Cricinfo approval rating dips

Posted by
< 1 minute read

Should we take it badly if someone says, “This is the ONLY article that I dont read on Page 2” about our work?

Hard to say, isn’t it? If they haven’t read it, they can’t really evaluate the quality. Or maybe they’re saying that they take in the article in some other way. Maybe they print it off and then eat it.

If you’d like to read or eat our latest Cricinfo piece, you can find it here.


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. Why did the chicken cross the road to the Wankhede Stadium?

    It didn’t, because extending this joke concept to the recent India / WI drawn match wouldn’t work.

    1. And I think we all know why now, KC. This astonishing insight into the hidden depths of your cake-hating soul had us all reeling:

      “You’re all hyped-up on battenburg and you’ve lost your equilibrium.”

      I can only assume that this opaque reference relates directly to some traumatic event in your childhood?

    2. We were never really a ‘hyped up’ kind of kid. Can’t remember another kid affecting us while out of his gourd on the pink and yellow stuff either.

      Guess we’ve repressed that memory, much as we seem to have repressed our memories of the names of lots of different actors recently.

  2. Your spontaneity is no more your strength. Go out of your way, and try something else. All the best. This criticism is because of your erstwhile high standards. So it is, in a way, a compliment. That someone actually has to comment on your article, shows that you used to write some good stuff.

  3. My favourite comment, apropos of absolutely nothing:

    Posted by harshalb on (November 28 2011, 10:12 AM GMT):

    “Sacin is planning next test 100 in 2022 hoping USA will play tests that year”

    Or maybe harshalb is hyped-up on cake.

    1. The worst part is that we read that one earlier and it didn’t even occur to us that it was entirely irrelevant.

  4. Compared with Thomson and Thompson, now that really is something.

    Both Jeff (in the cricket playing department) and Hunter S (in the journalism department) are/were my heroes.

    Stu and Ash journalism might well be the teeny decade’s answer to Gonzo journalism. Just think of that, KC.

    Perhaps I should have forgone that slice of lemon drizzle cake this afternoon…

  5. Stu and Ash are like a couple of characters out of some silly British sit-com. Or this is how I picture them to make them palatable. This is as opposed to the rib-tickling, laugh-out-loud funny that is yourself over here. Or “yourselves” as you would have us believe.

    1. I worry that your worry is ironic. Our that it’s not.

      I just don’t know anything anymore. But that’s probably something to do with all the battenburg I’m mainlining at the moment.

Comments are closed.