Posted by 
‘Bye bye Sachin, Rahul, Sourav and VVS, the new generation are here now. You guys are past it, but we’ll conquer Ajantha Mendis and Muttiah Muralitharan with ease.’
This is what India’s glittery one-day batting line-up might have said, but it would have been followed by a bit of a frown and a muttered ‘balls’, after Yuvraj Singh top-scored with 23 (six of which were scored in a blind panic while waiting to be clean bowled in Mendis’s first over).
Most media outlets will doubtless paint this as the next chapter in March of the Mendis, but all the Sri Lankan bowlers chipped in.
Our angle would be how deeply satisfying it is to see one-day matches being decided by bowlers for once. We don’t do angles though. We just witter aimlessly and then maybe tail off with an unnecessarily long and uninformative sentence that would perhaps be removed if it were to appear as the final words of a piece in a more respectable and professional publication.
Your angles would be nice and pointy and acute – unlike the obtuse angle taken by a writer over at Cricinfo – on good cricket writing – that has had me snorting in rage….
READ ALL ABOUT IT!
KING CRICKET IN “POINTY ANGLE” REVELATIONS!
“Nice and pointy” says Ceci, Nottingham.
Ceci, please don’t make me look at the cricinfo site. It’s horrid.
I have become increasingly suspicious that the cricinfo web designers are recruited from a mill pond just outside Oldham.
However, if there’s rage to be had then please post a link to the article. I like a bit of rage, me!
It’s true, cricinfo’s site was designed by cross-eyed gibbons. However, any visual crimes they may have committed are more than compensated for by the utter brilliance that is statsguru.
I’m guessing the rage-inspiring article was this one. I’m only half way through it because I have to give my eyes a break after every paragraph.
Blast and dammit Simon I have just had to read it again and SHOUT. Not a good day.
Always agree with the Sainted Lawrence Booth of the Spin too – but today he is WRONG !
For those who don’t read The Spin, Lawrence is gently suggesting that maybe Peter Moores is ‘not all that’ this week.
Are you pro-Moores Ceci?
More pro than anti Moores – but it was the inference that were Moores not coach – then Vaughan would still be captain and that would be a Good Thing which I disagree with.
That section could be construed as a comment on Moores’ ability to get on with the players.