26

Australia vastly inferior to India who are better than everyone

After winning successive Test series against West Indies, South Africa, South Africa again, Bangladesh, England, Sri Lanka, India and West Indies, Australia finally lost away to India and are now ABSOLUTELY SHOCKING at cricket.

India’s recent run of losing a series against Australia, drawing one against South Africa, losing one against Sri Lanka before winning this one, hints that they are now perhaps the new supreme power in world cricket.

Australia were soundly beaten and seemingly accepted that before the series had even started, but their first choice team isn’t a great deal different to the one that beat India at the start of the year. India have won a great series, but have hardly been rollicking along other than that.

The papers like see a clean handover of power though, so that’s what they’ll depict. The irony is that it IS a clearcut handover of power. India are now the Alternative Test Cricket World Champions.

We did not know that a cricket ferret was a thing until we saw this

Make an appeal
  1. Reply
    Ne   //   November 11th, 2008 at 11:51

    Typo in the last paragraph. You loser. What sort of person allows what they write to be so riddled with typological mistakes.

  2. Reply
    Dave   //   November 11th, 2008 at 11:52

    If England’s 98 all out against Mumbai is anything to go by, India’s defence of their title should be fairly safe.

  3. Reply
    King Cricket   //   November 11th, 2008 at 13:51

    Ne, how many times did you have to read that comment back to ensure a clean bill of typological health?

  4. Reply
    D Charlton   //   November 11th, 2008 at 14:09

    Sort out the typo. If I want typos I read CWB. I come here for accuracy and decency. Shame on you.

    Next thing I know you’ll be using acrofinitives all over the place.

  5. Reply
    The other Ed   //   November 11th, 2008 at 15:26

    Ne – I think you mean ‘typographical’, not ‘typological’…

  6. Reply
    Ne   //   November 11th, 2008 at 17:20

    The other Ed: Are you saying I’m alliterate?

  7. Reply
    Mahinda   //   November 11th, 2008 at 17:29

    Ne, there’s something I’ve been wondering about you for quite a while now. Are you pronounced “en-ee” or just “nee”?

  8. Reply
    miriam   //   November 11th, 2008 at 18:32

    Or, indeed, “nay”?

  9. Reply
    Captain Kirk   //   November 11th, 2008 at 20:46

    Or, perhaps, “Neh”?

  10. Reply
    Ceci   //   November 11th, 2008 at 21:21

    I know it’s pronounced as in “Ne nor ne nor ne nor ne nor”

  11. Reply
    King Cricket   //   November 11th, 2008 at 22:14

    His real name is En.

  12. Reply
    Moses   //   November 12th, 2008 at 01:25

    Thank you for ENlightening me as to how superior India are, I can now give up on supporting Australia and jump on their bandwagon instead.

  13. Reply
    damiths   //   November 12th, 2008 at 02:46

    Moses one must always support the team playing against a Ricky Ponting led team.

    So is En pronounced “N” or “EhN”

  14. Reply
    Malcom   //   November 12th, 2008 at 07:52

    En or whatever this guys name is, says, ” alliterate?”

    Typo! You loser. What sort of person allows what they write to be so riddled with typological mistakes.

    Don’t be too quick to point out others mistakes especially when you make them all the time yourself. Fix yourself up first.

  15. Reply
    The other Ed   //   November 12th, 2008 at 10:01

    Ne: no, never. Not alliterate.

    Though maybe, in some circumstances, alliterative.

  16. Reply
    Ne   //   November 12th, 2008 at 10:04

    Malcom: (*sigh*) do keep up with my rubbish attempts at ironic humor.

    It’s pronounced “Smith”

  17. Reply
    D Charlton   //   November 12th, 2008 at 10:06

    But how is Smith pronounced?

  18. Reply
    Suave   //   November 12th, 2008 at 18:13

    smuth if you’re a kiwi

  19. Reply
    miriam   //   November 12th, 2008 at 20:19

    Smit if you’re French, because they don’t really have the “th” sound.

  20. Reply
    Moses   //   November 13th, 2008 at 02:53

    it’s not pronounced at all if you’re Anna-Nicole

  21. Reply
    Ged Ladd   //   November 13th, 2008 at 06:48

    Spotted your acrofinitive reference there, DC. Excellent placement. Thank you for seeing it through.

  22. Reply
    D Charlton   //   November 13th, 2008 at 20:17

    As promised Ged…

    So does that mean, if Ne is French, he’s called Smit?

  23. Reply
    D Charlton   //   November 13th, 2008 at 20:18

    Or is Smith your maiden name?

    (anyone see what i’ve done there!?!)

  24. Reply
    the librarian   //   November 13th, 2008 at 23:57

    well played Mr Charlton Sir, well played.

  25. Reply
    Arun   //   November 15th, 2008 at 03:41

    Well played, indeed :)

  26. Reply
    Aussiefox   //   November 16th, 2008 at 08:06

    Curious about NeÒ€¦ is he knight ?
    In need of a shrubbery, perchance?

Discussion Area - Make an appeal

Comment RSS | TrackBack URL

What we mostly seem to write about

Archives

Cricket history