Momentum’s back!

Posted by
< 1 minute read

As in ‘returned’. It hasn’t got ankylosing spondylitis or anything, on account of the fact that it’s an abstract concept and therefore doesn’t have a spine or a rear side or whatever.

Mocking momentum’s the in thing to do at the minute. Typical that it would come into fashion six years after we were indulging. A lot of people have cited the ding-dong-ding-ding-dong nature of this series as being evidence of its meaninglessness, but look a little closer and there momentum is, actually having some sort of meaningful impact.

What is a fightback if not defiance of momentum? And what has there not been at any point during any of this summer’s Ashes Tests?

Each of the five matches between England and Australia this summer has followed a familiar pattern. One team has got ahead; the other team has at no point been able to recover. The winning team has invariably been the one that first gained momentum.

Maybe it was a thing all along.


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. Close series are often referred to as having pendulum-like qualities.

    Pendulums have momentum.

    Therefore: momentum does not mean the team that won the last Test will win the next Test.

    Just ask Massive Bob.

    At least the fact that England’s inevitable 5-0 defeat in the next Ashes will be on a slightly different TV channel could mean the Murdoch media have an incentive to pretend it’s not happening.

  2. “… dong … … dong”
    Lovely subtle implication that Australia are dicks, there.

    Momentum was largely unable to maintain its momentum in this series, notwithstanding the 3rd and 4th tests – this lack of meta-momentum ultimately worked in England’s favour.

    A two-and-a-half-year Ashes drought will now ensue, rendering any momentum Australia may have gained from the Oval drubbing meaningless.

  3. Are you going to write about the BT Sport deal, your highness? I’m pretty sure if I had a cat, it would be indifferent to it.

    1. It’s one of those stories that promises more than it delivers. But who knows, maybe we’ll have something to say after we’ve had a sleep.

  4. Momentum exists within a match but rarely carries over to subsequent matches. That seems a reasonable position.

  5. Might I suggest Angular Momentum as an alternative. It is conserved, of course, its conservation being one of the fundamental laws of the universe. And it results in specific sections of the body in question moving first in one direction, then soon afterwards in completely the opposite direction, ultimately getting nowhere. All in all, a much superior physics-based metaphor, and one that should put a stop to all this confusing torque.

    1. It is always reassuring to have the laws of physics explained to us by Bert, much as the Richie Benaud explanations of cricket provided solace and unpatronising instruction.

      Me, I could torque till I’m blue in the face but no-one would understand my soundings-off about the laws of physics, probably because I don’t understand them myself.

      But I do know that you cannae change the laws of physics. Scotty explained that to me long ago on that well known science programme, Star Trek.

    2. There is another advantage of using Angular Momentum as the analogy-of-choice for sportsmen. As we all know from interminable discussions on the psychology of elite sport, these people like to live in the moment. Well now they can.

      There’ll be another one along soon, people, just as soon as I’ve read through the glossary in this physics textbook.

Comments are closed.