Beautiful Games: book launch.

~ bowlingatvincent ~ Leave a comment

Included below; the audio from our Beautiful games book launch, at The Mariners, Nolton Haven, Pembs, on Sat 23rd March 2024.

Hosted by my good friend the treble-fabulous Mr Stephen Hedges, it features some daft bloke warbling about sport and the Meaning of Everything – as he does – plus some background noises and a wee bit of ambient pre-amble. Would’ve *really loved* to include the genuinely brilliant and hugely generous #pubchat that immediately followed the talk, but certain individuals shared some personal stuff about family experiences that it just wouldn’t have been right to include. So cut.

We had intended that the aforementioned #pubchat would dig in to and expand upon the Waltonian propositions… and it certainly did that. Some concerns were raised about school experiences in activity needing to ‘mirror real life’ rather than ‘just look to cater for all’. I hear that argument, and respect the need for (for example) competitive sport. I grew up – and I do mean grew up – through competitive sport, where (amongst other things) I learned to value guys in my teams who found little support or encouragement elsewhere, because they were either fully-fledged or aspiring football hooligans. Don’t ask them to spell much, or do their French homework but stick ’em on a sports field and watch the fekkers fly. Suddenly brilliant; suddenly selfless; suddenly valuable. I get how magnificent organised sport can be, for shedloads of reasons including that one.

But only about 20% of schoolkids are getting it: or only about 20% are developing a culture of lifelong activity. Twenty per cent. This means that BIG THINGS ARE IN PLAY. It means that (without sacrificing opportunities for ‘organised sport’) we have to include everyone – get everyone active.

The speech and the book then, have to come over all philosophical. I think there are moral imperatives in play as well as economic arguments: society cannot afford for zillions of people to be physically or mentally un-healthy. We all deserve a lump of happiness and the wider clan needs us to be productive. It’s a no-brainer that activity *nearly always supports* health. Great, uplifting, compelling experiences in Physical Education for young people can be personally transformative, can maybe lift where we’re at, as individuals, on the Happiness Index.

I want all of it – generous and ‘holistic’ approaches to PE, throughout the age-groups, and fabulous recreational sports and/or pathways. Change the thinking and invest in all of it. (Surely we’re sliding somewhere quite dark, if we don’t?)

There are political and philosophical notions we just can’t duck out of. My argument, I suppose, is that we need to prioritise and invest in wellness, not maxxing-out on profits. Because every one of us is valuable.

After the verbals I include a transcript of my speech.

BOOK LAUNCH.

Enough already of this welcome and adoration. It can’t last. For as sure as eggs are eggs… and beans are beans… and brown sauce is better than red, on bangers and bacon, you will desert me. For we are fickle, are we not? We ‘like’ everything but then move on, to the next story – the next poor, unfortunate target for our fleeting attention. I’m a realist, friends. There’ll be a lol-tastic notification coming along any minute – over here; over there – cats on the Twitters; dancers on the twick-twocks – and my moment in the spotlight will be gone.

I blame the Kardashians – I blame the Kardashians for everything – just ask the kids. Pouting. Potholes on the A40. Climate Change. Footballers diving and Raducanu changing coaches every twenty minutes. I blame the Kardashians. Cold toast; hot – fuck me, burning hot – Cornish pasties; V.A.R.; 30p Lee; too many adverts spoiling yer telly. I blame the Kardashians.

Surprisingly however, Beautiful Games is not the work of an embittered old bloke who can’t pout. The closest it gets to Worldly Cynicism is maybe through the introductory quote, from Naomi Klein:

‘Everywhere we look we find “binaries where thinking once existed.”

I kinda like that, because it makes me sound brainy. To be honest I haven’t the faintest idea what she’s onnabout but it seemed a good idea to have something wordy and philosophical in the first few pages. The rest is bollocks about Ford Escorts and beer. And sport.

‘Everywhere we look we find “binaries where thinking once existed”. Wish I’d said that. Instead I said

on P xii “I really want this book to be explainer-lite. Can’t stand the idea that the dots have to be joined/profundities unpicked for a readership that is thereby presumed to be brain-dead: insulting bollocks… (more)… not everything will be revealed”.

I also say “this book, whilst wading through the baggage of a middle-aged white guy, will be anti-bigotry. Believe it or not. Its purpose is to celebrate personal and universal stuff about activity. Not sure that can be done without advocating for those damp essentials love and understanding”.

But what the feck does that mean?!?

Glad you asked. Let me have a thrash at this. The book is in three sections: the first is called ‘Formations’ because it digs into things that may have made me… but which also relate, surely, to all of us? Family; environment; good energies; trauma or tragedy.

So ‘Formations’ is Big Relatable Stories. There’s stuff about ‘cannonballs’ – the heavy, soapy, brown-leather footballs we used to head, as kids, even though they weighed about twelve tons. There’s stuff about travelling to Canada dressed as Elvis Costello, and the hairs in my nostrils freezing as we stepped off the plane into the North American winter – at minus 26. (Fact). Then about playing indoor soccer with mad Italians and some geezer pulling a large hairy knife on my best mate in a nightclub in Thunder Bay. Exactly the kind of thing we’ve all experienced, yes?

Look, there is family, adventure and growth and maaaybee one of the central themes of the book, poisons in the ether – machismo; toughness; the ever-present fraudulence that is ‘masculinity.’ But also the wonder of sport and camaraderie and the craic. So the wild, contradictory kaleidoscope that is life… as a bloke(?)… or (know what?) however we may identify.

It’s no accident that chapter one – Unwise Tendencies – is about the violent homophobia that was everywhere, in our childhoods. I may need to come out as boringly, resolutely straight at this point, but that prejudice (in the North of England, in the 60s/70s) had a massive, conditioning effect on how I was and who I became. I wonder if it might be something of a surprise to many of you to discover *how much* the book has to say about blokeyness and ‘strength’ and pressures around behaviour. Let me read you something on this – true story:

Reading from P4 …”Much of the rich hinterland around this…

and no, I don’t know what that means either”.

I don’t happen to be gay… but I/we who were skinny or medium-brainy or had some facility for French or English Lit were in mortal danger, at school and beyond. I understand this excruciatingly poisonous, mind-boggingly pervasive plane of enlightenment marks the extreme edge of ‘laddishness’ but I think we know it’s still with us – and maybe in places we don’t really care to look. Certainly machismo in sport lies very close to prejudice. Beautiful Games deals with some of this; sympathetically, I hope, but also has a pop, creates some mischief.

On a happier note, the first section of the book does contain plenty in the way of wholesome tribute to Welsh heroes at Solva Athletic Football Club and later at Llanrhian CC. There’s lots of heading (a football) and some speculation about the effect of that. There’s a brief ode to K D Lang. There’s a coupla key chapters about family tragedy because *absolutely* that has made us… and a lot of family pride. This is not just about sport: it’s about formation.

Part Two is called ‘Practice’, meaning the hows and whys of sport. And the brilliance, and the inspirational figures or methods that become your way/my way.

We’re into culture and good practice; the Wonderstuff, whether that be through the All Blacks’ ‘No Dickheads’ policy or Brian Clough’s ‘OH YOO ARE BLOODY ‘OPELESS!!’

Both were godlike and inspirational, in ver-ry different ways; the one a kind of code of honour and way of being that set extraordinary and (dare we say it) civilised standards of behaviour *as well as* producing an 86% win-rate in international rugby over more than a decade. (And this is a very high figure). The other – Brian Clough – was a law unto himself but found a way to motivate his teams through personal magnetism, elite-level pig-headedness and a truly intuitive but profound understanding of a) football and b) people.

At my own daft level I love coaching teams: in fact I really like the word – is that sad? TEEEEEAAMMM! Teams are gangs of mates or soul-sisters who do that walk-through-fire thing or just pat you on the shoulder when you’re bowling like an arse. Teams encourage and build and take you, the individual no-hoper somewhere hilarious and miraculous. And know what? Teams aren’t just for sport… and they aren’t *just about* sport.

Clough was maybe something of a drunk and something of a bully. (I’m neither, honest). But he took two mid-ranking teams – Derby and Forest – to league titles and he and Peter Taylor engineered two European Cup wins. Incredible… and I think fascinating. His players ‘just knew’ he was a genius. They followed him and believed in him. He did ‘just know’. This was about relationships as much as skill.

This may be anorak central but bear with. Clough’s former players talk about his team-talks. (I like team-talks). Apparently on occasion, even before massive games, he would spread a towel on the floor of the changing rooms, and place a football on it. Like some druid ritual. Then he would just say something like “OI. You lot. This is a ball. There’ll be one out there. Go get it… and keep the fucking thing”.

Interestingly – I think –the great All Blacks coaches Sir Graham Henry and Sir Steve Hansen – allegedly got to a point where they barely said anything on matchdays. The players were so prepared, so in charge, so empowered, that there was no hairdryer and no Churchillian rhetoric from the coaches. No need. The players are ready. I’m aware this may be a bit niche, friends. But compare and contrast with Guardiola, Klopp, Tuchel, etc etc – with the zillions of messages going out before and during top-level football matches, now. I think that may be a kind of madness.

In Part Two I write chapters on the All Blacks, Clough, Guardiola, Bazball, the fabulous and universe-changing development of women and girl’s sport. There are also Honourable Mentions for Dutch football/Bobby Charlton/Chloe Kelly/Welsh rugby/the Baabaas and many more. I do make the point that though women and girls sport is better supported than before there is still much work to be done and throughout this book, I promise, I am mindful that competitive, organised sport is not the be-all and end-all, in any event. Beautiful Games moves towards being about Sport Development – that is the provision of activity for all. More on this in a moment.

Some of you will know that I have ECB Accreditation as Written Media and most often use this to follow England and Wales Women cricket: it’s been a real privilege to have been quite close to the powerful surge in that half of the game, for towards a decade. I talk about this in the book – in both books, asitappens.

Locally, Llanrhian Ladies are a spectacular example of the joy and development occurring in cricket. They are absolutely magic and have transformed our cricket club so they are in Beautiful Games – of course they are! Finally, in the section on practice, the book turns to the other great revelation of the current moment, namely Pembrokeshire Seniors cricket.

Reading from P155 ‘Here’s something weird and wonderful...

To p157 …”I am going to be bereft when I can’t bowl”.

Sad but true, I really AM gonna be bereft when I can’t bowl. But onwards, in haste. To the final section, which I’ve called ‘The Case for Sport’.

I have worked as a coach for Cricket Wales – still doing it – and as a peripatetic PE teacher for Sport Pembrokeshire. Ver-ry proud of my colleagues in both organisations. Latterly I also did some work ploughing through a significant bundle of reports on wellbeing/activity/lifestyles for children. I’m no academic but this was ‘my territory’ so Matt at Sport Pembrokeshire let me loose on this to try and draw insights about what good, enlightened provision might look like. Who needs activity most? What’s most effective? What can we justify doing? Inevitably political/philosophical and strategic stuff, in an environment where (criminally, to be frank) budgets are likely to tighten, not loosen up.

I may have gone into this feeling a tad cynical about surveys. As a deliverer of sport you can’t help but think that it’s bloody obvious that activity is so essential and life-affirming and developmentally important in every way we don’t need reports to tell us that! They feel a bit like exercises commissioned by dead-souled office wallahs. Like who doesn’t know that exercise is good and that we have to fund absolutely everything that’s legitimate, to fight the good fight against obesity, poor mental health, the fall into sedentary behaviour and the peer pressure around body-image – for which I blame the Kardashians!

We all know this! And yet, because the more I looked at the surveys – from Pembs County Council/Senedd/the Happen Survey/the Good Childhood Report, from the Children’s Society etc, etc – the more I bought into the idea that they are often very sophisticated and skilful, and they do provide us with good, even valuable information. We just have to act on it.

So I talk about personally taking the Happen Survey into Pembrokeshire Primary Schools and then producing a kind of brainstorming document around good practice (for our Sport Pembs practitioners – Active Young People Officers, by name). About the conclusions we might draw, the options we might take. I try to weed out from the mighty, meaty documents some workable priorities or undeniable truths. I offered them to my colleagues in Sport Development across West Wales, and I offer them to you, in Beautiful Games.

Reading from p 195…

“I wrote two reports…

To end of chapter on p196.

Part Three then, does make the Case for Sport, indeed it campaigns, in a way that I hope still manages to provide some entertainment. You don’t have to be wearing a tracksuit to get this book. You really don’t. Despite being ‘sport-mad’, I can tell you that those of us who coach or teach Physical Education (or sports, or games), now understand that given where we are – deep into a wellbeing crisis, with no sign that authorities get that – we have to get moving. All of us. So PE becomes more about everybody; welcomes Joey who can’t catch and Sara who can’t run in. Welcomes them; offers them something they can do and enjoy – probably with their friends.

You don’t have to be a Sports Development geek to sense the requirement for a wider, broader remit, for Physical Education. We have to get every child comfortable with movement. Find the funding, make the change, acknowledge the crisis and the need for a re-fresh of the offer. Ludicrously, in my view, despite being lumped in to a new Area of Learning with Wellbeing & Mental Health, PE is still not a core subject. Make it a core subject.

Let me finish, dear friends, with a Mad Idea. There is nothing more important than the physical and mental health of our young people. Could we be bold enough, then, generous enough, civilised enough to *actually invest* in what matters? By this I mean – amongst other things – look at and think about the UNICEF National Happiness Index as a meaningful measure of where we’re at. Stick the GDP and the Footsie right up yer arris. Forget this charade about ‘economic growth’. Value that which is valuable: health; wellbeing; the capacity to move and make adventures. Let’s ‘get going’ on that.

Mine’s a pint of Guinness. Thankyou.

Ability is not the issue.

~ bowlingatvincent ~ Leave a comment

Gonna front-end this piece with a few words. Have a concern that, written immediately as the players left court, with the Raducanu interview driving the narrative, it’s overly unsympathetic. (Despite being an opinionated middle-aged bloke, I don’t think I’m generally unsympathetic).

In my role as a pathway coach I am *definitely* not lacking in empathy or sensitivity towards issues around confidence or mental health. I make some sharpish points, here, about the need to be tough at all levels of sport – particularly, of course, the elite level – but maybe it’s a mistake to omit the balancing-points around player welfare and ease. (I guess I took these to be understood: and that therefore it’s permissible to challenge).

Raducanu is brilliant and in no way do I want to contribute to undermining her. Quite the reverse. I want to see her regain her place at the very peak of women’s tennis. But plainly there are *questions arising*, currently, which many of us recognise. Questions that she, as a slam-winner and top, top player, must answer on the court. She knows this, and must also know that this is relatively time-critical. Going down 6-0 in the first set, to a low-ranked player – however good or inspired – is unacceptable. Not preparing sufficiently well is unacceptable. There are nettles to be grasped, broiling kitchens to be endured.

So compete with everything you have – not for us fans or critics, but for you. Compete with maximum effort for maximum honour and personal satisfaction. Show us you love it and need it; that it means everything. Or quit. If it doesn’t make you happy or the grind simply ain’t worth it, quit. That’s a perfectly legitimate option: after you’ve tried like hell.

Let’s do that thing where we infuriate the entire universe of People Who Really Know… Tennis. (I don’t really know tennis but I *do get sport* and I *do* coach and of course this makes me the very worst kind of keyboard warrior: the cod-psychological, smart-arse-know-nowt kind). But on.

Raducanu. I fall into watching her opening round match. It’s looking like it’s in Qatar, but the wind/sun/ failed serve-toss combo might mean Brighton. But no, it is Qatar, so more #sportswashing, in front of plenty media, twelve people and a peregrine falcon or two. (Apols, if that’s offensive stereotyping: but I’m bored of Big Unethical Moneystates scooping up everything – and there was nobody there. Occasionally the spittle, though righteous, will stir).

But Raducanu. Loses. In the first round, again. (A-and yes I know what her ranking is, currently, but c’mon). Then maybe heroically, maybe foolishly takes interview immediately post-game. She acquits herself reasonably well, given the circumstances – 6-0 first set, second lost in tiebreak – but airing the notion that she needs to practice more outdoors and in daylight may not cut it with most of us.

*Thinks*: wot yoo lost (partly) because you weren’t ready for the conditions… of daylight… and some wind? Is that what you’re telling us? (Or, to be fair, it’s one of the things you need to attend to?) Call me an ill-informed, judgemental outsider but there’s a large and hairy WTF quotient looming here, is there not?

You’re a professional athlete – a tennis player. Your job is probably to prepare, eh? For the physical and mental challenges – inevitably, more of that later – and the challenges the environments may pose. The ‘conditions’. Part of the whole bundle is accepting that you can’t control those but (or so) you practice like hell in a variety of situations, so as to maximise your readiness for whatever. Raducanu did imply that maybe she hadn’t trained outdoors enough, in daylight.

The match was lost in the first set, in the sense that the Brit failed to register, against Kalinina, of the Ukraine – listed at no. 237 on the WTA rankings. Appalling Admission no. 862: I didn’t see this set, but for a player of Raducanu’s potential (or quality, or heft?) this was poor. 6-0 is either a significant blip, unacceptable, or catastrophic, depending on your level of investment or tetchiness. And I reckon many of us have become tetchy.

The second set was at least competitive, with the wildcard Brit muscling or easing through to 6 apiece, before wilting in the critical finally rallies. (Raducanu nudged ahead, late-on, to threaten a third set, but a couple of killer unforced errors rather gifted Kalinina the win).

There are arseholes out there who get vitriolically angry, early-doors, thinking about Raducanu. ‘For chrissakes; how can a slam winner with her talent, athleticism and god-given groundstrokes fail so much? It can only be woke weediness. She prob’ly doesn’t even eat meat. She prob’ly didn’t even need all those operations – it’s all in her fekkin’ head!’ These are the unsayable things that people are saying, are they not?

I watched the US Open win - a good lump of the tournament. Raducanu was irresistible in a pret-ty special way. Her backhand was Federeresque; ridiculous and free and endlessly without fear. Her movement was truly excellent. Her temperament seemed largely devoid of doubt. She proper announced herself and it felt like this was on merit; this was a beginning upon which she would surely build. The Fall has been dramatic – or melodramatic, depending on your understanding of the issues (or non-issues?)

We may find ourselves rustling through that unappealing sackload of unsayable stuff. The changing coaches every Wednesday; the hard-to-read flightiness or casual(?) capitulation. The bad results piling up – yup, with the pejorative language.

So is she a prima donna? Is she a spoilt brat – another posh-ish, indulged type? Practically uncoachable, and trapped in her own, feisty-but-vulnerable world? However offensive they may seem – to her, to you – these are questions she needs to answer.

We’ve seen and can see that the playing skills are there but how do we account, generally, for the mentality of champions… and has Raducanu ever had that? If we can answer this mad abstraction in the affirmative, does this increase the likelihood that its absence may be temporary? Was the wonderful surge that was the US just a flush of adrenaline and very temporary liberation into greatness? If so, does that make it a single, divine fluke, in the context of what’s beginning to feel like inevitable disappointments?

I’m as tribal as you lot. I want Emma Raducanu to do well – to reclaim that position, that respect, that maximised self. I have concerns about her mentality: (what other descriptor can we use?) It may be wise to avoid pejorative language in a case where all of confidence, belief and equanimity may be precarious but sustained top-level careers surely need either toughness or the propensity to rebound from the sharpest of setbacks. High-end sport is, of course, exposing.

Raducanu is in the crosshairs because of her notable brilliance, marketability and the psychodrama into which she may have spiralled. She needs to find something, quickly: a long-term, trusted, inspirational coach would be good. A way out or forward and on. This may demand digging deep, fighting the fight, re-building that capacity to play through those clutch moments. Ability is not the issue.

Pope and dolphins and Klopp.

~ bowlingatvincent ~ 2 Comments

Big call whether to write about Pope or Klopp. May not decide ’til I’m *really in there*. Or, unsurprisingly to the three of you who fall into the Regular Readers category, that issue may remain unresolved.

Day after the first net session where I ‘ran in’ as well as set the world straight. (Been coaching every Sunday for several weeks – and still loving that – but joined some of the old guys soon to set off for Chenai for the Over 60s World Cup and yeh, had a bowl. With mixed success). Oh – and woke up this morning having to acknowledge the schoolboy error of having bowled with toenails just that wee bit too long. Other aches and pains not kicked-in yet.

But Pope. A special, timely knock, which fits with his Golden Boy trajectory-thing – that is, ‘expectation’ – and offers England a chance to meaningfully resist the Indian strut towards a win. He may, despite the distraction of that contraflow between boyishness and the vice-captaincy, be too accomplished to need public affirmation but, let’s face it, it’s always handy. This was top-level classy, in the spotlight, under the cosh, just when we needed it and probably with Delhi Belly. He may have had to overcome a slight niggle or two and no sleep ‘cos the Bharat Army were holding an all-nighter in the hotel car park. Whatever; it was special and ver-ry public. And away; in India. Massive that he got right through the day. Next up, Bumrah with a new ball.

But Klopp. Also a moment. Whether it falls into the Do You Know Where You Were category may hinge on whether you’re a red (obvs), or if you even follow the footie. (If you follow the footie to any degree then it was biggish). I can tell you where I was – and worse still, I’m gonna do that thang.

I was on the cliffs at Strumble Head, North Pembrokeshire, because a) it’s bloody sensational and b) in the faint hope that the humpback whale that (I kid you not) has been cruising the block might reveal itself again. Glorious day, but I under-clubbed on the clothing front.

Anyway, I get out of the car – a mud-splattered VW Polo, with a century on the clock – and shift the Graham Parkeresque shades that are digging into ma beak. There’s something out in front. Wow; forget that Whatsapp notifibloodycation; there’s something there. Unmistakably. It’s a byoodiful day, if parky, but I’ve stepped right into a pod of dolphins doing their arched ‘oi oi geezer’ flypast. Forget the phone. They’re no more than fifty yards off the coast. In front of the line of empty cars – again suggesting that the moment has singled me out. I adjust my box and raise ma bat.

Then I walk to the block building, where the Proper Naturalists are watching. You can tell they’re proper because they have two dogs each and lenses that reach the Wicklow Mountains. Best not talk to them before I’ve looked at the info-posters on the back wall: I need to know what’s a dolphin and what’s a porpoise. Then we can exchange pleasantries and make circuitous (but cool) enquiries about Humpy. (Dolphins have beaks; porpoises don’t).

No sightings. But there are more dolphins to our right. And the fella with the handsome hound-terrier-thing is *actually friendly*. He’s barely anal at all, despite the clobber. We could probably talk about cricket or football as well as cetaceans. I loiter and yes, do raise bi-nocs to my eyes, purposefully, before setting out towards Carregwasted, or somewhere.

Another ping finally prompts the check. Shit – it’s The Lads – meaning elite bantz and/or stuff that matters. It’s only now I see that Klopp has recorded his ‘message to the fans’. Wow. I am 157 yards north of the block building at Strumble Head when I hear that Jurgen’s dipping out. I have no connection to Liverpool Football Club but I’m genuinely bit shocked. And then, listening to that explanation, respectful – respectfully disappointed.

I’ve not spent the last twenty-four hours trawling The Athletic (or anywhere else) for in-depth analysis or Insta-goss. This can sit with me as human story; with a thoroughly good man feeling like he best escape into family life/ordinary life ASAP. He owes that to his wife: and crucially, there is life beyond football. Liverpool can’t be everything forever. If there’s a sort of continental drift going on, Klopp’s not going to let his energy combust in the subduction zone. He ain’t gonna go down and let the all-consuming consume him. There’s more ground to discover – a life to be liberated into. Fair play.

Ar Jurgen’s always been easy to love, despite the occasional touchline aberration. (Notes to universe; all managers are monsters). Klopp is unequivocally big-hearted; generous; understanding of and able to coach the best from the human spirit and the collective will. He’s urgent and deep and brilliant, with that soft-left man-hugging soulfulness being a pleasingly sharp contrast to the spiky mania and techno-genius of Pep. The German is more lovable; closer to us; good-natured. A leader who could travel on the bus or tube: and share the jokes about Hendo or the Egyptian King. Even now.

The ‘achievements’ will be listed elsewhere. They’re real, but so too is the feeling. Klopp soaked-up the power of the surge, early doors. He knew he could make a high-energy, irresistible kind of entertainment work at Anfield. It might be high tariff in terms of that gambol around possession as god: he would tilt things more towards directness than control. Liverpool would attack you. The fanbase would identify with that and quite possibly get off, just a little, on the rawness and pace and the somehow ballsy defiance expressed or implied. It would be ‘proper’.

The gaffer understood that Liverpool is unique: there was something he could harness to his own brand. This season, a patently unexceptional Liverpool side – o-kaaay, on the Grand Scale – with a strike force consisting of Mo Salah and two blokes trying to find something find themselves top of the league. Klopp is building quickly,; is ahead of the game again. But he will know that City have more quality and are more likely to approach invulnerability. The reds will need every ounce of the gaffer’s nous and ability to motivate if they are to grab the Prem title.

I do wonder if this is part of Jurgen’s thinking. Plainly he does want to enjoy some semblance of Normal Family Life, *and* avoid a critical loss of verve whilst still in post at Anfield. But could he be stirring yet more definitive defiance amongst the Scouse Posse by announcing this now? Could he be pressing green for go on one more almighty surge? Might he understand that this is the way – the best, most likely way – to keep the storm brewing? I hope the bloke can do it.

India Eng: * sounds like*…

~ bowlingatvincent ~ Leave a comment

Yeh, all very well, battling ‘gainst a tasty turner (is it really that?), in the angry sun, with eighty zillion people watching, but in Pembs we’re raging against the dying of the green light – the flaming WIFI! So yeh whilst I have some sympathy for Our Lads, having to get up at 3.30 to play international sport, it’s the (never-ending, trust me) high-tech/low-tech trauma I’m principally concerned with, first thing. Sure it’s gloomy; sure the calves and the crows look bit bedraggled… but can bitta damp and bitta swirl really knock out the signal?

Of course it can. Nearly always does.

I don’t get up mad early because I can’t watch – no TNT or whatever-it-is. I don’t get up because admittedly foolishly I watched a crap film ‘til lateish. (Terminator something: what the hell was I thinking?) Plus – incredibly, I know – nobody’s paying me, and we’re one notch down, rightly or wrongly, from Ashes Cricket. But I am interested in this Test.

India are good and they will want to compete: (euphemism, for grind England into the dirt). England *really might* relish the prospect of setting out the Bazball stall even there. Plus, even though he may have a somewhat reduced role, Bumrah is damned watchable. England, very much to their credit, have been tremendously watchable, for two years solid.

Like most of you, I’m on this from breakfast-time, or more exactly faffing abart trying to find available coverage on the tellybox, then laptop, via that pitiful WIFI. Half an hour’s furo-angst later, with the i-pad shoved hard against the bookshelf between me and next door, I’m in business. That former doorway might be plastered-over with unconvincingly soundproofed board and the source, from our friends at Bee Effing Tee may be scandalously poor and subject to brain-scramblingly frequent interruptions, but it lands about three foot two from the alcove, on their side. Finally, we do seem to have fluked a decent signal. Allez-bloody-loo.

I can live with the fact that the lads decide to have tea, a few minutes after I’m set. Talksport 2. Kimber has started with a duff ‘stat’ which he admits proves nothing but then gets into his flow. Some might say it’s heavyish on the smartarsery but the bloke has good intelligence and intimidating knowledge of the game. Harmison offers a decent foil. Helpfully, the match is obviously and immediately riveting.

Test Cricket is forever contemplating its navel: or worse, being either ushered towards some inevitable grave, or potentially fore-shortened. England have cut through the white noise and the tribal-historical psychobantz and had a right go at things. They’ve been thrillingly bold and changed or even made irrelevant, the arguments. They’ve entertained us in exactly the way Stokes and McCullum promised. Almost uniquely over the span of the universe, a Management Posse have said extravagantly generous stuff and then delivered. How’s that gonna go, in Hyderabad? Six an over possible?

With 23 overs left in the day, and England a smidge short of 250 all out, it’s game on – but only one side can score at a rate that would make Geoffrey Boycott blush. It’s already apparent we may be looking at a short, eventful game. Hard to know how long the McCullum Crew will remain in it, but we know that they will resist.

Highlights? Stokes has climbed into his armour and clanged another unlikely (but likely) 70. Spinners have been ‘on top’ but rather wonderfully – in terms of the execution and the narrative – Bumrah – the other knight-god-icon – was the one to fell the England skipper. Hartley offers a nice cameo, with the bat, 23 on debut.

In the zooming and booming, it’s easy to forget that England were 50 for nought, early doors. Duckett went on to get 35 before the clusters of wickets either side of some stout resistance (wot else?) from Bairstow (who sounded in great nick) and also Root. Wood, alongside Stokes, hints briefly at another lusty contribution but then suddenly he’s bowling: struck for four, first ball. The sole quick is partnered by Hartley – another characteristically bold call from the England camp. Slow left arm, second over of the Test. He is thrashed for six twice. Wow.

Wood, of course, is putting it all in there. Bowls two short ones in his second over; both called wides for height. India have 22 for no wicket after eighteen balls. Hartley looks nervy, maybe: poor ball gifts Sharma runs to leg. Then Jaiswal slams a further boundary. Two worryingly expensive overs from the newbie. Kimber notes that Hartley may never have opened the bowling with a red ball. So Big Ask. It’s also been suggested – repeatedly, by Pietersen – that he’s not finding any meaningful turn. Ah.

‘India are flying along’ at 35 for 0. They’re doing an England.

Leach is in, to follow Wood, who just bowled those two overs, with customary intent. Subtext – in and out of the comms box – Leach rarely spins it significantly.

Stokes predictably persists with Hartley, who is ‘suffering’. Jaiswal has 40… off about three deliveries. Statements are being exchanged: Stokes offering the aerial route, India saying ‘cheers then’. 68 for 0 after ten overs. Stokes saying ‘I back yooo, mate’ to the debutant.

Wow is the word. We have more rapid-fire, high-colorific cricket in front of us: from a team that are unequivocally not led by Stokes and McCullum. In a Test Match. With a capacity crowd. This might be wonderful.

If there *are* negatives they may be around just how long this match may last… and (for England) how damaging Stokes’s faith in Hartley might be.

But then Hartley beats Rohit Sharma twice! Reviewed: not out. England go on to burn all three reviews before we get to 15 overs. The calls weren’t entirely howlers… but they may need to reflect on that.

Sharma has looked/sounded watchful as well as positive, but he skies one from Leach. Stokes races around and pouches. 80 for 1. England need a cluster: could this be the start?

No. The left-hander Jaiswal sparkles throughout, and the lushly-gifted Gill sees out the day alongside. India not just ahead, at 119 for 1, but expansively, entertainingly so. The home side have not only accepted the gauntlet that is the *England Vibe*, but have stylishly brushed it against Stokes’s jaw. Yes it’s possible that the hosts could lose a bundle of wickets. Yes the England spinners might find the necessary consistency or Wood might transform the energy of the match. But it feels, to be blunt, unlikely. India are bossing this; the crowd are loving it; the batters are probably better than our lot; the bowlers are odds-on to prove more of a threat.

On day one, having won what was widely regarded as a crucial toss, England started well, faded and recovered, with the bat. On a challenging surface (though not an unfair or inconsistent one), the 246 all out was no capitulation, but offered little slack: the bowlers had to respond with discipline as well as ambition. They didn’t – not really. Stokes naturally held out with boldish or theoretically wicket-taking fields but only Leach found line and length. Hartley was targeted and though he bowled one or two jaffers, he was mediocre; short or wide *just enough* to offer fine players gifts. Ahmed was similarly unconvincing: Wood was rather mysteriously absent.

We should finish on a positive, eh? Jaiswal was pretty close to sensational.

pic from Guardian Sport

Sancho.

~ bowlingatvincent ~ Leave a comment

Difficult to know, from where most of us are sitting, whether Jadon Sancho has been genuinely worryingly depressed, following his difficult time are Manchester United, or if he’s ‘more simply(?)’ been cheesed-off at his various demotions.

Both scenarios are unfortunate, but only one of them legitimately invokes our sympathy. Either way, and let’s be clear, there may be lots of ways, in this peculiarly contemporary saga – so wise to bin the binaries medium-pronto, yes? – one of few incontrovertible truths here may be the one about how Sancho played his way out of contention. He was poor, on the pitch. But how much of that was a function of stiff, unskilled management of a sensitive or complex soul and how much is down to raw or rather dumb brattishness or lack of application from the player? And, hang on, is that already sounding like another dynamic, oversimplistic duo? ‘Misunderstood’, or ‘Typical Modern Player: lightweight?’

Time-out – early. It can be fun and even invigorating to latch onto View A and judge: or B. It’s just not clever. Deep breath; look in mirror; extend tongue out for inspection. Sniff and re-gather.

We might suspect that Ten Hag is as impassively wooden as his clipped Dutch accent makes him sound. We know that Sancho’s poor timekeeping has been noted over a period – not just at United. But he doesn’t look or feel like a rebel-without-a-clue. Some of us wonder whether the lad was really that good when he came in, or if his stint in Germany was dotted with inconsistency or peripherality. We didn’t really see. Was he truly high-level brilliant, or merely sometimes electrifying? If the former, does over-expectation figure in the matrix, from early-doors?

We ask this because from the moment he stepped out for M U, he rarely looked a top player. Sancho – or this Sancho – could neither do that twisting-the-blood thing nor convincingly play within himself, like an elite player-in-transit might, before finding his or her groove. He looked so short of confidence that even gearing-down to a ‘simple game’ looked beyond him.

We know that (or hear that) a man-hug can sometimes sort this out. The proverbial ‘arm around’. Klopp is likely to be a master at this; Ten Hag, less so. But this does not at all mean that Sancho wasn’t getting enough love, in those early days. He may have been. And besides, for all the legitimate talk of confidence and wellbeing, there is an argument that *in this particular environment*, a measure of resilience is a requirement. Professional sport searches for and supports confidence and makes demands of it. The competitor needs to be resilient: they know this. Theoretically.

An individual may well be delusional about their own contribution but they are aware of what is required. Everywhere, the word ‘expectations’. Who gets in their ears, from club, per-group or family, when times then become challenging, is therefore important. Who’s ‘around?’ How is the challenge met?

Big Brutal Picture. The very nature of ‘form’ – real, constructed or subjectively-viewed – implies judgement and consequence. Sancho plays repeatedly below par and (despite help/support/concern for his wellbeing) he has to be dropped. Whatever the family or agent are saying. Dropped. Not for being a bad man or a weak man or anything else but for playing below par. The reasons are important… but secondary. They will be attended to, but for now, it’s Arsenal away. If, after time, the club hierarchy become displeased by poor attitude or timekeeping or lack of commitment to training; or if the player sparks any difficulties in relationships through petulance or perceived arrogance, then that’s different. Things will deteriorate. The exclusion-through-performance becomes exclusion for misdemeanour.

This will be, weirdly, both an absurdly cushy environment and a disciplined one. (That mad binary is true). Players both ‘don’t know they’re born’ *and* are under a cruel spotlight. Training sessions filmed; contributions checked and logged; bodies sat-navved. Sancho has seemed too bland to fit the role of Champagne Charlie; too quiet to be a subversive. And yet he was banished, to train ‘elsewhere’, suggesting something personal in the drift. Words must have been said.

Of course the club has responsibilities (as well as financial incentives) towards keeping players happy and well. Sancho was a signature investment; whatever the reasons for his poor return, it seems certain that substantial efforts, whether by personal interventions or professional support, will have been made initially, towards appeasing any issues and building ways back to expected form. At Point X, though, a falling-out occurred – a few unwise or spiteful words from either player or manager or both. Given the power-distribution in the relationship, this could only go one way. Ten Hag was right to look to offload.

Leaving, of course, more questions – principally, I would argue, about the younger man. Like who has been around him? He doesn’t appear to have the strut or inclination of a rebel. Who’s in his ear? He was dropped, for playing badly or to little effect. Fine. Work hard, play your way back in. But no. Before we know it trust and those key relationships – that key relationship! – are gone. Busted. We lurch into less edifying territory.

How truly vulnerable has Sancho been? Why this MASSIVE FALL? Why the sense of animosity, as opposed to shared purpose? Oh – and have people in either camp – or both – been, yaknow, *clutching at agendas?*

This dispiriting episode may yet prove more unsatisfactory if it turns out the player could have bitten his lip and knuckled down but for other influences. Or is he really just a bit young, a bit deluded… a bit unable to accept the non-negotiables?

Sancho will really have to work to restore himself, now. I genuinely hope he can.

Pic from Daily Telegraph.

Warner: a short inflammation.

~ bowlingatvincent ~ Leave a comment

He brings out the tribal in us Poms, for sure, so he ain’t gonna get a fair trial. Not here.

Don’t care. Just not having the general rehabilitation of Warner. It’s just been too obvious for too long that the fella reeks of banter gone bad, sledging gone to the dark side and celebration-entirely-as-wind-up. Nobody’s jumped so performatively high or roared so consciously provocatively. And yeh we get that this is what competitors do… but not like him: no need. He has the arrogance of the small man and the feeble-evil veil of the absolute J Arthur.

Ugly? Maybe. Judgemental? Certainly. But this is what plenty people think. In the cauldron of sport that Warner so seems to relish, he’s been bubbling under with the Bad Guys for aeons, however nice he might be to children and animals. His chopsiness and malice – faux, forced or ‘just for fun’ – have made him a leading candidate for Most Hated Man in Sport for more than a decade. Why? Mainly because of that inflammatory-distraction schtick he’s got going.

Of course, there maaay be something in the idea that sport is bendable to your will, and that therefore you can benefit from ‘getting in the heads’ of the opposition: that notion’s been nearly as central to Warner’s career as the swing of his bat. But na. We’re not aligning ourselves with the spurious pomp (with the Spirit of You-Know-What) if we shout cobblers to that. When it’s so obvious and so-o cheap, we’re entitled to bristle – and do it with an honest gale at our backs. His Panto villainry entered that joke isn’t funny anymore territory about three seconds after he first tried it… in 1872.

There are ways of being psychologically competitive without being an arse. In this case, time hasn’t much cured the universal dislike. Warner hasn’t noticeably moved towards our grudging respect, except maybe in the cricket media, some of whom will know him outside the game. (Others I think may be doing the ‘grown-up thing’ of accepting his abrasiveness and unpopularity as his way of ‘leading the fight’, or ‘taking it on the chin’. Understand that; don’t buy it).

It’s not just the Brits who’ve disliked the fekker and enjoyed his scalp more than the rest. Again, though his batting record is good, particularly at home, I don’t register this attention on the leftie’s wicket as being about Warner the Perceived Threat, entirely. Many feel he’s hard to respect.

He’s back in the news over a spat with a former comrade. To be honest I’ve barely looked at this but clearly Warner’s leading role in the whole Sandpapergate thing has been called-out. (Like we needed it), *he’s* been identified as the major protagonist. Well ya don’t say?!?

Sandpapergate was scandalous and poor and an insult to all of us. For me it figures entirely that Warner was indeed at the centre of it and likely bullied (in some way, to some extent) the junior player who allegedly carried out the damage to the ball. It stank. Some of us have both moved on *and* maintained a level of hostility to a) the idea of that significant (and significantly high-profile) cheating and b) Smith and Warner themselves. We’re somewhere between noting it still and not forgiving. We’re happy to take the accusation that we really should have forgiven this by now right there… on the chin.

Pic from Getty images.

Proper England.

~ bowlingatvincent ~ Leave a comment

70-odd thousand supporters in the ground; a grandstand finish; some heroic effort and some painfully poor choices when Our Lot seemed likely to score. Star player on the night and wisest, coolest head? In the pundit’s chair – Emma Hayes. And goddammit she’s lost to America. Everybody else bit lost in the rush and the ‘urgency’. So yeh, Proper England.

Russo fabulously mobile and full of intent – but only on the park for twenty minutes. James and Kirby and Stanway scandalously wayward or seemingly lazy… but probably just nervy, because despite their experience these MASSIVE, FLOODLIT, WEMBLEY NIGHTS are maybe something you do grow into over time. And then, in any case, they were stirred to brilliance. The visitors run ragged but also doing that ‘we’re here and we’re going to pick our moment because we *just might* have more class (or certainly composure) than you Inglish’ thing. The Oranje looking, in that first half, like they might get battered but win three nil.

Pick your moment to get irate about. Or enthuse about. Or say ‘this could only be England’ about. Because this was/is authentic, now. Was it the godawful second goal, where every Lioness in the building went AWOL, or misjudged, or daren’t commit, before the consistently excellent Earps let a distinctly ordinary shot squirm under her body? Was it when James repeated the Unbelievably Bad Choice Option, despite having time and options? Was it Kirby – the brilliant, low-slung, cerebral, skilful Kirby – being persona non wotsits again; as absent as her fellow water-carrier (and fellow absentee) Walsh? I lost energy on all these things.

But c’mon. We were gripped. By the drama of the last half hour, and the quality of Hemp, despite her cruel isolation, and by the two richly weighted assists from James, and the wonder-pass that made the Netherland’s opener. Gripped.

When Toone – who had rightly been dropped after a series of performances which kinda personified the Lionesses thoroughly disappointing campaign – slid in the winner from James’s perceptive cross, Wembley went medium-bonkers in a particularly satisfying way.

England had surged back, hugely to their credit. The gaffer – Wiegmann – who had maybe been found wanting, tactically, early doors, threw Mead and Russo and probably Stanley Matthews at this, late on. She could have withdrawn Bronze or Stanway or Kirby or anyone but Hemp, at the half. Instead the tangential (and wasteful) Kelly got the hook, with England two-down and weirdly both dominant and worryingly porous. Then Morgan, then everybody with an English passport put shoulder to the wheel. It was a great win.

What it means though, is likely disappointment. Post-match, the wonderfully sturdy Earp heaped the blame on herself. Nah. One big error but she was exposed by poor work in front. Plus England should have capitalized on chances before and after the two weak concessions. Earp we love, for her general quality and the occasional delightfully obvious and possibly marginally defiant ‘what the fuck’, to the nearest and most intrusive camera. You’d want her in your mob.

As a squad, this particular group have under-achieved in this particular competition. But what the fuck? They got Wembley rammed. They won something major. They are worth the investment and the grief. They are our new, watchable, wonderful Ingerland.

Welcome to the End of Everything.

~ bowlingatvincent ~ Leave a comment

It rained. Like biblically. And then it was clear and bright – IS clear and bright as I write – for a big lump of time. Others, notably my hugely esteemed friend Mr G Dobell, Esquire, expressed immediate concerns about possible errors/omissions/slacknesses from the groundstaff because the match was abandoned surprisingly early, given the medium-fab conditions which followed. In short, (dare we ask?) did the venue staff cock it up, allowing the devilish downpour to seep through into critical areas of the pitch? (Because it didn’t look right).

And then – factoid – it *really was* balmy, or at the very least pleasantly helpful, for a prolonged period, immediately after the deluge. And, yaknow, this was an international match, in which England were in real danger of eviscerating the record books. So questions.

It may, however, be foolish to let hard rain be the story when the story should be Salt, or Duckett, or the cruel tribulations of the Irish seamers. Some extraordinary cricket happened.

Here’s how the action we saw felt, live:

Don’t ask me; just don’t ask me. I have no idea what triggered the enduring JD earworm. Was it Brizzle in the drizzle, being overcoatastically moody? Maybe. Maybe the (very temporary) greyness pointed my soul back to the Boy Curtis at his poetic/philosophical peak?

Existence well what does it matter? We live in the best way we can.

The past is all part of our future. The present is well out of hand.

Welcome to Gloucestershire County Cricket. Where Salt is facing Adair and Jacks is quietly pacing and Crawley – probably not a JD man – is England skipper. (I nearly wrote ‘incredibly’, here). Oh – and Salt has now taken 18 off the first four balls. (And then then the fifth was a wide). So my earworm thing was a portend. The world is ending. Welcome.

Jacks shows a greater degree of mercy than his partner; partly because the second over, from the spirited Little, is goodish. The poor fella Adair, meanwhile can’t find a wormhole quick enough or fast enough. England are going waaaay beyond that routine making of statements thing into a brutal humiliation zone. Jesus. Jacks joins in. England are SIXTY for 0 off the first FOUR OVERS. It’s an all-new, ridicu-level battering. This is happening despite the *bowler-friendly conditions*. Go figure: both Little and Adair are getting some swing and some movement off the pitch.

I’m trying hard not get distracted by a particular journo who is talking on the phone. It’s work-talk, and he’s not (now) doing that loud self-important thing (quite), but it is a pain in the arse. He ain’t gonna read this, so I will add that a senior colleague of his views him with deliciously real contempt… cos that feels like some kind of silent retribution for the last twenty minutes of infringement.

Salt has got 50 and then 60 before we get through 7 overs. Everything is ‘going’. Then he is, caught skying to mid-on. Cruelly thrilling stuff. Crawley marches out with England on 87 for 1, and McCarthy replacing Little, at the Ashley Down Road End. Jacks welcomes him with a six then four.

100 up on the 7 over mark. Perversely, Crawley gets England there with a gently steered straight drive, after having played a straight-batted defensive shot(!) to the previous ball. Jacks – fishing or fending(?) – is fortunate to escape as he edges towards short third, but Young bowls him with a peach the following delivery. 104 for 2, off 8. Duckett re-forms the Little and Large partnership with the towering captain. The skies have lowered a wee bit… and then cleared and brightened.

There are ironies in play – maybe there always are? Here they concern the noticeable softening of urgency, as the two notably urgent England Test openers see out a regression into Proper Cricket. The expectation for endless violence has retreated, somewhat. This gentility may be temporary.

Crawley drives straight and hard, at McCarthy. Classical. Four. But the recent #bantz in the press box includes the idea that England were ‘on for 700’. So even assuming a good wedge of stoutness and application from our Irish brothers, a massacre, possibly of historic proportions, seems inevitable. As if to reinforce that, Crawley hoists dismissively, for another six. 136 for 2, off 14.

Curtis Campher may be forgiven for drawing plenty of ujayii breaths, (for yogic comfort), before joining us – despite that slight tapering of violence. He gets off fairly lightly and can inhale further, over drinks. Ireland need drinks: short, nasty fekkers, probably.

Adair returns from beneath us. Goes too full. Cuffed through midwicket. Then Duckett absolutely clatters Campher, pulling just in front of square. Gleeful and violent again. When the batter tries to repeat – albeit with more of a cross-court top-spin drive, Nadal-style – mid-on bravely gets a hand there. Good, if symbolic stop.

Sit back briefly, to reflect. A re-cap should probably include the idea that Ireland haven’t necessarily bowled that badly. Feels more to me that England simply have better players. Salt (in particular) then, and Jacks were enabled or freed towards that killer explosion from the off. Duckett’s swing at Camphor suggests that he’s ready to launch, now, too: fabulous, skilled driller goes flying between the bowler and the ump. Four, and now 176 for 2, off 20.

We have our first sight of spin, from what (I’m going to call) the Media Centre End. Van Woerkom (born Christchurch) is a left-armer. The batters don’t let him settle. Little’s authentic Irishness serves him no better, on his return to Ashley Down. Crawley blasts to 50 in the over, which includes a crunching six over long-on.

200 come up in the following (23rd) over, with the light now brilliant and Duckett’s sweep joyfully extravagant. He also has 50, now.

Crawley goes. VW gets some turn away from him and the ball flies to short third. Sam Hain (born Hong Kong) will replace him. Duckett is pulling hard, at Little, who seems happy enough to proffer that gamble. Slight miscue, safe and good running brings three. Ireland cannot afford any misfields. There have been a couple. England’s leftie slog-sweeps, and times, to go to 68.

I think George Dockrell has just become Ireland’s seventh bowler on the day. No issue with that: why wouldn’t you cast around to seek some change or respite – or luck? Hain looks settled, early but it’s Duckett again who catches the eye. Another fabulous, liquid sweep rattles the boundary fence/rope/toblerone-thing. Hearing various numbers quoted here: all suggest this is a world-beating, record-breaking score (for England’s second team).

Oof. Adair has fallen heavily into the advertising-boards. He may wish it happened after his first three balls… but he will carry on.

Hain is plainly a man who can launch, but currently I’m enjoying his late-playing, soft-hands vibe. He’s guiding the ball around, seemingly untroubled, seemingly waiting. Ah. Until that. A rather ugly swipe towards cow – top-edged. He’s fortunate. There may be a team policy to pull the seamers hard, perhaps to expose and even demoralise the (mere) medium-quickness of the visitors. Cloud is in-filling, as Duckett slaps Dockrell for six, to go beyond the ton. (Off 72 deliveries; lots and lots of ver-ry well struck and well-placed shots).

14.45. Rain feels possible – maybe imminent.

I thought Hain was looking good, early doors, but his frustration may have grown. As it gets *really dark*, he slaps hard at another shortish one and clubs it to mid-wicket. Just as the rains starts.

Wow. It rains hard. On a ground where there’s not a huge amount of cover. (Not a complaint, just an observation… and possibly borne of the fact that my son is out there, and I’ve got his coat. Insert appropriate emoji). It’s rained HARD. To the extent that we wonder if this is over… at 15.02.

15.12. Clearer and brighter to our left. But is The Damage already done? Not heard any announcingments yet…

MATCH ABANDONED. May add more thoughts later… or may go the pub with my son, who leaves for Thailand/Aus (for SIX MONTHS) tomorrow!!

Welcome to the End of Everything.

~ bowlingatvincent ~ Leave a comment

Don’t ask me; just don’t ask me. I have no idea what triggered the enduring JD earworm. Was it Brizzle in the drizzle, being overcoatastically moody? Maybe. Maybe the (very temporary) greyness pointed my soul back to the Boy Curtis at his poetic/philosophical peak?

Existence well what does it matter? We live in the best way we can.

The past is all part of our future. The present is well out of hand.

Welcome to Gloucestershire County Cricket. Where Salt is facing Adair and Jacks is quietly pacing and Crawley – probably not a JD man – is England skipper. (I nearly wrote ‘incredibly’, here). Oh – and Salt has now taken 18 off the first four balls. (And then then the fifth was a wide). So my earworm thing was a portend. The world is ending. Welcome.

Jacks shows a greater degree of mercy than his partner; partly because the second over, from the spirited Little, is goodish. The poor fella Adair, meanwhile can’t find a wormhole quick enough or fast enough. England are going waaaay beyond that routine making of statements thing into a brutal humiliation zone. Jesus. Jacks joins in. England are SIXTY for 0 off the first FOUR OVERS. It’s an all-new, ridicu-level battering. This is happening despite the *bowler-friendly conditions*. Both Little and Adair are getting some swing and some movement off the pitch.

I’m trying hard not get distracted by a particular journo who is talking on the phone. It’s work-talk, and he’s not (now) doing that loud self-important thing (quite), but it is a pain in the arse. He ain’t gonna read this, so I will add that a senior colleague of his views him with deliciously real contempt… cos that feels like some kind of silent retribution for the last twenty minutes of infringement.

Salt has got 50 and then 60 before we get through 7 overs. Everything is going. Then he is, caught skying to mid-on. Cruelly thrilling stuff. Crawley marches out with England on 87 for 1, and McCarthy replacing Little, at the Ashley Down Road End. Jacks welcomes him with a six then four.

100 up on the 7 over mark. Perversely, Crawley gets England there with a gently steered straight drive, after having played a straight-batted defensive shot(!) to the previous ball. Jacks – fishing or fending(?) – is fortunate to escape as he edges towards short third, but Young bowls him with a peach the following delivery. 104 for 2, off 8. Duckett re-forms the Little and Large partnership with the towering captain. The skies have lowered a wee bit… and then cleared and brightened.

There are ironies in play – maybe there always are? Here they concern the noticeable softening of urgency, as the two notably urgent England Test openers see out a regression into Proper Cricket. The expectation for endless violence has retreated, somewhat. This may be temporary.

Crawley drives straight and hard, at McCarthy. Classical. Four. But the recent #bantz in the press box includes the idea that England were ‘on for 700’. So even assuming a good wedge of stoutness and application from our Irish brothers, a massacre, possibly of historic proportions, seems inevitable. As if to reinforce that, Crawley hoists dismissively, for another six. 136 for 2, off 14.

Curtis Campher may be forgiven for drawing plenty of ujayii breaths, before joining us – despite that slight tapering of violence. He gets off fairly lightly and can inhale further, over drinks. Ireland need drinks: short, nasty fekkers, probably.

Adair returns from beneath us. Goes too full. Cuffed through midwicket. Then Duckett absolutely clatters Campher, pulling just in front of square. Gleeful and violent again. When the batter tries to repeat – albeit with more of a cross-court top-spin drive, Nadal-style – mid-on bravely gets a hand there. Good, if symbolic stop.

Sit back briefly, to reflect. A re-cap should probably include the idea that Ireland haven’t necessarily bowled that badly. Feels more to me that England simply have better players. Salt (in particular) then, and Jacks were enabled or freed towards that killer explosion from the off. Duckett’s swing at Camphor suggests that he’s ready to launch, now, too: fabulous, skilled driller goes flying between the bowler and the ump. Four, and now 176 for 2, off 20.

We have our first sight of spin, from what (I’m going to call) the Media Centre End. Van Woerkom (born Christchurch) is a left-armer. The batters don’t let him settle. Little’s authentic Irishness serves him no better, on his return to Ashley Down. Crawley blasts to 50 in the over, which includes a crunching six over long-on.

200 come up in the following (23rd) over, with the light now brilliant and Duckett’s sweep joyfully extravagant. He also has 50, now.

Crawley goes. VW gets some turn away from him and the ball flies to short third. Sam Hain (born Hong Kong) will replace him. Duckett is pulling hard, at Little, who seems happy enough to proffer that gamble. Slight miscue, safe and good running brings three. Ireland cannot afford any misfields. There have been a couple. England’s leftie slog-sweeps, and times, to go to 68.

I think George Dockrell has just become Ireland’s seventh bowler on the day. No issue with that: why wouldn’t you cast around to seek some change or respite – or luck? Hain looks settled, early but it’s Duckett again who catches the eye. Another fabulous, liquid sweep rattles the boundary fence/rope/toblerone-thing. Hearing various numbers quoted here: all suggest this is a world-beating, record-breaking score (for England’s second team).

Oof. Adair has fallen heavily into the advertising-boards. He may wish it happened after his first three balls… but he will carry on.

Hain is plainly aman who can launch, but currently I’m enjoying his late-playing, soft-hands vibe. He’s guiding the ball around, seemingly untroubled, seemingly waiting. Ah. Until that. A rather ugly swipe towards cow – top-edged. He’s fortunate. There may be a team policy to pull the seamers hard, perhaps to expose and even demoralise the medium-quickness of the visitors. Cloud is in-filling, as Duckett slaps Dockrell for six, to go beyond the ton. (Off 72 deliveries; lots and lots of ver-ry well struck and well-placed shots).

14.45. Rain feels possible – maybe imminent.

I thought Hain was looking good, early doors, but his frustration may have grown. As it gets *really dark*, he slaps hard at another shortish one and clubs it to mid-wicket. Just as the rains starts.