Ian Botham says England will win the Ashes

Posted by
< 1 minute read

Ian Botham’s been doing his bluff overconfidence thing again:

“What I’ve seen so far, I don’t see as too much of a threat and if England’s bowlers stay fit then they’ll win the series.”

This is why Ian Botham was a brilliant cricketer. He lets a few facts seep in, but not enough to divert him away from the path of supreme confidence.

Sod it - let's just make it 'stash week'We saw the path of supreme confidence once. We cut across it at 90 degrees precisely. We also tripped at the crucial moment so as to make no contact with the path itself. Then we got lost in the thicket of extreme doubt where a snake of anxiety bit us on the arse.

The problem is that while Australia’s bowling attack has looked mediocre, they’re playing in India. Their bowlers aren’t suited to Indian conditions and nor have any of them really played there much before.

We’ve said ourself that Australia’s bowling attack’s worse than it was, but let’s each round up some horses and hold them, as they say. Why we do this, we don’t know, but equine grippage is a necessary step when drawing conclusions from relatively small amounts of sample data.


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. “This is why Ian Botham was a brilliant cricketer”. That and the mush. Facial hair FTW, as the kids might say.

  2. Always with the indecipherable acronyms.

    You could tell us what it stood for, but we’d instantly forget. We just can not hold information that arrives in acronym form.

  3. These acronyms are annoying me as well. Especially as they are technically not acronyms but abbreviations. Acronyms have to spell a word that you speak, like Nato or Waca or Laser.

    I reckon FTW is for For The Women. That’s why Ceci appeared. She sensed the abbreviation.

  4. That’s true actually.

    We are shamed at having forgotten our childhood lessons about the difference between acronyms and abbreviations.

    These meaningless sequences of letters are eroding our intellect. We really can’t afford that.

  5. Those snakes of anxiety are athletic beasts – yer average serpent only manages ankle or calf hight at best!

  6. D Charlton, once at a party I got into a gentle dispute with someone as to the difference between an acronym and an abbreviation. It culminated in someone producing a dictionary and (of course) proving me right. In making my arguments, I didn’t refer to NATO, WACA or LASER, but did refer to SCUBA.

  7. Mark Nicholas SAYS ‘M P H’.

    Drives us mental. It’s harder to say than the words themselves.

  8. I always remember how Botham said, before the last Ashes series, how the Aussies were too old to win.

    Onya, Bothie!

  9. Botham Often Trys To Obviously Manipulate Statistics.

    Or BOTTOMS, as I might acronymically put it. Apologies for the split infinitive within the acronym.

    Is there a special word for an acronym that contains a split infinitive? Or should we invent such a word?

  10. Didn’t know about Scuba, Miriam – isn’t it strange when acronyms become real words?

    Bottoms – genius – even with that split infinitive. You invent the word Ged, I promise to use it next time I appeal.

  11. Re text abbreviations, I still like my interpretation of LOL, lots of love. However I am au fait with latin abbreviations – and French phrases.

    Sorry about the late response but King Cricket’s cast-off computer is on the blink again. (Bit of illiteration there for you Ne.)

Comments are closed.