After reading the Cricinfo expose about Adrian Shankar (go ahead and read it - it's great) it appears that Worcestershire have based their recruitment policy on who can write the best covering letter. So now there's a hole in their squad, I've sent this to see if they can fulfil my county dream...
Dear Worcestershire CCC
I've heard that you are in need of an all-rounder, and I'm the man you'll want to pick. I have the rainbow of talents, and will be an excellent addition to your squad.
I played in the same high school team as Sachin Tendulkar, where I captained the first eleven at the age of 14. Sachin, who is a close personal friend of mine, says that I am his "inspiration", and "taught him everything he knows". After outscoring him regularly, we went out separate ways, although I still do help him prepare for test matches by batting alongside him in the nets.
My own playing career has seen me play 53 First Class matches, with a batting average of 86 and a bowling average of 8. I've spent the past few years playing in the notoriously difficult Bangladeshi Premier League, but after a few years turning out for Chittagong, I want a return to my spiritual homeland of Worcestershire.
Despite going to school with 38 year old Sachin Tendulkar, I can confirm that I am currently only 21 years old. However, my passport and birth certificate were destroyed in a tragic fire where I had to save some orphans from a pet rescue centre by bowling really, really fast, so you'll just have to take my word for it.
Here are some references just in case you aren't convinced.
"He's just what the doctor ordered" - Ravi Shastri
"Will Atkins is the reason I took up cricket" - Don Bradman
"I feel as though I've lived my life in his shadow" - Shane Warne
"Will Atkins is to cricket what Danny Morrison is to commentary" - Muttiah Muralitheran
Thanks for taking the time to read my letter. I'll assume you're going to take me on, so I'll turn up at training on Monday.
Will Atkins
Showing posts with label cricinfo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cricinfo. Show all posts
Friday, 27 May 2011
Sunday, 3 April 2011
The Cult of Sachin
It took the World Cup for me to truly embrace the Sachin.
I knew he was great. The stats told me that. But I'd never really realised just how great.
Sachin was making hundreds before I was even born. He'd been single handedly carrying his country while I was in nappies, and consistently churning out the runs while I was getting into cricket. It wasn't that I wasn't in awe of it, but the sheer amount of runs and consistency of them made me blase. Sachin scored another century? Oh.
I've seen him bat in a test match, back at Lord's in 2007. While to millions (even billions) this would be the greatest thing to ever have happen in their lives, I was generally more interested in Jimmy Anderson taking a five for. To me, Sachin was just a batsman - just a batsman who happened to be out lbw for 37. I knew of the runs, but I'd never really appreciated his genius.
As time went by, the achievements got more extraordinary. Over 14000 test runs. 50 test centuries. The only ever score of 200 in an ODI. The World Cup started - and the adulation that goes everywhere with him swept me up. The superb hundreds against England (number 98) and South Africa (99) made me realise what I'd been missing. Previously I'd seen the borderline stalker / obsessive comments on Cricinfo from Sachinistas, and dismissed them as frenzied lunatics. But suddenly, I'd been bitten with the Sachin bug, and I started seeing sense in what they had to say. "Sachin is no mere mortal, Sachin is God". Why not - someone with that level of ability surely has to have some sort of divine assistance.
Before being swept up in the Cult of Sachin, I'd have seen the Indian players giving Sachin (who scored 18 and bowled two overs of cack in the final) a triumphant carry on the shoulders as ridiculous postering. Why not captain and man of the match Dhoni? Why not nearly-centurion Gambhir? Why not leading wicket taker Zaheer? Why not man of the tournament Yuvraj? But lifting Sachin just made sense.
"Sachin has carried us for 21 years, so it is only right that we carry him today" said Virat Kohli. And having been fully inducted into the Cult of Sachinism, I'd have been alongside him, hoisting the Little Master into the air. And I don't care who knows.
Now, I'm off to spam Cricinfo with some meaningless comments about how great Sachin is compared to everyone else ever...
I knew he was great. The stats told me that. But I'd never really realised just how great.
Sachin was making hundreds before I was even born. He'd been single handedly carrying his country while I was in nappies, and consistently churning out the runs while I was getting into cricket. It wasn't that I wasn't in awe of it, but the sheer amount of runs and consistency of them made me blase. Sachin scored another century? Oh.
I've seen him bat in a test match, back at Lord's in 2007. While to millions (even billions) this would be the greatest thing to ever have happen in their lives, I was generally more interested in Jimmy Anderson taking a five for. To me, Sachin was just a batsman - just a batsman who happened to be out lbw for 37. I knew of the runs, but I'd never really appreciated his genius.
As time went by, the achievements got more extraordinary. Over 14000 test runs. 50 test centuries. The only ever score of 200 in an ODI. The World Cup started - and the adulation that goes everywhere with him swept me up. The superb hundreds against England (number 98) and South Africa (99) made me realise what I'd been missing. Previously I'd seen the borderline stalker / obsessive comments on Cricinfo from Sachinistas, and dismissed them as frenzied lunatics. But suddenly, I'd been bitten with the Sachin bug, and I started seeing sense in what they had to say. "Sachin is no mere mortal, Sachin is God". Why not - someone with that level of ability surely has to have some sort of divine assistance.
Before being swept up in the Cult of Sachin, I'd have seen the Indian players giving Sachin (who scored 18 and bowled two overs of cack in the final) a triumphant carry on the shoulders as ridiculous postering. Why not captain and man of the match Dhoni? Why not nearly-centurion Gambhir? Why not leading wicket taker Zaheer? Why not man of the tournament Yuvraj? But lifting Sachin just made sense.
"Sachin has carried us for 21 years, so it is only right that we carry him today" said Virat Kohli. And having been fully inducted into the Cult of Sachinism, I'd have been alongside him, hoisting the Little Master into the air. And I don't care who knows.
Now, I'm off to spam Cricinfo with some meaningless comments about how great Sachin is compared to everyone else ever...
Friday, 14 January 2011
Luke Wright, just go away
I don't like having to bag Luke Wright every time he turns out for England. I'm sure he's a nice enough, harmless guy, and probably gets quite upset when he / if he reads blogs like this or sees that he's trending on Twitter due to a hate campaign attempting to force him out of international cricket. I don't like having to do it. I'm bored of it. You must be bored of it. But what I'm most bored and tired of is seeing Luke Wright being carried by this England team, and offering nothing towards the end product of the team.
Cricinfo's profile of Lukey says he's a "crucial cog" in England's team. Is he bollocks. If this England team was a car, Luke Wright would be a hubcap. It improves the look of the car, but serves no other purpose. And gets carried along while other parts of the car do much harder, difficult and important jobs. While everything looks nicer and cleaner with hubcaps, don't forget that a car can function just fine without them. Luke Wright sits for some reason at number six, and acts as an "all-rounder". He doesn't bowl, and is frighteningly too far up the order, where he is often exposed for just not being a good enough batsman. He's also a bit of a liability in the field. Put simply, he just isn't good enough to be playing for England.
In the past I've banged on about how it's a disgrace that Wright has played 70 times for England over the past 4 years. But I can see how he may have been given a few games as a promising all-rounder, and hoped that he'd develop into a big player for England. Well, it's four years down the line, and he hasn't done that. And when he plays, it's stopping the promising all-rounders of 2011 from playing. If he's meant to be playing as a sixth / backup bowler - there isn't any point, as Collingwood is more than capable of doing that role. And if he's seen as one of England's top six one day batsmen, then I'm sorry, but whoever's selecting him is seeing something I'm not.
I have nothing against Luke Wright as a person. I'd have nothing against his selection if England decided to open with him or use him in a more prominent role with the ball. If England were picking him to fulfil an actual job in the team, such as either a batsman, bowler or even as an all-rounder, then I would judge his selection on the relative merits of what the team management were trying to achieve. However, at the moment, he is not being used as a bowler, or a batsman. Or even as an all-rounder. England would be far better off selecting someone who's likely to do a job in the team, rather than some bloke just because Andy Flower likes the look of him. Luke Wright related rant over. (Until he gets picked again...)
Cricinfo's profile of Lukey says he's a "crucial cog" in England's team. Is he bollocks. If this England team was a car, Luke Wright would be a hubcap. It improves the look of the car, but serves no other purpose. And gets carried along while other parts of the car do much harder, difficult and important jobs. While everything looks nicer and cleaner with hubcaps, don't forget that a car can function just fine without them. Luke Wright sits for some reason at number six, and acts as an "all-rounder". He doesn't bowl, and is frighteningly too far up the order, where he is often exposed for just not being a good enough batsman. He's also a bit of a liability in the field. Put simply, he just isn't good enough to be playing for England.
In the past I've banged on about how it's a disgrace that Wright has played 70 times for England over the past 4 years. But I can see how he may have been given a few games as a promising all-rounder, and hoped that he'd develop into a big player for England. Well, it's four years down the line, and he hasn't done that. And when he plays, it's stopping the promising all-rounders of 2011 from playing. If he's meant to be playing as a sixth / backup bowler - there isn't any point, as Collingwood is more than capable of doing that role. And if he's seen as one of England's top six one day batsmen, then I'm sorry, but whoever's selecting him is seeing something I'm not.
I have nothing against Luke Wright as a person. I'd have nothing against his selection if England decided to open with him or use him in a more prominent role with the ball. If England were picking him to fulfil an actual job in the team, such as either a batsman, bowler or even as an all-rounder, then I would judge his selection on the relative merits of what the team management were trying to achieve. However, at the moment, he is not being used as a bowler, or a batsman. Or even as an all-rounder. England would be far better off selecting someone who's likely to do a job in the team, rather than some bloke just because Andy Flower likes the look of him. Luke Wright related rant over. (Until he gets picked again...)
Saturday, 24 April 2010
It was written in the stars...
Friday evening at Wantage Road, Northampton. Middlesex have put themselves in an incredibly commanding position, and appear to be coasting to victory, even prompting this Cricinfo article: "Scott Newman sets up Middlesex victory push". Shaun Udal set Northants an incredibly unlikely 395 to win on a final day where Steven Finn, Tim Murtagh and Danny Evans (fresh off a first innnings five-fer) were to bowl Middlesex to victory in a procession.
Saturday evening at Wantage Road, Northampton. Northants have won, thanks to an unbeaten 183 from openers Steven Peters. Nobody saw this coming; as Northants grasped victory from the jaws of defeat, and Middlesex staring at a third consecutive LV=CC defeat.
But someone did see it coming. Step forward Cricinfo's resident nostradamus CricketingStargazer, who on that earlier article congratulating Middlesex for their obviously-going-to-happen victory, said that: "This match is more finely balanced than it looks. Despite what the reports says, Middlesex showed little initial urgency. As a result, they have probably set 20-30 less than they might have liked. Batting looked increasingly easy through the day and, with the quick start, a final day chase is not impossible. The trick is going to be to keep Northants interested because determined batsmen are not going to be easy to dismiss tomorrow if Northants put up the shutters. The danger though is that Northants need under 4 an over and have the batting to get it if someone gets in.".
You know what. He was right.
And yes, as a deeply distressed Middlesex fan, I have chosen to ignore the questionable declaration from Udal and useless bowling from the much vaunted four of Murtagh, Finn, Berg and Evans. I've instead chosen to write about an extraordinary piece of punditry from CricketStargazer. Northant's victory truly was written in the stars.
Saturday evening at Wantage Road, Northampton. Northants have won, thanks to an unbeaten 183 from openers Steven Peters. Nobody saw this coming; as Northants grasped victory from the jaws of defeat, and Middlesex staring at a third consecutive LV=CC defeat.
But someone did see it coming. Step forward Cricinfo's resident nostradamus CricketingStargazer, who on that earlier article congratulating Middlesex for their obviously-going-to-happen victory, said that: "This match is more finely balanced than it looks. Despite what the reports says, Middlesex showed little initial urgency. As a result, they have probably set 20-30 less than they might have liked. Batting looked increasingly easy through the day and, with the quick start, a final day chase is not impossible. The trick is going to be to keep Northants interested because determined batsmen are not going to be easy to dismiss tomorrow if Northants put up the shutters. The danger though is that Northants need under 4 an over and have the batting to get it if someone gets in.".
You know what. He was right.
And yes, as a deeply distressed Middlesex fan, I have chosen to ignore the questionable declaration from Udal and useless bowling from the much vaunted four of Murtagh, Finn, Berg and Evans. I've instead chosen to write about an extraordinary piece of punditry from CricketStargazer. Northant's victory truly was written in the stars.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)