England v Sri lanka post-match analysis

1. Probably more accurate to say England beat Angelo Mathews.

   Other highlights included Chris Jordan wearing a one-armed base layer denoting the doing arm and someone in the crowd who was whistling like our nose sometimes does when it’s partially blocked.

   Because of the latter, we kept having to check that the sound was definitely coming from the TV. It was really annoying.

   Well played, Annoying Whistling Crowd Man. Well played.

2. The last two are probably the first posts here that could be tweeted verbatim

   1. Those on Twitter just get the clickbait headline. At that point we try and add value – not least with the comment below the article, which was constructed out of tweets they’ll already have seen.

3. We needed post-match analysis…we GOT post-match analysis.

4. Should be similar to the pre-match…

   1. Is similar

5. Alternatively: that post-match analysis went like a tracer bullet.

6. My 8 year old son asked yesterday what David Soul was trying to make it through. Was it some sort of wall, he mused? Not that he knew David Soul’s name, but apparently that song is in Johnny English Reborn, which he was watching. Is that too old a film for him to watch, in terms of age appropriateness? I don’t know, but he was watching it in the back of the car on a long journey, so at least he was quiet. Until that song came on, after which he wouldn’t let the question drop. You can’t underestimate the benefits of keeping kids quiet in the car. Without those DVD players we’d have had to endure four hours of I Spy. Being better educated than me they sometimes play it in French (Je vois, avec mon petit yeux, quelque chose qui commence avec…). But that always ends up with the letter being L (la voiture, l’eglise). And that joke can go on for twenty minutes or more. So if you and David Soul had been a little clearer about what “through” means in the context you have used it in, I wouldn’t have had to a) put up with my children talking to me when I was listening to 6 Music, and b) read this article three times before I understood.

   1. We’re sorry you had to spend so many seconds reading the article three times.

   2. I read it twice in order to get the pun, but I sympathise with Bert. His expertise lies in maths, not words. I sometimes have to read his scientific postings more than three times in order to make sense of them.

      It is always worth the effort to re-read them, though, as they are packed with facts, expert knowledge, and wisdom.

      As indeed are your postings, yer maj.

Comments are closed.