Eoin Morgan is better than Sachin Tendulkar

Posted by
< 1 minute read

James Anderson slipping in an inswinger - metaphorically

Of course he isn’t, but Morgan’s 130 was better than Tendulkar’s 203 against Sri Lanka – we’ll say that much. England v Pakistan has been a game for bowlers and only then does batting really mean something.

Most of us are happy about this. People mistakenly believe that sport is all about action, but it isn’t. Like anything absorbing, sport is about plot and narrative. It’s the difference between the second batch of Star Wars films and Blade Runner.

The former is all fours and sixes, shorn of context, ambling towards an inevitable conclusion. The latter is the ball beating the bat and field settings being changed – nothing tangible, but every little thing is shot-through with meaning and you’ve no idea where it’s going.


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 don’t referees ever reports these pitches as being substandard? Agarkar could have scored a double on this pitch. The England-Pakistan game, now THAT is Test cricket.

    Oh, and by the way, Deckard is not a replicant, screw what Ridley Scott says.

  2. I disagree,

    From the context of sachin approaching 50 test centuries, it is as important as murali taking a bunch of tail ender wickets 🙂

  3. In other England v Pakistan related chat – I would like to propose ‘Finn’s Nine’ as a new phrase describing something which takes far too long, is largely unsatisfactory and is done entirely for somebody else’s benefit.

    E.g. ‘France took quite a Finn’s Nine at the hands of the Jerries.

    P.s. I thoroughly enjoyed Finn’s Nine.

  4. I’m a bit drunk, so I’m going to rant.

    If I could, I’d select a TMS commentary to go with my Sky pictures. Why? BECAUSE I’M FED UP WITH THEM BANGING ON WITH SOME IRRELEVANT POINT.

    Christ, they got so caught up in whether or not England were going to declare several hours after it didn’t matter. Then Warne and Botham discussed at significant length at why England didn’t declare 45mins before they did. 45 mins? This game lasts 5 days. 45 mins doesn’t matter you self satisfying bunch of c*&%$s.

    I’m sorry, but I almost had a stroke.

  5. you’re really out of order, complaining about irrelevant commentary on king cricket. I’d advise you to bugger off someplace else.

  6. I’m with Dandy Dan on that Warne and Botham rubbish. I got over it by falling asleep and waking up again just before Matt Prior got his ton.


  7. Actually, an apology is in order, Dapper Dan. Calling people cunts cancels out any unworthy things you might have said.

    Hayden – cunt. Watson – cunt. Prior – cunt. Malik – cunt. Akmal – fucking MORAN.

  8. Well I don’t think I said anything unworthy, just mis-placed.

    It was just the first place I came to when I got in last night. But by God they make me angry.

  9. funny………….
    a person who scored one century can not be compare with some one who has scored around 50 centuries over a decade.

  10. Funny haha funny peculiar Webumpire? And if you had taken the trouble to read past the headline you would have realised that no comparison between batsmen was being made.

    Goodness that was bad tempered and snappy – inadvertent listening to the fathead Blofeld on TMS today waffling about pregnant pigeons has really unsettled me. They lay eggs you old fool.

  11. Think you’ll find that’s two decades Webumpire. Sachin isn’t good enough to do it in 10 years.

  12. Captain Kirk,

    Technically sachin did not score 50 centuries in a decade: true.
    But look at these numbers
    He scored
    46 in the 1990s
    42 in the 2000s
    6 in this year.

  13. ElishaCook

    Close enough, but has to be shifted to the right by a decade. He didnt score a century in the 1980s.

  14. and btw you dumbshits, I’ve been advocating Morgan for the test team for bloody ages. everyone always ignored me. well fuck you. assholes.

Comments are closed.