What the hell is Stuart Broad talking about?

Posted by
< 1 minute read
Photo by Sarah Ansell
Photo by Sarah Ansell

Ahead of the first Test against Pakistan, Stuart Broad said one thing that made sense.

“The biggest test for the bowling unit will be trying to do what no other team has done this year, which is to win a game and take 20 wickets at Lord’s.”

Lord’s: Home of Rain-Affected Draws as well as Home of Corks. Engineering a result will indeed be a challenge.

But after that, Broad said the following about communicating with the other bowlers: “We always talk, not as an ego thing, but to try to get one over the opening batsman.”

“Not as an ego thing”? What in blazes does that mean? Why would verbal communication – the basic keystone supporting the whole of humankind’s development – ever be considered merely ‘an ego thing’?

Not a year goes by – not one single year – when we do not see two or more human beings engaged in conversation with one another. Not once have we ever thought to ourself: “Look at those raging egotists.”


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. Oh you would be surprised. You can usually tell two egotists in conversation because it’s a series of anecdotes, each one being tangentially related to the other, but mostly an excuse to talk about their own experiences and ignore what’s gone before.

    1. Apparently, when we are listening to someone speak, the majority of our attention is being used to formulate and rehearse the thing we want to say next. Only a small part of our brain is actually taking in what the other person is saying. That is a sort-of egotistical thing, because we are focussed more on what we want to do than on the other’s point o… ALRIGHT ALREADY, I’LL PHONE THE BLOODY AMBULANCE, IT’S NOT LIKE HE’S GONE ANY BLUER SINCE YOU ASKED THE FIRST TIME.

  2. I suspect ‘talk’ in this quote may be a euphemism for ‘abuse the opposition’

  3. Great hover caption.

    But if Broad’s lungs were full of helium, his verbal ejaculations would sound more like Micky Mouse’s than Stuart Broad’s voice. That would detract from ego and/or “getting one over the opposition” purposes, in my humble opinion.

  4. Apropos to nothing on this thread, I have just seen the following wheeze on Facebook. I’d prefer to share this nonsense here, with people who will no doubt appreciate it.

    Tory name = first name of a grandparent + the name of the first Street you lived on hyphenated with your 1st headteacher’s surname.

    In my case, Richard Acre-Plumridge. Sounds worthy even of petite noblesse:
    Sir Richard Acre-Plumridge, Bart.

    1. Brian Orleston-Corr. Legit.

      Alternatively if it’s the first street you’ve owned property in, it becomes Brian Central-Corr. Which sounds like a goon in a parody spy thriller. “Hi, my name’s Brian Central-Corr, and I guard *sigh* the Central Core. Please kill me now.”

      1. Strangely, I have never used any of those characteristics as security questions, nor can I recall ever having been offered any those.

    2. Robert Balcarres-Sharples

      This one is helped by growing up on a street that was named after a proper lord, Lord Lindsay, The Earl of Crawford and Balcarres. The land on which the street was built belonged to this chap. As I often tell people, I grew up on an estate.

  5. If there’s one form of communication between humans I wish were banned forever, it would be press interviews / conferences with cricketers, whatever their ego involvement.

    PS Stuart, what you refer to as the ‘bowling unit’ is actually something called’ the bowlers’. They are your team mates who do the bowling. They aren’t some spare part available only at Kwik-Fit.

  6. Are you sure, Mark? I think I might have bought, probably by mistake, an Anderson Ali valve

Comments are closed.