14

Mark Ramprakash reverts to type

Bowled on 21st August, 2008 at 10:00 by King Cricket
Category: County cricket news, Mark Ramprakash

Same picture for the same storyThree hundreds in as many innings for Mark Ramprakash now – the middle one a double and he hasn’t been dismissed in any of them. He’s 133 not out overnight against Sussex.

Mark Ramprakash must be the only batsman in history who can cause people to mull on his mental frailties by hitting three successive hundreds.

There are a lot of batsmen out there who’d bat without a box for a chance to have their mental frailties dwelt over after three successive hundreds.

Not Graham Thorpe though. There was a man for whom the ball was magnetically attracted to the groin. He wouldn’t have risked genital liberation for a dozen hundreds in a row.

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

Make an appeal
  1. Reply
    Suave   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:10

    So what did Murray Goodwin say to Ramps that meant he had to be restrained by two umpires, eh?

    I bet he wasn’t questioning his parentage.

    I reckon there’s been a wee dig about mental strength and he’s lost it, therefore proving Mr Goodwin right.
    He did go on to score his century after that, but anyone can score a century when they’ve got the rage.

    By anyone, I mean anyone but me, I have rage, and I haven’t scored a century in years.

  2. Reply
    King Cricket   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:18

    Maybe you haven’t got quite enough rage.

    You’d better press on with the rage so as to eliminate that possibility, if nothing else.

  3. Reply
    Ed   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:22

    So far, I have stayed silent on the whole Mark Ramprakash issue. I am now going to bear my sole by removing my light from the proverbial bushel.

    Pietersen has just had a pop at him by saying that he couldn’t handle the pressure of scoring his hundredth hundred. Well, Kevin, each game that Ramps played, while on 99 hundreds, built the pressure up and up and up. By the time he got to Headingley the other week the pressure was at vesuvius like proportions. Mark Ramprakash scored a hundred. Enough said.

    I have mentioned Justin Langer’s comments else where on this site, but if Langer thinks that Ramps is the real deal then that’s good enough for me.

    Unfortunately, Ramprakash will never again be picked for England. A plethora of moronic media punditary, to a Boycottian level, will see to that.

  4. Reply
    King Cricket   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:30

    Fair point about the escalatation of pressure.

    Don’t see why you needed to get that fish out though.

    No? No-one in the mood for jokes based on pedantry?

  5. Reply
    Ed   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:41

    Bugger bugger bugger.

    I feel like a right spaz now.

    Thanks for pointing it out though.

  6. Reply
    King Cricket   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:45

    Can we say ‘it was a pleasure’ and come away unscathed?

    No. No, we can’t.

  7. Reply
    SimonC   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:47

    Don’t worry, no post with bears in it can be bad.

  8. Reply
    Suave   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:48

    I thought Bears ate Salmon, not sole?

  9. Reply
    Ed   //   August 21st, 2008 at 11:50

    Bollocks – that’s the danger of typing stuff quickly when you’re supposed to be working.

    I’ll just get my kagool.

  10. Reply
    Suave   //   August 21st, 2008 at 12:34

    That’d be kagoule, or cagoul then, Ed.

    Bad day sunshine?

  11. Reply
    Ed   //   August 21st, 2008 at 13:08

    Suave: it waz intendud to bee ironik. I suppose my spazzy spelling would probably negate the effectiveness of such irony though.

  12. Reply
    King Cricket   //   August 21st, 2008 at 13:25

    ‘Cagoule’

  13. Reply
    Suave   //   August 21st, 2008 at 14:28

    Cagoule too Sire, they are all derivatives of Cowl.

    Why we had to refrench a french word to make it British is beyond me.

  14. Reply
    Brett Pee   //   March 14th, 2009 at 09:44

    Ramps would only have made a couple of test appearances for Australia. You need to be able to cope upstairs and fit in with the team ethics of the day, witness Stuey Law and his one solitary test appearance. He was pretty sus in the mental department and did not fit in. If he was a Pom, on talent alone, Stuey Law would have made over 100 Test appearances. Chew over that if you will.

Discussion Area - Make an appeal

Comment RSS | TrackBack URL

Cricket history

Photographs on this site by Sarah Ansell

sarah_ansell.jpeg