But he was pleased to hear of Douglas’ concern and would like to engage his (or his friend’s) services in selecting a new colour scheme for their away kit. So Douglas please select from the following:
Googlies and Chinamen
is produced by
James Sharp
Broad Lee House
Combs
High Peak
SK23 9XA
Tel & fax: 01298 70237
Email: [email protected]
