Tuesday 26 May 2020

The Spirit of Not-Cricket

There is futher discussion today about the extent to which occupying the crease is injurious to eyesight and whether a wild drive outside off stump is an appropriate way of testing opthalmalogical fitness.

Senior batsmen have suggested that they have themselves driven for this purpose many times.  Others have responded to these claims with some scepticism, recalling instances when those batsmen might have failed to walk after nicking off.

As Fantasy Bob has readily confessed, this is not an issue on which he can claim any expertise.  He bats with his eyes closed.  Any kind of drive, whether it is outside off stump or outside a well known visitor attraction, would not really help him determine whether he is fit for continued crease occupancy.  In most circumstances he is unfit for that role anyway - eyesight being only one of a myriad of possible factors - so there is no point in prolonging the agony.  The bowler should just pop a straight one in.

There is also a suggestion that the batsman currently in the public eye may have revised previous match reports on his blog to improve his average.  Long suffering readers of this blog (and any reader, even shorter term, must be suffering) can be assured that Fantasy Bob has not rewritten previous posts to create a more favourable impression or to suggest that he foresaw current events.  FB cannot easily foresee the time in half an hour, so there would be no point. 

There are many cricketers who, match by match, play according to the precepts of the Spirit of Cricket.  They wonder how some players seem to consider themselves above or beyond these precepts.    A batsman not walking, a catch claimed on the half volley, a chucker.  It is now suggested that holding these views is evidence of a subversive world view.  The Spirit of Cricket is just not cricket, as it were.

How has it come to this?

No comments:

Post a Comment