James Pattinson’s vanity not readily apparent

Posted by

We’ve implied many times that Australia’s team is currently weaker than in years gone by primarily because of the rich vein of hairless metrosexuality running through it. However, we were quite surprised to learn that James Pattinson is as guilty of this as anyone.

Michael Clarke recently said:

“If James could take one thing to a deserted island he would definitely take his mirror.”

Maybe he just likes to practise his angry face. Or maybe he would direct the sun’s rays in such a way that he could start a fire and then send smoke signals of distress that might be seen by passing ships.

The other interpretation – that he thinks that haircut is ‘good’ – is highly unlikely.

39 comments

    1. You realise that joke only works if you don’t write ‘is’?

      Usman Khawaja’s back! As in ‘returned’ – he hasn’t got ankylosing spondylitis or anything.

    2. In which case, depending on which style guide you follow, should it be “Ryan Harris’ back” or “Ryan Harris’s back”? I don’t think either works well, myself.

  1. England has won the toss and will bat.

    Personally, I think it’s a big mistake. Playing The Ashes, that is. Too many risks for all concerned. Take batting, for example. We could be all out for 7, or 32. And fielding as well – every taken catch is the unlikely outcome of a thousand potential diasastrous drops. You can only catch the ball in one way, but you can drop it forwards, backwards, a bit off to the right, or the left, or miss it by an inch, or a yard, or a yard and an inch…

    I’m going to hide now. While I’m there I’ll work out a mental plan for dealing with being 1-1 in the series next week.

    1. Nothing to worry, up to 74 already. That should be enough for an easy win, probably by an innings if they bat out today.

  2. When is it declared a mistake to push Joe Root as Opener? Nick Compton seems to be getting better without playing.

    1. Might as well open with Bairstow and Bresnan. If we’re going to lose early wickets anyway, may as well do what Australia do and put the crap batsmen up there.

  3. Just popped out from under the blanket to see what’s going on. 182 for 4 at tea – not bad, not great, but not bad. Maybe I should have watched from the start, as it all seems very sedate and drama free this time.

  4. How many times do you reckon the new gritty Ian Ronald Bell could get up Alp D’Huez in a day?

    1. Ian Bell is not pathetic. He is the opposite of pathetic. He is a Demi-God.

      Am I taking it too far?

      I’ve got a fiancée, you know. Really, I have.

    2. If you knew my surname that would make even more sense. But you don’t. (King Cricket does. But he won’t let on.)

  5. argh

    i missed the entire afternoon’s play thanks to some horrific nonsense at work. i followed most of the morning session online, gaped in disbelief as 18/0 became 28/3, relaxed a bit as they put on a bit of a recovery… next chance i get to check in, i have missed the good news bit and arrive just in time to see the sixth wicket fall, followed swiftly by the seventh. i now am not sure whether i can even bring myself to watch the highlights {sob}. steve smith takes three wickets?? ffs

  6. oh yes, and as regards the actual subject of this post – i raised an eyebrow at that too. what’s he got to be vain about, just out of interest..?

  7. I fully expect tomorrow’s hover caption to be “Ian Bell and all them battings and that and them and that.”

    Don’t let me down.

Comments are closed.