Why in blazes do you read this website?

Posted by
3 minute read

We’d really appreciate a bit of feedback about the site. First, some background and an explanation as to why we’re asking.


We’ve written this website in one form or another since the start of 2006. We wrote just over a thousand posts on the old .blogspot.com domain and have added a further 2,300 or so here at .co.uk. That is quite a lot of writing and rather more effort than you might imagine because we’ve had to learn about managing a website along the way – something we’re still pretty ignorant about, if we’re honest.

Despite the ads, it is not an earner. This is not a complaint as such; it’s more an indication that we persist for other reasons. Basically, we enjoy it. We write something, then a few people leave comments and more often than not, the comments make us laugh. We once said to someone that you get the comments you deserve on a website, because your audience reflects you. We can only get away with saying that because we like what appears on our site. If we attracted a great heap of arseholes, we’d think that was a stupid theory.

The point is that this is the way we see the site, but we don’t know if you see it the same way. We see it as being a daily source of idle chat with the articles being mere hooks off which everything else is hung. But we’re not really representative of the overall readership, which is why we’d like a bit of feedback, if you’d be so kind.

Why now?

As for why we’re asking this now, there are a couple of reasons. Websites evolve by necessity, simply because the nature of the internet evolves. We’ve been wondering for a while now whether the niche we used to fill still exists.

It used to be that the comments section of a website was where like-minded people would interact. However, that function is increasingly being served by Twitter. That site also serves as an outlet for shorter, punchier, of-the-moment writing, which was a large part of what we originally did here.

Partly because of this and partly because it just happened, we’ve taken to writing rather longer pieces here in recent times. We used to restrict ourself to a paragraph or two at most, but, for better or worse, we tore up that rule quite some time ago.

Longer pieces take more time, but more importantly, they seem to burn up more energy. Maybe it’s that or maybe it’s the fact that we’ve covered so many different topics already over the course of those 3,000-and-odd posts that we sometimes feel a bit uninspired these days. That’s no good to anyone, so we can’t have that. Write because you feel you have to and people can easily tell.

So what are you asking?

We try and add an article pretty much every weekday, because of the comments thing. We think of the site as being a regular, brief escape from the drudgery of work. However, we can’t write longer articles every day. Quite simply, we don’t have that much to say.

It’s also possible that we’re entirely wrong about how people use the site. Our cycling site has a lot of people who subscribe by email, but it doesn’t get many comments. It occurs to us that King Cricket has several hundred email subscribers and many of them never actually visit the site itself. What do these people want or expect from the site? We’d love to hear from you. Then there are mobile users. Maybe you’re looking for something different again?

We could ask whether you’d prefer occasional, longer articles or regular, shorter articles, but we’d prefer to keep this more open-ended than that. Are you interested in our opinions or do you only care about the bad jokes? Do you think there’s another way of working? Should we spend more time on Twitter making bad jokes and produce only occasional, longer articles on the site when we’ve really got something to say? What is this site for? We don’t want to lose all our readers because we’re ploughing a pointless furrow.

The final word

Bear in mind that at the end of the day we’ll do whatever the bloody hell we want to do. We’ll listen to what you say and take it into account, but if you start trying to meet expectations, you end up like a tired old rock band, endlessly performing your greatest hits to ever-diminishing effect.


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. It’s largely a pleasant way of wasting time at work, as with the rest of the internet. As such, daily updates, occasional longer articles and no twitter (i.e. no change) would be lovely for me, as I don’t do twitter.

    Consistently better than any other sports blog I’ve found, and given that you have cricinfo exposure I can’t really work out why more people don’t find their way here and then stay, but there you go.

    I would actually be prepared to pay a small amount for access (£3/4 per year? I really do mean small), given how much I enjoy it, but difficult to see how that would work re: getting more people in – a very high limit for annual access of 150 visits, maybe?

    Interesting bit in Duncan Hamilton’s Brian Clough biography where he talks about originally giving up sportswriting because everything just seemed a bit stale. I’d be very sad if you went the same way.

    1. Thanks Nick and thanks in advance to anyone else who takes the time to leave an opinion. We’ll try and respond to everyone, if we can.

      We haven’t really got the clout for a paywall. The way the web works at the minute, the mere act of paying would be enough of a barrier to keep readers away, even if the sums involved weren’t themselves offputting. However, producing some eBooks as paid ‘premium’ content might be something we look into in the future. This would be extra though. Most likely the site itself will always be free.

      As for the feeling of staleness, we’re not remotely thinking of jacking it all in. If anything, we’re actively trying to combat that eventuality.

    2. I read every now and then, catching up on a few posts at a time. I read because it’s funny, irreverent and intelligent. I don’t read real sports journalism, but I do read this habitually. I and my friends share articles through Facebook or twitter; we and others enjoy them that way. It’s all very lovely. I never comment.

  2. When I started to read this post I got worried you were about to announce your retirement. Please don’t. This is probably my favourite website on the internet.

    I like the sense of community, the intelligent back-and-forth between commenters and the fact that you don’t get the spiteful, hate-filled bile that seems to populate the rest of the web.

    Personally I think you should stick to the more whimsical side of things. Lord knows there are enough journalists out there writing about what they think is “real” cricket news.

    Also, perhaps you could have more contributed posts by readers, many of whom I’m sure are aspiring writers.

    But please don’t stop.

    1. We mentioned having a rule at the outset where we tried to limit ourself to one or two paragraphs per post. Another guideline we worked to at that time was: “No-one cares what you think” – which was aimed at ourself and was another way of keeping our writing in check. It was a response to what you say about there being enough journalists out there.

      That stance got eroded once we started writing for what was then The Wisden Cricketer and subsequently Cricinfo. We suddenly had a slightly higher profile and naturally started presenting our view on certain things we felt strongly about. Sometimes, when you feel strongly, people respond. Maybe that should be a new rule – we shouldn’t tackle something unless we really give a shit.

      As for the guest contributions, our worry is that it would dilute the site. This isn’t meant to be criticism of what anyone else might produce. It’s an acknowledgement that we started the site and have written pretty much all of it, so that is really what it is. We have seen other sites struggle after enlisting other people.

      Also – and we appreciate the irony of writing this at the end of an overlong comment on an overlong article – but EVERYONE writes too much. The editing work necessitated by guest writers would be greater than writing more ourself.

    2. The theory “no-one cares what you think” is a good one for life in general. Only bettered by “no-one cares how you feel”.

    3. What Sam said. The insights. The jokes. The pet photos. The hover captions. Lord Megachief of Gold. And the best comments and commentary banter of any of the cricket blogs I’ve seen. All of it. Don’t go, I’d miss you. And I’d miss the usual crew providing comments.

    4. Everyone knows we’re not going, right? We were genuinely just trying to find the best way of working.

  3. Definitely don’t stop.

    I’ve been reading since 2006 and still waste a lot of time reading your posts. There is quite a lot of badly-thought-out opinion about cricket available (eg the comments section of cricinfo articles), the ‘USP’ of this site is mainly the sense of humour. Plus Rob Key pictures, obviously.

    On the topic of ‘longer and infrequent’ vs ‘short and frequent’, I would say both – ie regular short updates, with the odd longer (dare I say ‘more thought-out’?) post. Ultimately, if you post once a day or once a week I don’t mind, as long as it’s at relatively predictable times/on regular days/etc.

    I agree with Sam that guest posts would be good, especially if the alternative is no posts at all. Back in the ‘glory days’ of Google Reader/etc, there was a lot of ‘cross-polination’ (people writing on each other’s blogs), which I liked.

    Also, I’d just like to add: THANKS. I know from experience that writing an ‘amateur’ blog is a big consumer of time and other resources, and even occasionally means you have to go home early from the pub. I genuinely appreciate the effort you’ve put in, and the volume of comments that the site gets makes me think that plenty of others do as well.

    1. The steady flow of short pieces with the occasional longer one is probably the way things have been going, but we’re not sure we’ve really got it right. If we think about it, we’re probably doing too much stuff that’s somewhere in between. Perhaps we should reimpose our rules from the early days for the short posts and try and be a bit clearer in our own head about the divide between those and the longer articles.

      This is all very helpful, by the way, so thanks for that and for the compliment too.

  4. KC, there is also a category of readers who read but never comment till you vaguely threaten closure. I read for the wit, insight (sometimes) and the banter in comments.

    On shorter vs longer and frequency, I would go for shorter more often and a longer piece only when something worthy of that kind of attention and energy happens. The comments will take care of content for the shorter posts anyway.

    1. Yes, we’re well aware that there’s a silent majority and that’s the main reason why we’ve explicitly requested feedback. Those who comment and email skew our perspective simply because it’s that much easier to appreciate that they’re real people. No offence, but web stats are a bit ethereal in that regard.

      Similar thoughts to the ones we’ve given in response to A P Webster there too, which is good. Maybe we should just stop reading now and pretend that there’s a consensus.

  5. Its one the best websites around. I like your writing, both here and on cricinfo. And obviously the comments. Ged, Bert, sam, they are all awesome.

    1. Thanks very much and we’re vicariously accepting the praise for the comments as well, as per the article.

  6. Ps – trust you to publish this post on the day the greatest cricketer of his generation announces his retirement.

    And before you all pipe up with the jokes, I believe Darren Stevens is in fact going give it one more season.

    1. That’s bloody annoying. Then again, everyone can busy themselves with the proper career reviews before ours appears.

  7. Shorter, short, short, pictures of cats, long – that kind-of rhythm.

    I check the site every day at around lunchtime and when I get bored through the day – for stupid humour, top writing, good comments and the odd bit of laser-like observation.

    I think you could use guest bloggers when you fancy a break or go on holiday, that’s all. Cut yourself some slack. If you have the energy, don’t use them.

    Twitter length posts are good – I miss them. Twitter does a different job. Twitter feeds fill up and the conversation disappears. A twitter length post on KC can kick off a lengthy discussion ending in a battle of 80s-culture references. Twitter doesn’t do that so well.

    Oh yes: I massively second APW’s THANKS. It’d be a worse The Internet if you gave it up.

    PS Go responsive: so people can read on mobile. And do an app. Charge for that. You can do cheap off-the-shelve ones that use RSS feeds. That’s what the Daily Mash do. There is a cost, but might be worth it…

    1. Do people not read on mobile anyway? What’s the benefit of using an app?

      Another vote for a similar sort of posting rhythm. But what sort of guest posting do you mean? We currently have reader submissions for picture submissions and match reports. Do you want serious pieces about Kevin Pietersen’s backlift or what?

    2. Apps are nicer to read content on as they’re bespoke, not repurposed from a browser. And you can charge for them.

      Up to the writer. The point is to give you a break – you don’t even edit them(!) – they write what they want.

      If I was writing on KC, I’d know what readers expected and it wouldn’t be 3000 words on why Sachin was great and how cricket’s like a religion in India. Let the writer sink or swim.

    3. Okay, we might add ‘app’ to the list of technical things we intend to do but will probably never get round to doing because we dread the fiddlesome frustration.

      People think they know what’s wanted, but it’s easy for things to get away from you. It happens to us near-daily and no-one knows ‘the rules’ better than we do. Honestly, we would have to edit things. Editors have a place in this world, D Charlton – you have to accept that.

    4. Yes, people read on the mobile, I do it all the time. However, it is kind of fun to have to scroll down in anticipation of a comment from Bert, Ged or Sam, so I would stick to this non-mobile site than have a clean app. Sort of mirrors the old world charm of test cricket anyway.

    5. Another no to an app here. It will take away from the amateur vibe of the blog.

      On the other hand commenting from the mobile is a royal pain. Why not meet halfway and design a mobile website?

    6. It’s almost as if you think we have the wherewithal to achieve either.

      Incidentlaly, we’re pretty sure the amateur vibe will take care of itself, no matter what we do.

  8. As part of the (mostly) silent majority, I hope that you don’t bother writing anymore words and just post pictures of cats.

  9. I’ll take any and all of it, and have been for a long while now. Your writing is witty and your topics are fun.

    The longer posts are good, it’s nice to have a top down view from someone who isn’t immersed in the daily grind of writing about proper cricket all the time. They’re a nice treat, so I don’t mind the infrequenct. But it’s the whimsy that I like the most. Sacrificing witty, shorter posts in favour of more of the longer, discursive posts would be a shame.

    In writing this, Orwell’s Moon Under Water came to mind. He writes:

    “If you are asked why you favour a particular public-house, it would seem natural to put the beer first, but the thing that most appeals to me about the Moon Under Water is what people call its “atmosphere.””

    That’s you, that is.

    1. Thanks. And we get what you mean about ‘atmosphere’. See also the reply we’re about to write to Bert.

  10. Check it everyday so don’t subscribe to the email. Funniest blog I’ve seen on any subject, just perfect that it is cricket. It could do with more coverage of stuff happening domestically in other countries (oustide the UK), but understand why that might be too much of a bother. You could use guest bloggers for that, but you would need to find the right sort, who would keep up the high standards.

    Thanks and Cheers KC!

    1. We worry that too much domestic coverage might be a bit alienating for a lot of readers, plus there’s proper websites for news. Then again, maybe we could try and summarise. That might be something we could sort of do.

    2. Not really the news, more like short opinion pieces on significant/funny stuff. But it’s great as it is so just keep it going.

  11. ‘cos it’s funny, like, but then you also can tell that you and all the other commenters really love cricket. Plus, the comments don’t make me want to gouge my eyes out like Cricinfo’s do.

    1. Ta. We’ll take the advice here as being: “Pretty much just carry on roughly as you have been doing.”

  12. I agree with what everyone else said, especially the bit about fearing the worst when I started reading. I visit because you put cricket into its proper setting. By which I mean this.

    When I go to a cricket match, I go with my pals. We watch cricket, and we discuss cricket, and cricket trivia, and cricket politics, and that bloke walking past, did you see him, and the pointlessness of the roof on the new stand at Trent Bridge which doesn’t cover anybody, and how to improve the marketing of Chiquitos restaurants (serve the food in upturned sombreros, that was my suggestion). In other words, we talk rubbish. I often feel sorry for the people sitting nearby who have to put up with the inanity of it all, but two or three pints makes me feel better about it.

    This website replicates that perfectly. Some of the funniest things I have ever read are on here. There is always that sense of sitting at the match, mid-afternoon, slightly pissed, talking drivel with friends. Sometimes you laugh, sometimes they laugh, sometimes they just stare at you and cough gently before changing the subject. It’s hard to explain, but the cricket is central to this, without being dominant. That’s what makes this website different from Twitter. The article sets the scene; everything else hangs from it, even if the link seems occasionally tenuous. It doesn’t have to be long, or insightful, or even right. But it does have to be there. The cats know this. They’re not merely indifferent – they’re indifferent TO CRICKET, which is not the same.

    As for the nature of the articles, short is good. Long is also good. And medium-sized, that’s good too. But short is good. And about the cricket. But not necessarily ABOUT the cricket. I’m sure that makes perfect sense to you.

    There is a style about this website that is unique. I remain in awe, even after all these (four) years. Huge thanks for it.

    1. Cricket is the glue. The great thing about the sport is that if someone’s properly interested in it, there’s a good chance they’re worth talking to about other stuff as well.

      “About the cricket, but not necessarily ABOUT the cricket,” is a very accurate summary of the philosophy of the site.

      It is for people who are interested in stuff with cricket being the thing they happen to have in common.

      That sounds kind of meaningless, but the world is full of people who aren’t interested in stuff.

  13. This is the first time I’ve posted but I read your articles every time they’re posted.

    I enjoy the combination of humour and news updates (I’m living in China at the minute and it’s difficult to catch all the cricketing/human rights news).

    I find that I agree with most of the comments you make particularly in contrast to reading the regular media which are (understandably) out to make money and hence reactionary views are more prominent.

    I don’t read the articles when I’m at work but this is the first 5 sites I check when I get home.

    I really enjoy the long articles but if I had to choose between regular short ones or less regular long ones then I’d be picking the shorter ones.

    I like the balance that you have at the minute – I think it works well.

    I’m not sure if there is any other useful feedback that I can give you but shout up if I’ve missed anything!


    1. Pretty much another vote for short posts doing the legwork, garnished with the occasional longer piece when warranted.

  14. without bothering to go through the whole of the already-posted comments, i have to say i very much enjoy both the longer and the shorter pieces. the usual folks who comment are always good for a laugh as well. i don’t often comment, but that’s mostly because i’m a silly yank with nowt to say
    this, along with A Cricketing View, and The Old Batsmen are my favorite reads on the internet (and that includes various things about our yank sports).

    maybe one long one and a couple shorter ones during the week? dunno. do what you want. as long as what you want isn’t to stop writing.

    1. Thanks for the compliments, Robb. We were expecting a bit more conflict about the types of posts we should be writing. Maybe it’s because the email hasn’t gone out yet. Maybe the email folk will say the exact opposite.

  15. O king you were the first cricket website I ever read and you’re still the best. I usually have you (fnarr)after lunch except when you’re too bone idle to post, then I just enter a random word in the search box and read whatever comes up – it’s always a goodie. Plus the comments are a joy (Dame Mel, Sarah from Canterbury and I are all devoted Bertettes). As long as you keep posting I’m happy xxx

    1. Think that should read: “As long as you keep posting and Bert keeps commenting, I’m happy.”

      Thank you for that. We’ll try and ensure you have something to ‘have’ after lunch each day.

  16. What’s there not to like about this site? Something to look forward to everyday over the morning cup of coffee, back and forth in the comments section that lead to nowhere but are immensely enjoyable, Ged telling us about food and places we have never had and been to. It’s top notch, everything.

    I realize you’re not really looking for validation, but for comments to gauge reader interest/expectations. I am sorry I’ve nothing constructive to offer in that regard because whatever we have here currently works perfectly for me. Don’t change a thing.

    1. Well, that too is feedback and therefore appreciated. If no-one ever professed satisfaction with the status quo, the world would be in a permanent state of revolution.

      [Resists making Status Quo joke]

    2. Maybe I am too thick to get the joke, but the world *is* in a permanent state of revolution.

  17. This site presents a great view on cricket. The way it is presented is up to KC, long, short, intermediate stories, write it, it will be read. But please on a regular basis, I need my fix

    1. We’ll take ‘regular’ as a vote for a steady supply of shorter pieces rather than ‘occasional and long’.

  18. well. i like the irreverent tone and the traditional self deprecating humour. particularly enjoy the match reports. never thought to comment at the end (this is my first post) as it comes across as a bit “in with the in-crowd”. personally i like the short regular posts. if i want depth i’ll read mike atherton or gideon haigh.

    1. Everyone should feel free to comment. There is no in-crowd. It’s just a big, sprawling family where some happen to be gobbier than others.

      We’d totally forgotten that article. For some reason we have a really, really bad memory for things we’ve written.

  19. This is my favorite cricket blog. It’s irreverent without being over-the-top, self-deprecating without being self-hating, knowledgeable without being dry. That’s the exact mix I like from a writer or from a fellow fan, and it’s the mix I’d like to aspire to.

    Plus I laugh.

    1. Thanks very much. We’ll take that as another vote for the status quo.

      [Resists joke a second time. Resolve weakens slightly.]

  20. In a similar vein to the other comments this is unquestionably my favourite sports blogs on net (and I read a lot of them). I genuinely look forward to reading every day, though normally I get it on email. Also I have a cricket fanatic Australian client who I enjoy sending your articles to, though annoyingly he has now signed up to read them before I can bait him with your particular insight that day.

    I vote for the status quo, though my only comment would be to give KP more abuse because he’s a complete dick.

    p.s. I also read the cycle blog because my boss is a nazi cyclist and I am able to fob off your opinions/knowledge as my own giving me some street cred with him so keep that up to.

    1. Double points for Ben for reading both sites. Wait, what are we doing here?

      Oh yeah, another vote for the status quo.

      [Iron will considerably weakening.]

  21. I like what you write, at every length. Regardless of length, what I really like is your ability to convey a measured but insightful idea with humor and how you cut through the charade of media managed, controversy-driven reporting. With humor.

    Anyways, if you keep doing what you’re doing, I’ll be happy. And if you do something completely different, while still being insightful and humorous, I’ll be happy too.

    As far as consumption goes, I read everything you write (I skip the match reports and some county stuff). I don’t need you on Twitter, what I’ve realized is if you’re pithy all the time on Twitter, you have less drive to be pithy on the blog. All the good material is used up.

    I’ve rarely, if ever, commented on the blog. I usually tweet at you and hope you’re listening.

    Finally (and you already know this): please, please stay away from paywalls, apps, and any paraphernalia that get between the reader and your words. A site your size needs more visitors, and if money is a nice-to-have, then you’ll just have to ask your loyal readers to chip in for small baubles (shirts, ebooks, commemorative cat photographs).

    1. Thanks and an intriguing vote for ‘less Twitter’ from someone who uses the site. Interesting.

    2. Just to clarify: when I said “if you’re pithy all the time on Twitter” I really meant me. That is, I’ve noticed that when I spend a lot of time being pithy on Twitter, I have less drive to write something humorous on the blog because I’ve used up the good stuff. On the other hand, I would have preferred to have it on the blog because the good joke and good ideas can live longer there.

  22. As a North American, I don’t have much in the way of ingrained cultural understanding of cricket. So when I discovered that I really, really like it (sometime around summer 2012), I decided the best way to go about being a non-imbecile was to find non-imbecilic writers and read the things they wrote. Cricinfo helped with that. Your pieces there stuck out because not only were they well-written, they had this general quality of not giving too much of a shit that I tend to appreciate. Too many people who write about sports take it way too seriously, I find. I like this place because the comments are good and the posts are concise. When an opinion is taken, it’s not supposed to be the end-all be-all of opinions, it’s generally something like “Graham Onions seems to be very good but apparently the England selectors disagree”.

    That’s not to say I don’t like the longer posts. I generally find that I like reading anything you write and there’s never something so long that I think “oh no, can’t be bothered to read that now” and then never come back to it.

    Basically, the site is good and more sites should be like it. Twitter is fine but I never use it unless there’s something going on that I want to talk with people about, or I’m excruciatingly bored.

    I don’t know where I’m going with this, I’ve been sitting here for at least two hours with this post open and I keep coming back to it with something else to say and then going to another tab to check something else. I guess the main point I’m trying to make is I like this site more than I can imagine liking any other site and whatever gets written I’ll read. And all the comments. I think I come here something like ten times a day, because I’m a journalism student and my days are basically sitting around waiting for phone calls and occasionally typing a few words for a thing, which leaves lots of time for checking the same six websites.

    I wouldn’t mind guest posts on subjects that weren’t match reports, I guess. I like the match reports but I’d also like to read things Sam/Ged/Bert/etc. have to say about actual cricket and not just lists of foods and wines they ate at the cricket. Also match reports make me jealous of people who live in places where cricket happens.

    I think I have exhausted my repertoire of words at this point. If you read this far, congratulations, I’ll send you a trophy when I’m rich and famous.

    1. Of course we read to the end. We read all the comments – almost 30,000 of them on this site alone.

      A vote for ‘roughly do what you’re doing, but maybe a guest post or two’.

  23. I’m a bit worried all this praise is going to KC’s head.

    Maybe we should bring him down a peg or two with some well-aimed criticisms.


    1. Actually this is true. We weren’t exactly appealing for praise. Appealing for praise from your own readership would be a cowardly way of attempting to build self-confidence. Negatives are entirely welcome and are highly likely to help us work things out.

  24. The number of comments on this post are beginning to challenge the West Indies Cricketer name generation post.

  25. If you’re beginning to feel a little uninspired, or burnt out, perhaps sticking a little more rigidly to your old paragraph restriction would be wise. Then the detailed articles can be a pleasent treat (and with a bit of luck, the more you write short pieces, the more you’ll feel the urge to write long ones). I think that’s what you’ve said yourself, anyway.

    As for why…it’s nice to read about cricket from someone who actually cares about it, but doesn’t pretend it’s terribly important. Both of which cricinfo/others often seem to miss.

    1. If we have concluded anything today, it’s that we should be wary of falling between two stools. The truth is, we don’t always have a point to make, but we do always have something stupid to say.

  26. It’s a nice change from oh-so-serious articles that are either way too stat-heavy even for a former scorer, trying to claim the good old days were better, or paragraph after paragraph of waffle written by someone clearly paid by the word.

    1. Thanks.

      People should be paid according to how brutally they can edit something in our book.

  27. What Sam said makes it. Out of all the sports blogs out there this is the only one that feels more like a forum. I’m a forumer at heart, I’ve grown up with it. Discussion of the results, pitches, players, media and barely tangental stories are as much a part of cricket for me as the scores.

    KC is a forum really. It’s got its own community of old boys and newbies, its own inside jokes and its own pet hates; and I agree with a minority of what I read. It’s just that the trolling is minimal and every thread happens to be started by the same person.

    This isn’t to diminish what the actual posts contain. I’ve been commended elsewhere for basically paraphrasing your points. There is a real joy here behind the very English semi-serious exasperation. It’s really not common enough for someone to be into cricket this much while also being able to recognise how ridiculous it is. And how those two things don’t contradict each other.

    And when I say I’ve grown up with it, incidentally, I mean it. I started reading KC when I was 17 and knew nothing about cricket. Now I’m 22 and know nothing about cricket. A ha.

    My dad told me about when he used to sneak downstairs and nick his dad’s radio just to spend hours locked in his room listening to Bailey and Arlott on TMS. One day when I’m old and jibbering I’ll be telling all the kids about how I was so mad about cricket I would stay up all night drawing Venn diagrams in MS Paint.

    I remember last winter when I was feeling like I needed cheering up a bit, and I spent some time getting nostalgic about the 2010-11 Ashes. I have the highlights of that series so I could have just watched them all back again, but instead I decided to go and read every single KC post from those two months. It felt more like reliving the experience that I had.

    1. I’ve realised that in that rambling mess there wasn’t really anything approaching a constructive opinion.

      I guess what I’m saying that this is one of a few sites that I’ll struggle to look at objectively by this point.

      So I’ll keep reading whatever happens. I’ll miss it when it’s gone.

    2. Much of that is actually quite moving. You have to appreciate that we never really see anyone reading anything, so as far as we’re concerned it might well not happen.

  28. King Cricket, BBC News, The Guardian, Digg. That’s the tabs that get opened on my browser every lunchtime in that order. This is the first time I’ve ever bothered to comment on here as I don’t know nearly enough about cricket or Rob Key to be as funny and interesting as other comments on here, but I just wanted to add my voice to the “no changes ever” brigade.

    I’m also a regular reader of your Tourdefranceontv blog (ungooglable by the way – maybe why you don’t get so many comments as people can’t find the website again?), and I find this to be as interesting and insightful as KC.

    If you want to draw more people in to comment, you need a grass routes campaign to appeal to a wider audience. What about coming up with some cartoon characters like Willow and Stumpy to get the kids involved? Alternatively you could keep everything just as it is as this is what your subjects want.

    Keep up the good work.

    1. We’ll settle for those bedfellows, particularly being as they’re roughly the same as the ones we used to open up at lunchtime when we started the site.

      Sometimes days like today bring a new raft of commenters. We’re not sure why. Comments really kicked up a notch the day we moved to this domain, for example. Perhaps people find their name’s saved in the comments field and it’s just that little bit easier.

  29. I think I started reading the site when I was hooked in by your
    County Championship updates the last time Notts won the title. As such, I might be the only person who comments saying ‘more county cricket coverage.’ I stuck around though, mainly because I think you treat the sport with the seriousness it deserves (not a whole load), and in the hope that the ‘[Cricketer’s name]’s Back’ joke would come around again.

    So I’m here for county cricket and ankylosing spondylitis, apparently.

    I also subscribed to Weak Holidays for a bit – where’d that go?

    1. That first link. THAT was the one. If I could ask for one thing, it would be more comparisons between iconic sporting duels, and damp first-class cricket deciders.

  30. Pretty much another vote for “keep doing what you’re doing”. I check the site every morning from N.Z and die a little inside if there are no new posts. If there was a “make a donation” type function on the site somewhere i’d be happy to chuck in a few N.Z peso’s from time-to-time as my way of thanking you for distracting me from the thrilling life of a middle-aged accountant. Also i’m sure every cricket fan would love more discussion of the vitally important N.Z v Bangladesh series that’s just kicked off.

    1. Thanks. At present it’s looking like it’s going to be a slightly refined version of what we’ve been doing. Hopefully that will be okay – particularly as the new approach should see posts appear more reliably.

      We’re actually quite interested in Bangladesh v New Zealand, but unfortunately we’ve got to cover some really big news tomorrow.

      REALLY BIG. No-one, but no-one, is going to be at all disappointed by what appears.

    2. Actually everyone should be interested in NZ v Bangladesh; been a couple of good days so far; great work by our top order, mini-collapse by the middle, then an epic stand by the last pair. A couple of quick wickets to start their innings, then a great counter-attack to rebuild. Pretty much all you could ask for in a test so far. But i’ll wait until i see the BIG NEWS before i pass judgement on your editorial priorities.

    3. And a century from Williamson to add to the ‘he’s fantastic’ pile. Unfortunately there’s also the ‘Bangladesh don’t count’ rule to add to the ‘he’s not all that fantastic really’ pile.

    4. Unfortunately you’re forgetting the “NZ don’t really count either” rule, so we’re offically removing the stats stigma from Bangladesh/Zimbabwe tests. And remember, Williamson also has the “surprising good bowler as well (just don’t look at his action too closely), so actually he is pretty fantastic” rule. And keep an eye on Corey Anderson; massive talent, like a young Flintoff, (without the alcoholism & ego).

    5. Also another reader from NZ. This is the first place I go each morning after arriving at work. It always puts me in a positive frame of mind before tackling the horrors of the 8 hours of work I face. At the moment I am procrastinating about an assignment that is due so I am going to read every comment (170 odd at the minute) made before starting.

      I have been lurking around here for a while. The first cricket blog I started reading was Cricket with Balls and I found you from there. Sometimes I appear from behind the sofa very occasionally to comment. I’m always a bit scared that my poor grammar, punctuation and spelling may provoke some negative comments which would upset me and I don’t want to be discarded.

      This is probably my favourite website, the community atmosphere is something that brings me back – it is not just one voice, every commentator has something fresh, insightful and witty to say. There is also none of the bile present on other sites.

      The sense of whimsy, fun, joy, sense of humour, occasional lurches to serious topics treated in a measured way, the opinions/jokes on here that I can steal are things I most appreciate. There are probably many others that I have forgotten but many of the other comments hopefully cover them off.

      Most of all thank you (KC and all the commenters) for those few minutes of joy that brighten my day and make it that bit more bearable.

      I am in favour of the Status Quo but I am not scared of change. But as long as there is an update every couple of days I am happy, especially if there is a new post ready at 7.30am Monday to Friday (NZ time). But do what you need to do – I will keep on reading as long as you keep on writing.

    6. It was always intended to be a site for people avoiding work, so that’s pleasing to read, lbking.

      If there is a downside to pedantry (we’re quite proud of that opening to a sentence) it’s that would-be commenters do sometimes feel reluctant to say stuff. We’d really like it if people would reserve their corrections and nit-picking for what we’ve written and leave the other commenters be.

  31. Shit. This is all a bit serious. I might have to wait a day or 2 before I give a proper reply.

    But in brief. Stop worrying (if that’s what you’re doing) about it. You won’t please all of the people all of the time. I, for example, rarely read any of your stuff on the county championship. Why? Because I don’t care about the county championship. Doesn’t stop me checking it pretty much daily though as the majority of stuff you write I enjoy/agree with.

    I do care about cricketers riding large rodents though.

    Not being able to use any photo you like is a pity.

    1. We’re not worried as such. We just want to make sure we’re roughly on the right lines. We’d hate everyone to ebb away thinking the site wasn’t as good as it once was or summat like that.

  32. Yeah, basically just keep it up. Love the page, love the regular commenters, and write whatever you feel like, long or short. I always read it, even though my posting is sporadic. More at times when there is a test series, or when Rob Key is mentioned.

    I’ll have nowt to do with twitter though, so you can be as witty and wonderful as you like there but it will elude me. So don’t bother.

    It has never occurred to me to read the page on my mobile. Not sure why. I just check the RSS thing on my laptop to see if there is a new post to read.

    1. Another vote for the status quo.

      No wonder they got to make Bula Quo with that sort of popularity.

      Knew we’d crumble eventually.

  33. I don’t usually write comments on this website (say what you will, but King/Blue/Brown’s career would’ve been short lived had you three written on an ipad). I struggle to think of a better cricket site that mashes irrelevance and actual cricket, without “trying” to be funny (Cricinfos Page 2 tends to really ram humour down our throats). Truth be told, it’s the mixture of reading the comments following the post and the actual itself. It’s in the vein of TMS – irrelevant, not trying to be funny, and reflects what the true cricket aficionado thinks. Wouldn’t change a thing. I actually have read this web page for four years too. So the best of luck to you three chaps. PS- please don’t write the movie blog again!

  34. I meant irreverence where I said irrelevance! The horror, the horror, the horror. Actually come to think of it I can’t remember where I meant irrelevance and where I meant irreverence. Possibly both. There you go Blue & Brown, your target audience spells at an eight grade level.

  35. I come here most days, when I miss a couple I catch up on your previous work. Occasionally I’ll scan the comments, but rarely ever comment myself. I enjoy your obscure outlook on the cricket and mildly cricket related world. From ankylosing spondylosis, pictures of Cats or a passionate plea on the relevance of Test matches. The variety, the ambiguity of your blog is thoroughly entraining. I’ll continue to while away a few minutes every day, please keep writing.
    Will Laurence ever return?

    1. Thanks. It’s kind of good to know that variety’s a strength rather than being offputting. Suppose what keeps things interesting for us also keeps things interesting for readers.

  36. Coming from a non-playing cricket country, having barley a clue about how the game really works as i have never played it, this is the best writing i have found so far.

    It is quite simple, it is entertaining and attitudley well written. often when i read your post i get the feeling that this blog is truly free in what it wants to say, there is no corset.
    and in addition, the comments are like the dot on the I, refreshing.

    just yesterday, i read the whole “matthew hayden”-section to understand what the hate is all about.

    so coming back to what you actually asked for, i prefer the longer posts. (and yes this is my first post too)

    1. Thanks Kurt and we think you’re the first person to express an actual preference for longer posts.

      Reading the entire Matthew Hayden section must have been harrowing.

  37. So, I read this each day in the United States and it makes the day get off to an OK start (email via RSS feed). I tend to read it as soon as I get into the office and off my bike, on which I have commuted and communed with myself about whatever needs doing that day. I will look at Cycling on TV, but for some reason that seems less in need of comment. Perhaps cricket is a social sport and cycling a solitary one.

    It’s been a long time since I really paid attention to English cricket beyond the Tests, but one thing this site always reminds me of is how cricket lends itself to discovery through digression and to, well, to digression in general while always being about cricket. [Hint of a C.L.R. James quote there?]

    So, basically, I’m saying the site seems to be working perfectly as is. Sure, it seems to have changed somewhat in terms of lengths of posts, but not in a way that is anything other than organic, so I would suggest carrying on in whatever way strikes you as worthwhile that day.

    I fondly recall the idea of praising the exceptional with the “Holy Crap” moniker. Perhaps you might revisit and deploy your “complex rating system” (now sadly vanished)on a regular but not draining schedule [twice a month, I don’t know]. Along with conspicuously indifferent cats and match reports this might help lessen your burden while leaving the blog very much yours, as it needs to be.

    You are bang to rights about the need for editors in general, by the way.

    There were pterodactyls once, too, I recall. And Rob Key.

    1. That’s a good point about regular but non-timely features. Maybe not necessarily Holy Crap! which tended towards being a bit statistical, but something we could write in advance would be good. Cheers.

  38. i like the way you write, you frequently make me laugh (as do many of the regulars) – and i do generally find the site to be informative and/or thought-provoking on a subject of interest to me.

    like you say, when it comes down to it you will please yourself anyway – and this has to be the sensible way to proceed. (i was going to back this up with references to my own blog, which has readers, but seldom attracts comments these days… but since i have been neglecting it of late, it seems rather irrelevant to talk up any value i derive from maintaining it – !) do please keep going, and write whatever the hell you feel like… as for twitter, i’m not on it and never likely to be – so i will only encounter you here or at cricinfo…

    1. Yes, we’ll do what we want, but this has been really helpful in working out what we want. Nobody wants to be shouting into a void, so it’s encouraging to know that people give a toss about what you do. Which they seem to.

  39. Since many comments here revolve around the issue of this website getting/not getting comments, let me add my two cents about that issue. Like many have said before, the reason I like this site is because it is unique. I believe (or would like to believe) that if I met KC in person, he would not be much different from the image I get from this site. This is different from most cricinfo articles that you see – either an entire piece is written with the sole intention of being funny, or it is just another article praising Sachin/Rahul/Ponting/*fill in your guy*. I don’t want to trivialize the issue, but I imagine getting comments in and of itself should be straightforward – either pander to the public or write something outrageous that you really do not believe in. Such pieces have no soul. A gigantic thread of comments is not the gauge with which the efficacy of blogs like KC’s should be judged.

    1. Unlike people, not all comments are equal. The commenting we get here is genuinely the thing we value most highly about the site and indeed about our writing ‘career’ because as was mentioned in the article, we claim credit vicariously.

  40. bloody hell, when i first started writing that comment there were only six before me, and half of them were from you… then i broke off and didn’t get back to it until hours later. now there’s too many for me to struggle through :-S

    there’s a moral in there somewhere. (or possibly not)

  41. I come here for the writing. nowhere else can I have Harmison described as ‘the lolloping ganglatron’.

  42. every couple of days i have a look in here and it constantly amuses me and educates me in completley useless facts . Both long and short articles , pets being indifferent to cricket etc and even some very pertinent observations of cricket from time to time.
    Maybe you are having a King Cricket mid life crisis…either way about it dont stop . the main strength of this site is it gets constantly updated with quality posts and has some excellent comments….

    1. We’re always having some form of midlife crisis. Every day since we were about eight.

  43. A few years ago i went thru a phase of reading quite a few cricket blogs. This is the only one i still read. Keep doing what you are doing. I don’t like change.

    1. A surprisingly rare vote for not changing due to distaste for/fear of change. We thought there might be more of that.

  44. What I like best about this site is that you don’t take yourself too seriously, thereby producing probably the best opinions and the best expressions of those opinions anywhere on the internet. Essentially, I come here for an unbiased and funny take on all things cricket.
    I like both the long posts, which tend to try and make more serious points, and the short posts, which tend to be funnier. And both contribute to the mix of gravitas and levity which this site is all about.
    The existence of something like that on the internet is, IMO, more important than having something to read every day, so my suggestion would be to write less often if you are struggling to find things to say. But don’t stop writing!!!

    1. Btw I haven’t visited the site in a while since there hasn’t been much international cricket going on, and I came here to see what you made of Tendulkar’s retirement. Your current existentialist crisis is way more disturbing news.

    2. We think that distinguishing better between short and long posts and keeping the word count of the former down should help us retain enthusiasm. That’s currently the plan. We’ll just have to see how it pans out.

      And shh. Don’t break ‘the big news’ ahead of schedule. We’re pretty sure we’re going to beat everyone to it.

  45. Yes, I know *now* you’re not going. It is the middle of the night here. Edwin is currently ignoring New Zealand v Bangladesh. So is Mimi, our greedy bimbo chihuahua. I hope you find that news heartening.

  46. I’m one of the email subscribers that rarely visit the site. I enjoy getting an email during the workday that I know is going to make me smile. Bizarrely, I’m not even that interested in cricket any more, but I still like the way you write about it.
    I prefer shorter articles, if I open an email at the desk and it’s too long, I’m more likely to decide to ‘come back to it later’ and then forget.
    I doubt I’m your typical subscriber, so don’t feel like you have to change anything for me :p Thanks for all the times you’ve made me chuckle and forget about the drudgery.

    1. There is no typical subscriber, but it’s interesting that you too prefer the shorter stuff. We thought the email people might ‘go long’.

    2. I’m with Ed, in terms of being an email subscriber who nowadays rarely has time to visit the site or look at comments. It’s taken me 2 weeks to get round to replying to the original post, but I always read the daily email.

      As far as I can recall, as a Somerset man it was an article on Ian Blackwell that brought me to KC many years ago. Surely, there can be no better reason.

      I’m content with everything as it is, and grateful that you still put the time and effort in to the site.

    3. In a way, it would be interesting to know how everyone first found the site. It’s easy to see where people arrive from on any given day, but where do the people who ultimately hang around first come from?

      Thanks Dave K. It’s quite nice to think articles aren’t dead the day after they were published so a late read is quite welcome.

  47. Another vote to echo most of what has been said about enjoying this website. I don’t usually comment but I also enjoy the ‘discussion’. You once wrote a very interesting piece about how following cricket is as important if not more important to people than actually watching it. Though I enjoy the latter when I can manage it I wholeheartedly agree with this, but would find that the experience of following cricket would lose some of its joy and pleasure if it did not include this website. Which goes to say that I like both your longer ‘opinion’ pieces and your humorous ones, though I am not sure which are funny. Thank-you KC

    1. Thanks. Another vote for a mix of lengths. We also get the vibe that people are more interested in ephemera and trivia than match coverage. We haven’t really discussed that much.

  48. Irreverent, synical, sarcastic but wrapped in a love for the sport. It’s your USP. Where else can cricket fans find anything approaching this?

    Keep informing, educating and amusing us while taking the proverbial.

    On mine, I like to think I contribute something to readers along lines of a model somehwere in my head (although what they get out of it is slightly different to that idea, it seems) but I’d never have the nerve to do what you do or even to try it.

    Keep it up.

    1. It never struck us that this required nerve. Hopefully we’ll never realise that or it might cripple us.

  49. I enjoy your humour and I think you are a good analyst and observer of cricket. I look forward to reading your stuff at work and it’s a nice bit of escapism and fun. I always read the email no matter how busy I am.
    I got hooked by your brilliant take down of Hayden which still makes me laugh today. What a prat. Just keep executing your skills haha

    1. Thanks Guy. Great to see new names in the comments, by the way. That’s another encouraging thing this little exercise has brought us.

  50. Cricket is a joyous, wonderful, nuanced sport. Frankly it’s bonkers and I love it. But to be honest I started reading earlier in the year because I got a bit tired of the self important cricket writing everywhere else and this blog was a breath of fresh air.

    I concur with something along the lines of short posts most days and then a once weekly “article” (which is close to what happens anyway).

    1. Yup. This is definitely the vibe we’re getting. Now that we know that, we can better police ourself and stop the short pieces stretching out too much.

  51. I read this site for years before eventually having the gumption to leave a comment. Yesterday. Very last one before this post. True story.

    1. We really do hope that this post has led to a proliferation of gumption. No-one who regularly reads this site should feel they can’t comment.

  52. I’ve read this site for ages. I’ve only ever occasionally commented, and while the crowd that regularly comments here is, naturally, from the very top drawer, I would gladly continue to read it if comments were disabled (that’s not a suggestion, obviously).

    Why do I read it? Well:

    Bear in mind that at the end of the day we’ll do whatever the bloody hell we want to do.

    I read it because it’s written by someone who writes whatever the bloody hell they want to.

    I think your cycling site is brilliant for the same reason, and I’m not even a massive cycling fan. This article on Domenico Pozzovivo is a perfect example of why. I’d never heard of Pozzovivo when I read it, but that article makes me love him too, because it’s not about tribalism or godawful cliches, it’s about finding the fun in what is, after all, a completely pointless exercise. Same goes for this old article about Lasith Malinga’s bowling action. A nod to the tedious “debate” about whether he’s a chucker (yawn), then the right and proper glorification in his magnificent weirdness.

    It makes me enjoy cricket that much more, and that’s why I keep reading.


    p.s. and because there are sometimes transformers and cats and weird animals and Steve Harmison’s batting as explained with ghosts and sandwiches.

  53. I keep coming back in the hope that BTW Im baldy will return.

    He never does, he never does…

  54. I read because it’s a more enjoyable way of looking at the issues in cricket without some of the dry analysis of traditional print journalists. It’s also a good way to avoid trawling through cricinfo for something worthwhile and interesting to read.

  55. One of the highlights of my admittedly sad day is seeing the King Cricket email pop in to my inbox. I’m always a bit disappointed to see the shorter posts, to be honest, although they are nonetheless usually enjoyable. Longer is more, in my opinion, especially if I am in the mood to be distracted. Your writing (and the comments) make me laugh, but I also value the occasional insights in to cricket, amongst your other regular features. I have even plucked up the courage to add the occasional comment myself, even though I often feel (if I can use a soccer analogy) like a recently promoted Championship side facing off against Premiership stalwarts.

    Your cycling website is another good example of how you can very effectively mix whimsy and interest in a sport – I’ve learned more about cycling from you in the last 12 months than in the previous 20 years of occasional interest in cycling. I’ve even passed the link on to others interested in cycling – although I have never done so with this website – maybe I want to keep it to myself?

    Also, it’s almost three years since we heard from Laurence Elderbrook, surely some update is warranted?

    Keep up the good work and the Status Quo*.

    *On the subject of which, might I refer to a number of their aptly titled album releases over the years: Don’t Stop, Ain’t Complaining, The Party Ain’t Over Yet, Thirsty Work and Heavy Traffic. It’s a sign, I tell you!

    1. The Quo jokes are coming thick and fast now. Once the floodgates are open and all that.

      Thanks for that. Another vote for longer posts, but as has been mentioned above, longer articles probably mean fewer articles, which goes against one of your daily highlights being the arrival of the email. Hopefully you’ll be happy with the few – hopefully better quality – articles we continue to write.

  56. I’d echo the general praise and various votes for regular short updates with the occasional longy.

    I’m not particularly an internet fan and this is one of the few “blogs” (I think that’s what they’re called) that I read regularly, it’s a great site and a great reflection of the simultaneous greatness and inanity of sport.

    I get the email updates, read them there and then click through and go straight to the comments, which are always a great read too. Tend not to actually leave a comment because others here have a great deal more wit and insight than I can muster.

    If you’re after even more feedback; the cycling blog is great too. I do try to comment there, mainly because I like it and want to encourage it, but also because my cycling trivia is better than my cricket.

    If you’re lacking inspiration maybe you just need… more ties?

    1. A model subscriber. And thanks for commenting on the cycling site as well. As we keep saying, if nothing else it is encouraging to see some clear sign that people are reading. It can be a bit ethereal otherwise.

  57. Visit the site most days and still really enjoy it. Gave up commenting as I’m frankly useless at that type of thing. Would hate to see it change too much though. The match reports are ace. As are the pets. As are the photos. As are the posts – especially the “can’t be arsed” ones. Plus the crosswords. The crosswords are great. Top site. Keep it up.

    1. So the conclusion I think you can draw from all these 100 odd comments, KC, is that it’s mostly the crosswords that people come here for. Seems reasonable.

  58. I subscribe to the emails because I love cricket and everything about it. I love the match reports and the humour.. It is one of the few blogs that I always read as soon as it is updated. I am not someone who leaves comments on any blog really, unless I am really angry. In other words it’s a good thing for me not to comment.

    I enjoy your work a great deal.

  59. I get unreasonably excited when I see tweet from KC pointing me towards a new article. It could be because I know there will be a few paragraphs waiting for me that I can read quickly and will almost always make me laugh. Or maybe you just have a very nice avatar. Not sure.

  60. Personally I prefer a short burst every day to a once a week long juicy post, but it’s your blog and you should do what you bally well like!

    I subscribe to several cricket-related daily emails and yours shines like a beacon of whimsical light amongst the factual gloom of some of the others – please take it from a devoted fan (and part-time Bertette; Ceci was right about that) that it ain’t broke and you don’t need to fix anything. Do you still get enough match-reports-that-don’t-mention-the-actual-cricket so that you have a bank of stuff to post on days the muse leaves you? Do hope so, as everyone deserves the odd sofa day and with your other commitments I’d hate you to feel bogged down and uninspired.

    The commenters on King Cricket are a special bunch and should be cherished, and the fact that you provide the crackling bonfire around which they can light their sparklers of wit should give you a rosy glow of satisfaction *calls ambulance due to metaphor overdose*

    1. We’ve a few match reports queued, but to be honest, by the time we’ve finished editing and resizing images, it’s usually taken us longer than writing a post. Which doesn’t mean we don’t want more match reports, because we do. More, more.

  61. Another one of the (no-longer) silent majority. Have enjoyed reading your site for years, reading almost all your posts and occasionally the comments, which are also entertaining. I never comment here myself (except today obviously) as I already comment on one KCCC-related site that’s enough for me. I would also vote for the mixture of articles with both the short, generally funny articles and the occasional, longer, generally less funny ones. And more county cricket please, especially the lower reaches of Div 2.

    1. More county cricket, eh? We’ll try, but it’s really hard when there’s also a Test match on. Also, lower division two sides must earn the right to be reported on by becoming top of division one sides.

  62. In 2011, on a particularly slow day, a thought occurred of “why did Fidel Edwards bounce Jimmy so much in the 2009 West Indies test series?”.

    From this, the above question with somewhat fewer words was googled returning the below article, the only website to concern itself with such beautiful trivialities of cricket in terms of this article:

    After which, the Rob Key posts were the main draw.

    1. A Google referral. Fewer of those these days. Increasingly, it seems that Google hates us and while we’re moving towards not caring about that, it’s a bit sad to think you might never have found the site today.

    2. A reference to a New Zealand-Bangladesh match is quite timely. My hope for a reasonably competitive match went away in the pre-dawn hours, when Mushfiqur (my favourite international cricket captain who looks about 12) lost his wicket.

  63. Can I just say that:

    a) I had no real idea that anyone read this site apart from those who comment. Seeing the huge numbers commenting on this thread has made me go all shy.

    b) As I guess is logical, all the apparently-new-but-actually-they’ve-been-around-for-years commenters read just like all the my-god-doesn’t-he-have-any-work-to-do regulars – good points well made with plenty of wit, interested in but not obsessed by cricket, and with a leaning towards the obscure and the whimsical. It’s been great, please keep commenting. Your virginity has gone for ever, you can’t get it back, so you might as well start whoring yourself like the rest of us.

    c) I think I’m over my shyness phase now.

  64. Look, this whole comments thread is turning into a bit of a KC love in.
    Time to redress the balance with some comments aimed at KC’s cricinfo articles:
    “neither insightful nor humorous… ”

    “meh..not too funny. alan tyers is 10x better”

    “Thanks Andrew [sic], your article has finally dispelled the myth that cricket is the thinking mans pastime.”

  65. For starters, KC was the first cricket blog my sister and I discovered, and it’s only one of two that we still read ferociously. Why? Yeah, cause it’s funny, but it’s also surprisingly insightful. I’m not sure why it is surprising, but it is logic and sense (haha) hidden in layers of silliness. A bit like Douglas Adams.
    And sometimes Cricinfo is far too serious. And I’m an Aussie fan, but I read your Ashes articles just as much as Kimber’s.
    Twitter is transient. KC jokes last forever. ish.

    1. GAH HOW COULD I FORGET animals being indifferent to cricket – probably my favourite cats-on-the-internet-thingy.

  66. You have a top site KC. Please don’t change too much.

    I am irrationally disappointed if I log in after 3 days and there aren’t any new posts. So definitely don’t reduce the frequency of posts.

    I enjoy the cat and Rob Key pictures as much as the next man, but my favourite posts are about mediocre and/or obscure cricketers. I bet this site has the highest rate of Alan Mullaly mentions per million words than any other on the internet. So more of those please.

    I also like your occasional “manifesto” posts, though those are best served infrequently.

    More guest posts will be nice – your commenters have a rare blend of wit and civility and deserve a bigger canvas than the post-it sized appeals section.

    Please no twitter for actual content. It is great for “stream of consciousness” writing but is a rather inadequate medium to express the kind of ideas your readers value.

    All the best, and thanks for giving us the best cricket site there is.

  67. This was my first encounter [care of Ged, on MTWD] http://kingcricket.blogspot.co.uk/2007/02/nick-compton-model-cricketer.html the pictures are gone, but I knew then this was the site for me! The first and the best, and there’s still not anything else that matches it – you are part of cricketing life! I go to a match, I see animals being indifferent to cricket; I think of you.

    I have the email updates and don’t visit the site much in the season, and this season watching the champions didn’t leave much room for any other cricket in my life – I have a cricket quota; it was full. But now it is winter and I need you! And this is the joy of the website I can look back at what I’ve missed when I have time to kill. Please no Twitter – if you are not on that sort of phone NOW you have missed it, [I don’t have that sort of phone now, or at anytime]. You can’t go back and peruse. Twitter is great for passing on unsettling information; like that members of your team may or may not have their eyebrows waxed, when you do have time to sit down at your computer.

    The short post with top comment action is what it is all about. Short silly and yet hugely entertaining is a rare thing in this world. The odd longer piece, cos sometimes it just has to be said. The match reports. The audience participation works on this site and I love it. And you have left Mark Davies alone too – let’s keep it that way!

    1. Interesting that we tagged that post ‘modelling’. Not sure whether we thought there would be further additions.

      Thanks. We are on Twitter, by the way. But it’s a good point about it being transient.

  68. I agree! Not twitter! Twitter is the best way to NOT say what you mean! Even this comment would hit the 140 character limit on twitter and I would have to rewrite it and it would end up saying something enirely different! Perhaps it would even change to say I actually think Twitter is a great idea …

    Off Topic – I am aware you can split posts on twitter but I don’t think the official Android app supports that (or not in an obvious way). In this day of “there is an app for that” where is the app that fixes apps with rubbish user interfaces?

    1. As was mentioned above, we do use Twitter, but it will never be ‘the thing’. It is more for idle chat.

  69. No changes please, your majesty!
    Twitter? Please,no.
    Email? Whatever. As you please.
    Mobile content/apps? Huh?
    Short vs. Long pieces? Either/Or. But daily posts please.
    Match reports are fine. Especially if you add reports of Gully (street) cricket.

    Love the site as is. Many thanks King.

    1. Thanks, fromthegully. Daily posts will tend to mean shorter ones which seems to be most people’s preference. There is already Twitter, but those who hate it seem oblivious to that, so no harm done we suppose.

      As for reports of gully/street/backyard cricket – we specifically requested these when we launched the match reports. We’d love more of them.

  70. I think everything I like about this site has been covered already really, but I really like the perspective you have on the Greatest Game, done with a lightness of touch that eludes too many other cricket writers. You manage to provide useful insight combined with an appreciation of the absurd. It’s also about the only site I visit where the comments aren’t a ghastly cesspit of of idiocy.

    1. Thanks. And indeed thanks to everyone who commented or emailed. Even if you were saying the same as someone else, it was really helpful beause that other person’s view could have been unique for all we knew. We feel like we’ve got a much better idea what we should be doing now and we’re also quite touched by much of what’s been said.

  71. My two pennyworth, status quo please. I quite like the occasional diversion into things like that chap who lets out bestial roars (forgive me I’ve forgotten his name.. Lawrence?)

    Its the humour and sideways yet insightful way of looking at things you have that keeps me coming back. I know when I used to write my blog how difficult it is sometimes to find time so thanks and please keep it up!

    As a Kent man I’m all for more Rob Key, cats, and not too many other guest posts. I don’t often read the match reports for example (despite contributing myself).

    Cheers KC

  72. I’ve followed the site for a few years now. Before Google Reader shut down I only ever read it through there and so didn’t tend to come to the site and get involved in the comments. Now that’s gone I’m here a bit more often, and occasionally lurk and enjoy the banter.

    I would be happy if nothing changed, but if you’re looking to get a bigger audience you might be interested in this:


    1. It’s a very bad idea to have all your work hosted on someone else’s site (in this case, Google’s). We do wonder whether we should do something more with Google Plus, but considering the above, it would amount to little more than publishing links, which doesn’t seem to offer much of value in itself. We also question how much people really use Google Plus. Plenty of people have a profile, but it all seems pretty dead from what we’ve seen.

  73. I’m a bit slow to this (on major catch up after a big photography job) but have read it entirely from top to bottom and wish to echo how much I love reading this site – for your posts, KC, and for all the comments, too (especially Bert’s ❤).

    I am also happy for you to keep doing exactly what you are doing. The only posts I don’t enjoy (I feel rather disloyal saying I don’t like something) are the Laurence Elderbrook ones (sorry!). My favourite (for a reason I can’t quite pinpoint…) are those about the delicious Pink Bobby. Oh and Ged’s match reports. Marvellous stuff.

  74. Incidentally, we bet there’s a few people who’ve read all 180-odd comments and in a way that’s the biggest compliment of all.

  75. Hello there KC, and hello everyone who is posting here for the first time. And, I suppose I should say, hello to everyone else too.

    I realise I’ve slightly missed the boat here – I don’t come on here as much as I used to – so all the interesting and insightful stuff has been said already, but I’ll add my bit… for me the short, humorous posts were what drew me in but I’ve come to love the longer, more insightful ones, too. Didn’t know a lot about cricket when I found your site but I genuinely think I’ve learned a lot about it here, and have diverted a lot more time into watching and reading about it, when I was meant to be working, than I ever expected I would. So thank you for all the time you’ve put into it. It seems my vote is also for “no change”.

    1. We’re quite struck by the number of people who say they weren’t that into cricket when they started reading. It’s odd to think that you even found the site, let alone stuck with it. But thanks for doing so.

  76. Still hearing appeals for this?
    I found this site randomly almost two years back, and have managed to read every word written on it by now. Caught up finally. If I don’t have internet (frequently), I come here and catch up when I do have it. Cricinfo depresses me.
    I love cricket, cats and cars. Two out of three aint bad. I love the match reports, but also much prefer the backyard ones. Ones with ridiculous rule-changes.
    I think it’s great that cricketers are liked/disliked for proper reasons, for instance liking Morkel because it rhymes with snorkel.
    The comments are mostly my favourite, and all gets read. I don’t often comment as I feel out of my depth with some of the great wit on display.
    Also stumbled onto that holidays thingy and those pointless reviews of movies and albums. Really made me laugh.

    1. Still hearing them, yup.

      Great to hear that people trawl through the archives. We always think that posts are dead and buried once they fall off the front page unless we link to them.

Comments are closed.