Thursday, February 28, 2008

Strauss is the new Harmsprakash

Some time ago, I invented something truly original. Something so monstrously unique that the whole world was forced to run away in terror and ignore it. Such was its originality that it was as if no one had ever heard of it.

But I knew better. I knew the truth.

Now, I resurrect that concept and apply it to modern cricket:

Andrew Strauss is the new Harmsprakash.

This beast, or medical condition, if you will affects cricketers who have extreme talents. These specimens are capable of scoring unusually high number runs or taking a chronically high number of wickets.

Mark Ramprakash and Stevey Harmison are two such examples. But their afflictions have spread to young Straussy.

This young Wing Commander took to international cricket like a swarm of ducks to a vulnerable old women’s bag of bread. He scored a century on his debut at Lord’s, propped up England’s batting in South Africa, did the business in the 2005 Ashes and generally looked a cert to take over England’s position as Our Only Good Player.

Then, when his temporary office of captain was given to a pisshead Northerner, he fell to pieces like a shaggy flannel in the wind.

The ECB, acting the part of a benevolent and deluded uncle, offered to give Strauss a rest and let him back in gently into the tour of New Zealand. But Strauss hasn’t really done anything since his spell of rubbishness to prove that he’s now a superstar again.

In the current match against no one in particular, he took 17 balls to slog five, before being caught out by How. HOW?

In fairness, no Englishmen distinguished himself in the match, but, the others don’t need to.

Strauss hasn’t really done anything to suggest progress at test level. And given his current medical condition, it might be a rather cruel thing to push him back into the international arena when his clearly isn’t capable of holding a bat, let alone swooshing it about in a productive fashion.

I rather suspect that selecting Strauss here could end his career.

8 comments:

Suave said...

Thanks for the link dear heart!

I think Harmison needs to do a stint on strictly, it did wonders for Goughy & Ramps.

Maybe then he could bowl straight.

Maybe I won't have to cut off his hands.

Maybe I should get some more sleep.

Jrod said...

That pic is very disturbing.

Rob said...

They will find some bizarre set of excuses to pick him, why would them have brought him otherwise?

http://cricket-forever.blogspot.com

Tony said...

I think Matty Elliot was a Harmprakash. Loads of talent, not enough ticker.

Naked Cricket said...

Anytime I watched, Ramprakash scored @ his career avg. 27. Strauss @40 is more of an enigma. Not that I haven't seen him score a 40 in a while, but @ 40, (in Eng) he'll always be in contention. Nas Hussein will agree. Guess that's why Eng produce so many avg. bats.

scorpicity said...

He was a good batsmen... what's up with the ECB? Did not the change in guard at the top help matters?

The Atheist said...

Matty Eliot was awesome. What happened to him? Can I have him now that you lot are done?

Anonymous said...

you rule dude..Was PGW a granddad or someone?