18

Ian Botham says England will win the Ashes

Bowled on 7th November, 2008 at 11:37 by King Cricket
Category: Ashes, Australia cricket news, Ian Botham

Ian Botham’s been doing his bluff overconfidence thing again:

“What I’ve seen so far, I don’t see as too much of a threat and if England’s bowlers stay fit then they’ll win the series.”

This is why Ian Botham was a brilliant cricketer. He lets a few facts seep in, but not enough to divert him away from the path of supreme confidence.

Sod it - let's just make it 'stash week'We saw the path of supreme confidence once. We cut across it at 90 degrees precisely. We also tripped at the crucial moment so as to make no contact with the path itself. Then we got lost in the thicket of extreme doubt where a snake of anxiety bit us on the arse.

The problem is that while Australia’s bowling attack has looked mediocre, they’re playing in India. Their bowlers aren’t suited to Indian conditions and nor have any of them really played there much before.

We’ve said ourself that Australia’s bowling attack’s worse than it was, but let’s each round up some horses and hold them, as they say. Why we do this, we don’t know, but equine grippage is a necessary step when drawing conclusions from relatively small amounts of sample data.

This film features marines using the bannister when they go down some stairs. What more could you want?

Make an appeal
  1. Reply
    Dave   //   November 7th, 2008 at 13:19

    He probably said the same thing last year, though.

  2. Reply
    Ne   //   November 7th, 2008 at 13:54

    “This is why Ian Botham was a brilliant cricketer”. That and the mush. Facial hair FTW, as the kids might say.

  3. Reply
    King Cricket   //   November 7th, 2008 at 15:45

    Always with the indecipherable acronyms.

    You could tell us what it stood for, but we’d instantly forget. We just can not hold information that arrives in acronym form.

  4. Reply
    Ceci   //   November 7th, 2008 at 16:16

    World’s greatest mullet.

    btw KC – jpeg cap – pmsl!

  5. Reply
    D Charlton   //   November 7th, 2008 at 17:25

    These acronyms are annoying me as well. Especially as they are technically not acronyms but abbreviations. Acronyms have to spell a word that you speak, like Nato or Waca or Laser.

    I reckon FTW is for For The Women. That’s why Ceci appeared. She sensed the abbreviation.

  6. Reply
    King Cricket   //   November 7th, 2008 at 17:31

    That’s true actually.

    We are shamed at having forgotten our childhood lessons about the difference between acronyms and abbreviations.

    These meaningless sequences of letters are eroding our intellect. We really can’t afford that.

  7. Reply
    jrod   //   November 7th, 2008 at 17:43

    Dc is good with the detail. If there was an anal Olympics he’d win gold for Britain.

  8. Reply
    Dave   //   November 7th, 2008 at 17:50

    Anal olympics? I think I’ve seen that website.

  9. Reply
    SixSixEight   //   November 7th, 2008 at 19:10

    Those snakes of anxiety are athletic beasts – yer average serpent only manages ankle or calf hight at best!

  10. Reply
    miriam   //   November 7th, 2008 at 20:34

    D Charlton, once at a party I got into a gentle dispute with someone as to the difference between an acronym and an abbreviation. It culminated in someone producing a dictionary and (of course) proving me right. In making my arguments, I didn’t refer to NATO, WACA or LASER, but did refer to SCUBA.

  11. Reply
    King Cricket   //   November 7th, 2008 at 20:55

    Mark Nicholas SAYS ‘M P H’.

    Drives us mental. It’s harder to say than the words themselves.

  12. Reply
    Steve   //   November 7th, 2008 at 20:58

    I always remember how Botham said, before the last Ashes series, how the Aussies were too old to win.

    Onya, Bothie!

  13. Reply
    Short Backward Square   //   November 7th, 2008 at 21:55

    The Aussie bowling attack doesn’t look up to much.
    Will they be a match for England’s batsmen?

  14. Reply
    Ged Ladd   //   November 8th, 2008 at 10:37

    Botham Often Trys To Obviously Manipulate Statistics.

    Or BOTTOMS, as I might acronymically put it. Apologies for the split infinitive within the acronym.

    Is there a special word for an acronym that contains a split infinitive? Or should we invent such a word?

  15. Reply
    D Charlton   //   November 8th, 2008 at 18:21

    Didn’t know about Scuba, Miriam – isn’t it strange when acronyms become real words?

    Bottoms – genius – even with that split infinitive. You invent the word Ged, I promise to use it next time I appeal.

  16. Reply
    damiths   //   November 10th, 2008 at 01:41

    FTW- For the win , If im not mistaken.
    acronyms > abbreviations IMO

  17. Reply
    Ged Ladd   //   November 10th, 2008 at 08:54

    Acrofinitive?

  18. Reply
    King Cricket's Mum   //   November 13th, 2008 at 15:53

    Re text abbreviations, I still like my interpretation of LOL, lots of love. However I am au fait with latin abbreviations – and French phrases.

    Sorry about the late response but King Cricket’s cast-off computer is on the blink again. (Bit of illiteration there for you Ne.)

Discussion Area - Make an appeal

Comment RSS | TrackBack URL

Cricket history

Photographs on this site by Sarah Ansell

sarah_ansell.jpeg