Graham Gooch and some terrible puns

It’s our latest piece for Cricinfo. Here’s what the critics are saying about it:

“Ultimate 🙂 ROFL… Next in line is Misbah?” – The Sunday Times

Now, if you’ll excuse us, we appear to have one million things to write today and very few hours in which to do it.

Share this article...Email this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on Facebook0Share on Google+0

Tired of checking the site for updates? Sign up for our near-daily email

13 Appeals

  1. That last passage, about the duck: Goochie was obviously very forthcoming with his opinions on it, but I can just see him backing away from the question at the same time, hugging himself.

    You could say that he was both forward and defensive.

  2. literally Lol’ed out Loud!!!!!!! Sick.

    • I have a friend who was born and brought up in leafy Hampshire. A few years ago she moved to South London and started using the word “sick” as a positive adjective.

      It were absolutely diabolical.

    • Perhaps at some point in The Future, the youth will adopt broad Yorkshire as the language of the urban streets.

    • I’d rather have Nadsat, if I’m honest, although have nothing against saying it in a Yorkshire accent. “Ooh, ‘e took tha’ one ‘orrorshow in t’ litso.”

  3. Perhaps you meant “meat ofF the bat”?

  4. Hmmm – fallaciously attributing your accolade to the Sunday Times…

    …I’m onto you, KC.

    For a lengthy culinary parody that really did get a Sunday Times accolade:

    http://www.zyen.com/publications/books.html?id=280

    Still, the Gooch parody was very amusing, KC. Puntastic – you must have had lots of pun writing it.

  5. A truly Zaltmanesque performance, your majesty.

  6. How good was Gooch in the 87 World Cup? Just been watching highlights on iTunes and had forgotten. Had also forgotten Paul Downton, Bill Athey and Eddie Hemmings playing ( well) in a World Cup final . ..and Tim Robinson, but he got a golden.
    Sorry no puns there.

  7. OK. This one’s so far off topic that I’m surprised the internet is big enough. But I did think (some of) you would appreciate it. There’s been a discussion over at The Grauniad about the nature of mathematics. Pretty exciting stuff, I’m sure you’d agree. However, it is this comment from Violator that reminded me of you people. Enjoy. It.

    “Not according to Immanuel Kant. Maths is a priori but it is not composed of analytic truths.

    I love Kant. I’d shag that sexy German deontologist. I’m not lying either ’cause I couldn’t universalise that maxim.”

Comments are closed.

© 2017 King Cricket

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑