FB has no idea whether there was ever any evidence that Laxman used the substance, or the reason that he might have or whether it is effective in tricking the technology. But in true tabloid fahsion he is not going to let the facts get in the way of a good story. FB is intrigued by the not-vaseline scandal. Vaseline was invented in the Pennsylvania oil fields in 1872 by one Robert Chesebrough who made up the name and his company manufactured it until it was bought by Unilever in 1987. Chesebrough was born in London and was knighted in 1883. Upon knighting him, Queen Victoria praised his product, proudly claiming that she 'used Vaseline every day.' FB was not previously aware that Queen Victoria was much of a batsman and would seek so to evade Hot Spot. There appear to be many hidden scandals in thos high days of the British Empire which are only slowly coming to light.
FB understands that there are uses for vaseline among certain groups in the community, but he has found little use for it himself since the distant days of the sad demise of his rugby career when it was smeared everywhere to ease things at scrum time. Without its lubrication, FB's rugged features might have been even more rugged to the point of scaring all the juniors in the club to the point of nightmares. A half empty - or should that be half full, to look on the bright side - jar of the petroleum jelly has sat in the bathroom cabinet for many a long year. Now FB has a use for it. Notwithstanding that Hot Spot technology has yet to be approved in the lower divisions of the East of Scotland League there is nothing like being prepared for the inevitable march of technology. It will come and FB will be prepared. Some experiment will be necessary to see if other substances are as effective - chip fat can be used to power a motor car - but does it do Hot Spot too? Time for the scientists to get boffinning.
But to return to the matter at hand. England win and they rule the world. And who would bet against them? Not FB, but since he doesn't bet that doesn't really count. England seem to have done most things right in the 2 previous games (like do some proper preparation), India precious little - Dravid aside (and it is always heartening to see a former Scottish player do well on the big stage). Injuries have not helped their cause but they are no excuse for their poor show.
|Sehwag - will he make a difference?|
FB goes with Tremlett because of his bounce which gives something extra. England's batting is strong enough without Bresnan's contribution although it is a worry that the opening partnership has yet to deliver. The batting might seem to be weakened by Trott's absence. But even there there is a silver lining - it is surely a good thing for Ian Bell to bat at 3 - just so long as he waits till he hears the umpire say 'Over' before he wanders aimlessly off to the tea room.