Simon Jones is fit and firing

Posted by
< 1 minute read

Simon Jones in action prior to inactionYou’ve got to write these updates when you’ve the chance. We’re a bit worried because we wrote this on Sunday. 24 hours is an eternity when you’re talking about the fitness of Simon Jones.

We’ll plough on regardless though. Thus far in the County Championship, Simon Jones has taken 5-92, 1-2, 4-14 (from 4.2 overs – way to mop up the tail) and 4-41. He’s taken nine wickets at 15.55 in the Friends Provident Trophy as well.

It’s perhaps time someone gave some serious thought to our suggestions as to how to protect cricketers from injury.

Key points of our manifesto:
(1) Gauntlets to be worn at all times.
(2) Cricketers to be LITERALLY wrapped in cotton wool.
(3) Keep key players safe by putting them in a drawer.

OH NO!

Roelof van der Merwe just heard you haven't yet signed up for the King Cricket email...

...so he's on his way to see you!

21 comments

  1. “Simon Jones is fit and firing”

    /me cough a little to clear throat

    That’s what she said.

  2. (5) Cricketers should be made to pose in Madame Tussaud’s. Their wax replicas take the place of 12th man for their couty,

  3. I think Simon Jones should be allowed to bowl from a chair. It seems to be the running that causes most of the problems, so someone could just be charged with pushing him really fast towards the crease.

  4. Agree with points 1 and 2. Point 3 worries me though – will it be like when you put something important but infrequently used like, say, the chuck key for your drill “somewhere safe” which you then immediately forget? When you come to look for your Simon Jones/chuck key, it is in none of the places you thought you had selected as “somewhere safe”, nor even any of the ones you might have classified as only “moderately perilous”. Then, in 14 years time, when you’re clearing out your cupboards, you’d see a load of cotton wool, and inside the cotton wool would be Simon Jones, injury free but now all dusty and irrelevant because they don’t make the sort of cricket that goes with that bowler any more.

    Anyway, does anyone have a spare chuck key?

  5. But wouldn’t he fall out of the chair at the crease? And being Simon Jones he would then break his wrist or something. It could be a no win – if you strapped him in he would get whip-lash. [I’m assuming that the chair and pusher would not be allowed to follow through?]

  6. Agree with points 1 and 2. Point 3 worries me though – will it be like when you put something important but infrequently used like, say, the chuck key for your drill “somewhere safe” which you then immediately forget? When you come to look for your Simon Jones/chuck key, it is in none of the places you thought you had selected as “somewhere safe”, nor even any of the ones you might have classified as only “moderately perilous”. Then, in 14 years time, when you’re clearing out your cupboards, you’d see a load of cotton wool, and inside the cotton wool would be Simon Jones, injury free but now all dusty and irrelevant because they don’t make the sort of cricket that goes with that bowler any more.

    Anyway, does anyone have a spare chuck key?

  7. Gah! Sorry for multiple post – there was a good reason to do with spam filters.

  8. I’d have Simon Jones in the team IMMEDIATELY – not for the bowling but for the stretching exercises prior to bowling. Yum.

  9. My apologies, just amazed how many ladies there are round these (his?) parts.

    Btw, I have a spare chuck key. my old neighbor is having to empty his workshop and demolish it. he keeps giving me things, including 3kg of misc screws and bolts yesterday. and a chuck key on top. I think it’s a rite of passage I’m being initiated with, not sure.

  10. Good work, Spigot. It’ll take more than a sturdy defence to keep a bowling ball off your stumps!

    Let’s keep it under wraps for now, and debut it in time for the Ashes.

  11. I was once at Katie’s house helping her put together some shelving, and we mocked – MOCKED! – the rubber attachment on the drill which was for storing the chuck key. And then promptly lost the chuck key. We turned the place upside down looking for it, but no joy.

    I found it, months later, in my washbag.

  12. Yes, and now I’ve lost it again. I wonder if the chuck key is like the Littlest Hobo, or Sam off Quantum Leap – somehow travelling around different homes, trying to do good deeds, never settling in one place.

    Ah, Quantum Leap.

  13. Talking of Quantum leap, I read an interview with Charlie Brooker the other day, and they asked this question.

    Sam Beckett from Quantum leap jumped into many different people but which of these would you like to see aired?

    A) Sam Beckett leaps into a woman who happens to be right in the middle of sex. When he phases in and realizes where he is and what he’s doing, he is shocked. Looking down he notices his legs are apart and the man atop of him is thrusting away. Scrolling up he views the man’s face and realises that it is himself. He has leaped into his wife’s body. He is being screwed by himself. ‘Oh Boy…’

    B) Upon re-phasing Sam notices that he is wearing a tight collar around his neck. Looking himself up and down he realizes that he’s totally naked apart from the collar. He looks around and sees that he’s attached to a leash being held by a slim wealthy lady. He believes he has leapt into a fetishist. ‘Oh Boy…’ he sighs, but on surveying the room surrounding him further he spies himself in a mirror and sees a dog looking back at him, he discovers that he is that dog. ‘OH BOY…’ The rest of the episode features actor Scott Bakula (Sam) naked, on all fours, weeing against walls, sniffing other dogs bums and trying to keep his owner from getting mugged and killed in central park.

    That’s a tough call. A) has immediate gross-out value, but I think B) would be funnier in the long run, especially if he bites the face off a nine-year-old girl at one point.

  14. > My apologies, just amazed how many ladies
    > there are round these (his?) parts.

    It’s a thread about Simon Jones — honestly, what would you expect?!

    Back to the point. If, while time-travelling, you were to meet yourself, there’s bound to be some risk of cosmic buggeration…so could (a) result in an altogether different big bang?

    Fnirk.

Comments are closed.