Harold being conspicuously indifferent to the legacy of Michael Vaughan

Posted by
< 1 minute read

Eva writes:

“This is my cat Harold. Here he is, nonchalantly enjoying a meal. (Don’t question that. Cats can be nonchalant. No-one’s ever questioned a cat’s ability to display indifference.)

“In doing this, he made a choice. He chose to ignore the legacy of Michael Vaughan.

Studied indifference

“He’s actually almost sitting on the legacy of Michael Vaughan. He’s very committed in his indifference.”

At this point, we questioned Harold’s awareness of the magazine, but Eva can back up her words.

“Sadly, I can verify his awareness. Later, I found him engrossed in an article about the magic of Kevin Pietersen. It was a calculated betrayal.”

Conspicuously absorbed

If you’ve got a picture of an animal being conspicously indifferent to cricket, send it to king@kingcricket.co.uk.


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. Michael Vaughan’s “I am mildly surprised by this cat’s bottom” face is a lot like his “that apparently straight ball was in fact doing complex aerobatics” face. I wonder if there’s a connection.

  2. A Spinal Tap reference! Finally!

    We slip dozens of Tap references into our ‘work’. No-one ever joins in.

  3. You have to ask yourself: how much further up can we turn it?

    The answer, of course, is ‘none’.

    None further up.

  4. Are those tennis balls or lemons in the first photo, Eva? They look like the former to me.

    Don’t tell me you are moonlighting on a tennis blog with photos of tennis equipment in unusual locations?

  5. Ged Ladd: Quite the detective eh? They’re not mine, I’m looking after them for a friend.. I’ve never seen them before. That isn’t even my cat.

  6. From the angle of the second photo, it might look as if I was sitting on him, but I wasn’t. Just to clarify.

Comments are closed.