Dean Elgar will probably be out by the time we’ve finished typing this

Cricinfo are making reference to ‘toss drama’ but don’t be misled. The second Test between South Africa and Australia demands your attention in a relentless, whinging, shirt-tugging way. We briefly wondered why we hadn’t really latched onto the Under-19 World Cup or why we didn’t feel moved to write anything about Ireland’s victory over the West Indies, but the answer’s obvious. It’s this.

The South African team

  • Alviro Peterson OUT – Dean Elgar IN
  • Ryan McLaren OUT – Quinton de Kock IN
  • Robin Peterson OUT – Wayne Parnell IN

It’s also worth noting that Quinton de Kock, a wicketkeeper, will not be keeping wicket. AB de Villiers – who isn’t really a wicketkeeper – will retain the gloves. They’re his gloves. Stop looking at his gloves. Get your own gloves.

The South African scorecard

In the time it took us to write that last section, South Africa lost two wickets. We’re going to come up with a terrible headline and click publish now so that there’s somewhere relevant to leave comments for the rest of the day.

Update: Dean Elgar wasn’t out by the time we clicked ‘publish’, opening up the possibility that this headline could appear less and less appropriate as the day wears on. Remember kids, don’t headline articles in haste. It could come back to haunt you, like a low-key ghost which is faintly irritating without being in any way scary.

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

32 Appeals

  1. Why couldn’t you have written the Brendon McCullum/BJ Watling article a day earlier?

    • King Cricket

      February 20, 2014 at 10:18 am

      You mean before their partnership had happened?

      Surely you know why.

    • But you could have written it after Day 3. Might have jinxed it enough to allow India to win the match.
      You know, clutching at straws and all that.

  2. You jinxed your own headline before posting. It made me happy.

  3. Can I be the first to say ‘Elgar composes tuneful century’?

    Best to get it out of the way.

  4. How much do they pay Mark Nicholas for all that fawning on the Australians? Totally sick making.
    Is there a way to jinx commentators?

    • King Cricket

      February 20, 2014 at 12:39 pm

      No, but there’s a way to mute them.

      Selective mute is an invention that would enhance cricket viewing immeasurably. You could listen to Athers talking to no-one instead of to Beefy, say.

  5. The Afgani / Aussie U19 game well worth a piece…

  6. that piece of jinxing was priceless. have you stuck a few quid on an elgar century (tunefully-composed or otherwise) yet? 🙂

  7. Please hurry with the selective mute device.

    It should mute particular people
    Also commentators’ curses on English players
    And dreadful old cliches especially incorrect ones such as ‘gone without troubling the scorers’ – as if the scorers don’t note ducks and golden ducks.

    Must stop ranting..

  8. Bring back Tony Lewis.

  9. Offer monetary rewards for maximums which render relevant commentators incapacitated. This would soon make the IPL redundant. Probably by about the time the rule is drafted.

  10. One baseball site (Fangraphs, for any baseball fans here) ranked all the commentary teams and explained why they were good/awful. Most of them are awful, because it’s sports commentary on TV, but the few that received positive reviews quickly became the ones I watched when my team wasn’t playing. I don’t know if something similar would work for cricket, but I’d read it.

  11. @thecompdog
    Good to see ex Somerset and current South African batsmen @deanelgar playing so beautifully. Great knock hope he gets a ton! @SomersetCCC

    30 seconds later, he’s out.

    • blinder!

      norman mailer once wrote (it was in *tough guys don’t dance*, iirc) about gamblers on a losing streak… persistent winners apparently talk about being tuned into the “pipeline”, i.e. knowledge of what’s about to happen, and they place their bets accordingly. persistent losers are also tuned into the pipeline – which is why they continue to bet confidently until they’re in way over their heads – but their “reading” of it is out by 180 degrees, i.e. they do the opposite of what they’re supposed to do.

      sports commentators – and the like – seem to fall into the latter category with extraordinary regularity. (then again, we only notice the times when it happens that way…)

    • … and another one gone, while i was typing that. oz to bat before CoP..?

    • They would have, if you hadn’t been tuned into the wrong pipeline.

    • well quite. this is why i don’t gamble

  12. At last I have a secondee for my Tony Lewis-redux petition. A Peter West for we plebs.

  13. Let’s start a rating system. Great idea Dan M .
    Categories marks out of 10

    1. always stating the obvious slowly and pedantically
    Pommie – a lovely person and brilliant singer but NBG as commentator. 9
    2. ranting on and on and on
    Boycott 10
    3. talking like a caricature of themselves
    Aggers 10 Simon Hughes 9
    4. amusing but informed
    Neil Manthorp 8 Mike Holding 8 Mike Haysman 8 Robin Jackman 8 Bill Lawry 9 Vic Marks 10
    5. Boring and self satisfied
    Nick Knight 10
    6 informed and able to inform without being patronising and brilliant at handling Boycott
    Ed Smith 9 and Simon Mann 9
    7 motor mouth
    Danny Morrison 10
    8 one sided about a team other than England
    Mark Nicholas 10

    • 9 Senile.
      Blofeld 11.

    • Well done, daneel, we needed one that goes up to 11. Every good rating system needs at least one of those.

      Category 10 – stating the bleeding obvious
      Botham 11 Boycott 10 Vaughan 9

      Not sure about your category 6, Jill – Daisy would have some issues with it too. She describes your candidates, Ed Smith and Simon Mann, as Peter Perfect and Simon Bland respectively.

    • King Cricket

      February 21, 2014 at 7:40 am

      More importantly, what the hell is NBG? You presumably saved yourself some seconds there, but after six minutes I can’t deduce what this means and am now going to have low-octane background irritation informing my actions for the whole of the rest of the day.

      No abbreviations unless they’re really really obvious. Why does no-one pay attention to us on this when we’re clearly right about it?

    • i presumed that meant “no bloody good”

      only took me a few secs to arrive that… what else were you doing during those six minutes?!

      • King Cricket

        February 21, 2014 at 1:20 pm

        Going through all the other million words beginning with B that it could have been.

    • On reading Jill’s post in the wee small hours, my megamind, within a fraction of a second, deduced two things:
      * NBG = no bloody good;
      * KC won’t like that abbreviation!

      I’m going to feel good, perhaps even smug, about myself for the rest of the day now.

  14. Category 11: Stark raving mad, prone to bouts of road rage, ability to render co-host speechless… I give you Navjot Sing Sidhu, with a Megachief rating or 100 out of 10!

    Beat that!

  15. Sorry about the abbreviation. My aunts used them all the time. Here’s a goody.
    FHBMIK
    Clue – used at meal time times when unexpected guests have shown up and stayed for the meal.
    I do like Daisy’s names for Smith and Mann.

    Give up?
    Family hold back more in kitchen
    We didn’t as it meant bread and butter.

Comments are closed.

© 2017 King Cricket

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑