We feel we’ve got away with this one a bit

We wrote about Sachin Tendulkar at Cricinfo and, as Bert suggested, we criticised his technique. So far, most people seem to have correctly identified the joke.

We feel we’re being sucked in. Next time we’ll write a really innocuous piece about Ian Austin and thousands of people will send us turds in the mail. Well the joke’s on them, because the packages won’t fit through our letterbox and then we won’t go and collect them from the post office.

Read our piece about Tendulkar’s underwhelming 200 not out here.

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

23 Appeals

  1. Fairly certain you’ve spoke too soon. Give it a couple of hours and people will be criticising you writing technique, lack of humour, and obvious English jealousy towards the little master

  2. “I think Reporter Ash is hardly 10 years old since I might not have see Sachin’s earlier inngings. He should watch Sachin’s quick-fire inng 84 against New Zealand in Auckland, Inngs against Australia in Sharjah, 1997-98. He already has spent 22 years in International Cricket, you guys want to teach him how to clear the ropes. You guys dont know how much burden of expectation he is carrying. You guys want a cheap publicity and see you hit. Stop all this stuipd n useless stuff.” – Nikunj Patel

    Success.

  3. OMG!!! Guyz..relax!!!Its just a satirical piece!!

  4. Writing an overtly absurd piece with the intention of commentators not realising its satirical nature and thus providing greater comedy than the original piece. That is veritably Post Modern. Or something.

    • “I believe you should have watched his earlier innings. He had once dominated the game with sixers also. What you see now is a change. And its not easy for a player to change. But if i am not wrong, after the Tennis Elbow Sachin switched his bat and technique and from then on its not brute force but its the timing that carried the ball to the boundary. When you see Dhoni and Tendulkar sharing the pitch, please keep in mind that there is a difference of 8 years of age, and 15 years of dominating cricket.”
      – Akshay Johri

      This was the very first comment, and led to over 900 other comments telling him that it’s satire so get a life.

      But ask yourselves this. If you were going to put a comment on this article, wouldn’t this be EXACTLY what you would write? He even uses the word “sixers” in the second sentence – that has to be a giveaway. So maybe Akshay is an uber-sophisticated post-modernist himself?

      Or maybe not.

    • King Cricket

      December 13, 2011 at 2:03 pm

      Everyone writes ‘sixers’ in that comments thread. Makes us realise why the Yuvraj Singh six sixers article was so poorly received.

    • I do wonder whether some of the denizens of HM’s court occassionally “troll” his Heavy Balls. I never have (although I did use to write into Dubai newspapers as “Babu” every now and again). We will suddenly have an epiphany that Himadri Paul is an anagram of “Ged” and we have all been cruelly decieved

    • The mental image of somebody “trolling KC’s Heavy Balls” was not entirely welcome.

    • King Cricket

      December 13, 2011 at 3:04 pm

      Yeah, another vote for no-one mentioning trolling our Heavy Balls ever again.

    • I (patiently) explained on the previous Stu and Ash piece that the articles are Post Post-Modern, not Post-Modern.

      Give it another few years and copies of Stu and Ash articles will be displayed in the V&A, together with my Post Post-Modern novel.

      In the meantime, people like us, KC, will saimply remain cruelly misunderstood. Don’t yield to the siren voices on the Cricinfo comments.

      You might be the cause of Cricinfo’s decline, but that’s a mere bagatelle – I am a possible cause of World War Three, if MSNBC is anything to go by…

    • Scott, if i do say so myself, I thought as a double entendre I thought that was a “sixer”

  5. Alex, Please stop writing glass half empty articles and write some glass half full articles. Thanks.

  6. “Who Cares…. SACHIN is SACHIN” -Himadri Paul

    Himadri’s first law: An entity is the same as itself if written in all caps.

  7. Got away? Some guy called kany has pinpointed you as the reason for cricinfo’s apparent recent unpopularity.

    Also, what are these things that appear next to our comments and how are they assigned? Mine appears to be a Christmas tree with horns. Does it have a tie on, or is it sticking its tongue out?

    • King Cricket

      December 13, 2011 at 3:29 pm

      Could be a tongue. Could be a mouth. Assigned randomly, we believe, but it’s not something we really understand.

  8. OMG!!! (!) KC(!), do you know what you are doing?

    This guy named swarzi says that you: “seem to be suggesting that Tendulkar should have made a couple more 200s for the many number of times (442 innings which is more than anyone else) that he has been opening the innings in ODI matches. And every time, he has 300 balls available to him; the bowlers are compelled to bowl every ball within his reach, so that he can hit them (as any ball out of his reach is a NO BALL); and he can hit each ball anywhere he feels like, because the fieldsmen are restricted to positions whereby he is given the advantage to do so. Nonetheless, it was only in his 442 second innings that he was able to achieve that feat. But look! Virender Sewhag in only his 234th innings has been able to go past him! Yet, they say Sachin’s the best.”

    This chap, assuming he isn’t Ged (or the suspicious sounding GedLadd), actually thinks you were trying to say something with that piece.

    Tell me this whole Stu and Ash thing isn’t a front for some social experiment on cricinfo trolls KC.

    • So Swarzi thinks Sehwag is nearly twice as good as Tendulkar? Fair call, really. Sehwag has hit 223 sixers in 332 Tests and ODIs (0.66 per match). Tendulkar has hit 259 sixers in 637 matches (0.41 sixers per match).

    • I had read this Jonathan’s piece earlier but now looking at comments section of the KC column, i wonder what kind of comments Jonathan must have got. I am not able to see the comment section on telegraph’s website. My sympathies to you KC. Being a professional writer is tough, what with all the negative feedback you get. I hope you are as thick skinned as you claim to be.

  9. How about an article on the technique of VVS. He might have had exhibited good technique in UK, but his worst innings have came in Aus. They were also surprisingly longer in Aus, so you folks will get an opportunity to critique his technique.

  10. Howard A. Catswell

    December 14, 2011 at 10:24 am

    To be honest I enjoy the supportive comments just as much as the overwhelmingly negative ones. For example, behold the joy with which ‘Scorp’ views both the end of the article and the very concept of something ending: ‘hahahahaha… this was a mega end… and the best part was, nothing said after it..’

  11. It is not as if you get the best comments in cricinfo: Nothing beats the following comment on the “Marks out of ten – Australia” article:

    http://www.espncricinfo.com/australia-v-new-zealand-2011/content/current/story/545158.html?comments=all#comments

    “If Don Bradman was alive today he’d roll over in his grave :)”

  12. We Indians are overly sensitive about SRT.. and tend to lack that sense of humour too.

    Superb piece.. Enjoyed it thoroughly.

Comments are closed.

© 2017 King Cricket

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑