Slog of the Day: Marcus Stoinis v Sri Lanka

Posted by
< 1 minute read

We’re not sure this feature is really capturing the imagination, but we didn’t get where we are today by allowing complete-lack-of-reader-interest to shape our editorial decisions. If nothing else, picking Marcus Stoinis provides us with an opportunity to remind you how he and Adam Zampa are pissing away the great legacy of David Boon.

Maybe it was the caffeine that fuelled Stoinis today. He emerged with Australia needing 61 from 42 balls and promptly hit 59 not out off 18 to win the game and also significantly improve his team’s net run rate after New Zealand had butchered them in their first match.

Speaking afterwards, he revealed that he had been batting according to a devilish plan he’d hatched.

“Once I got in, the plan was to keep going,” he said.

Bad move, Stoin, letting everyone else in on your secret.

There were six sixes, but we’re picking the one that took him to 50 because it was just horrible cricket all round. Straight sixes are widely considered to be a little more classy than a leg-side wallop, but when it’s a filthy full-bunger and the batter’s defaulting to the long handle, the exact direction the ball travels isn’t going to add a sheen of sophistication.

Even the commentary was dumb; a staccato spew of bland: “Full toss. Stoinis. Stands. Delivers. Six.”

Top slogging, Marcus Stoinis.

Well played, Australia.

T20 is a bit too complicated for us these days, so we’re instead celebrating one of cricket’s oldest and simplest pleasures via our Slog of the Day feature.


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. Life has been preventing me from watching these matches live, which makes this King Cricket verbal highlights series a form of emergency service for me.


  2. The real madness of this game was the scheduling of a high interest game featuring the home team that finished at 1:30 AM for the majority of Australians.

  3. “Stands. Delivers.”

    In my head I read that in order of how the images would have been delivered. a la Jones…Bowden…Kasprowicz.
    – and therefore it felt like the ball was in the stands, and the stands were what was was delivering.

    I don’t know what that means, but that I wouldn’t have put it past the commentary team says a lot.

    1. You could argue the stands delivered the ball back to the outfielder afterwards.

      “Full toss. Stoinis. Stands. Delivers. Six. Stands. Delivers. Outfielder. Delivers. Bowler. Runs. Delivers. Full toss. Stoinis. Stands. Delivers.” Etc.

Comments are closed.