13

Harold being conspicuously indifferent to the legacy of Michael Vaughan

Bowled on 16th April, 2009 at 10:08 by King Cricket
Category: Animals being conspicuously indifferent to cricket

Eva writes:

“This is my cat Harold. Here he is, nonchalantly enjoying a meal. (Don’t question that. Cats can be nonchalant. No-one’s ever questioned a cat’s ability to display indifference.)

“In doing this, he made a choice. He chose to ignore the legacy of Michael Vaughan.

Studied indifference

“He’s actually almost sitting on the legacy of Michael Vaughan. He’s very committed in his indifference.”

At this point, we questioned Harold’s awareness of the magazine, but Eva can back up her words.

“Sadly, I can verify his awareness. Later, I found him engrossed in an article about the magic of Kevin Pietersen. It was a calculated betrayal.”

Conspicuously absorbed

If you’ve got a picture of an animal being conspicously indifferent to cricket, send it to king@kingcricket.co.uk.

"It’s not that I’m lazy - it’s that I just don’t care"

Make an appeal
  1. Reply
    sam   //   April 16th, 2009 at 10:51

    he’s really getting involved with that bowl of food.

    he’ll get it all over his nose.

  2. Reply
    Ceci   //   April 16th, 2009 at 10:59

    Goodness – with that rear end Harold is surely the Jacques Kallis of the cat world

  3. Reply
    Charlie   //   April 16th, 2009 at 11:02

    i like the tennis ball ornaments. very ikea.

  4. Reply
    D Charlton   //   April 16th, 2009 at 13:09

    Talk about mud flaps, your cat’s got ‘em.

  5. Reply
    SimonC   //   April 16th, 2009 at 14:21

    Michael Vaughan’s “I am mildly surprised by this cat’s bottom” face is a lot like his “that apparently straight ball was in fact doing complex aerobatics” face. I wonder if there’s a connection.

  6. Reply
    King Cricket   //   April 16th, 2009 at 17:44

    A Spinal Tap reference! Finally!

    We slip dozens of Tap references into our ‘work’. No-one ever joins in.

  7. Reply
    D Charlton   //   April 16th, 2009 at 19:06

    Turn it up to 11 KC and we’ll join in.

  8. Reply
    King Cricket   //   April 16th, 2009 at 19:40

    You have to ask yourself: how much further up can we turn it?

    The answer, of course, is ‘none’.

    None further up.

  9. Reply
    Ged Ladd   //   April 17th, 2009 at 06:46

    Are those tennis balls or lemons in the first photo, Eva? They look like the former to me.

    Don’t tell me you are moonlighting on a tennis blog with photos of tennis equipment in unusual locations?

  10. Reply
    D Charlton   //   April 17th, 2009 at 09:05

    KC, it’s all a matter of perspective. Too much f***ing perspective.

  11. Reply
    Eva   //   April 17th, 2009 at 13:48

    Ged Ladd: Quite the detective eh? They’re not mine, I’m looking after them for a friend.. I’ve never seen them before. That isn’t even my cat.

  12. Reply
    miriam   //   April 17th, 2009 at 19:32

    Harold may well be engrossed in the KP article, but he has his ears back in disapproval.

  13. Reply
    Eva   //   April 17th, 2009 at 22:13

    From the angle of the second photo, it might look as if I was sitting on him, but I wasn’t. Just to clarify.

Discussion Area - Make an appeal

Comment RSS | TrackBack URL

Cricket history

Photographs on this site by Sarah Ansell

sarah_ansell.jpeg