We’re supporting Zaheer Khan

Posted by
< 1 minute read

Zaheer Khan's ability is not related to the quality of his hair cut

We’re supporting India, but we’re struggling with that because we’ve got quite a big reservation. A win for India would, to some extent, be a victory for batting over bowling and we hate batsmen.

For us, much of the joy of cricket is in the fall of wickets and we hate to see bowlers marginalised. India are guilty of this, in a way. It’s not really their fault, but they’ve got to the final largely on the solidity of their batting, not through spectacular performances with the ball.

Yuvraj Singh is India’s second-highest wicket-taker in this World Cup and that’s kind of sad. While Yuvraj is a good one-day bowler, he generally plays on a batsman’s complacency against him as much as anything. It’s a useful and worthy approach, but it should be a supporting role.

India’s top wicket-taker, however, is Zaheer Khan and he IS a bowler. In a match in subcontinental conditions, he is the best quick bowler in the world. Zaheer’s adaptability is based on the fact that he has a range of deliveries that he can call on at different times during the game.

Zaheer is an incredibly skilled bowler and we’d like to see him have the biggest influence on the World Cup final. It would mean a victory for India and a victory for bowling too.


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. I’ve often thought Kumar Sangakkara might be the nicest man in the world. He just looks like a very nice man.

      Has anyone met him to clarify this?

    2. Sangakkara’s face is a cover; he is a seriously sharp-tongued sledger.

      Would love to hear what he’ll say to Sachin. Or is Sachin considered unsledgeable?

Comments are closed.