What Mark Wood might be

Posted by
< 1 minute read

Other than a fast bowler, feisty lower order batsman and a medieval knight of the outfield. These are, of course, major reasons why Mark Wood is currently our favourite cricketer, but it’s not just that. He’s also unfamiliar, so there’s a wonderful uncertainty about what he might yet be.

It’s not what he’s done, it’s what might yet happen. It’s not the wickets he’s taken; it’s the ones he’s still to take. It’s not that he has an imaginary horse, it’s that he’s the kind of person who has an imaginary horse.

We didn’t know he smote straight sixes until today, for example. That was a nice revelation. While he’s still relatively new, these sorts of things will slowly reveal themselves to us and that voyage of discovery is at least half of the appeal.

In a world of identikit cricketers, the tee-totaller who sometimes whinnies at the start of a bowling spell is a gift – not least because he proves that having an imaginary horse is no barrier to success. History tells us that there have been those who would try to expunge such deviant quirks from humanity in pursuit of a ‘pure’ race of conformists. These people are known as business executives and anything that confounds their beliefs we are fully behind.

Australia require 411 to win. English (and Welsh) men and women – bring out your pessimism.


Mike Gatting wasn't receiving the King Cricket email when he dropped that ludicrously easy chance against India in 1993.


Why risk it when it's so easy to sign up?


  1. He will be purged, mark my words. They cannot cope with deviance.

    Anyway, 412. There is no England fan who at any single moment in the last six months would not have bitten your hand off if you’d offered this situation in the first test. And not just your hand, but your forearm, your ear, and your spleen for dessert.

    This match is not won yet, but what kind of pathetic, lilly-livered coward wants their teams to win with two days left to play? This is sport, this is what we sign up for. England have given themselves a decent chance to win, which is what all good sportsmen do first and foremost. What winning sportsmen do from here is win.

  2. Is he like an ep you bought in the 91 on vinyl in Reidy’s in Blackburn cos you liked the cover and then it turned out you loved the two of the songs on the B side and one on the A side was pretty good too and you thought ‘damn i will buy their next ep, even if I don’t like the cover.’?
    Is Mark Wood currently like that?
    Is Mark Wood currently like Ride’s Today Forever EP?

  3. Wouldn’t be a better headline if you said “Wouldn’t Wood be better if he would chuck wood as a Wood chucker should”?

    1. Is that an obscure reference to Groundhog Day, Rus?

      Cos it doesn’t feel like Groundhog Day to me.

      Feels more like a new dawn, a new day…

      …and I’m feelin’ good.

    2. This raises an important point: has the ICC actually measured a woodchuck’s elbow angle to definitively make the claim that it chucks wood instead of bowling it?

    3. The Wikipedia item is uselessly silent on your excellent point, DC.

      Looking at the pictures, though, I cannot see how the woodchuck would achieve the level of flexion required for it to be “called” for chucking.

      Frankly, looking at the pictures and reading about its lifestyle, the woodchuck comes across more Peter Siddle than Mark Wood.


Comments are closed.