Lots of laughs, Archytas; gosh, the good old days, so many stories and
anecdotes to share on those long hot summer days in the pavilions with
a pint, bemoaning the changes to cricket rules and colours..."these
young uns just dont know what cricket is...sigh; its just not cricket
anymore...", i hear me say :)

I wasn't too shabby with the bat either, though i confess i never
batted higher than 6 in a serious game; back then i knew i'd be
wearing prescription glasses soon :) I dont remeber my highest batting
score, but i remember the match well, it was a varsity match, i was
facing a very tall, very quick seamer; his fist few deliveries whizzed
past my off stump while i raised my bat and got on the front foot;
"what great judgement", everyone must have thought; truth be told, i
didn't see much of the line of the ball till the wicketkeeper had the
thing. Well, the next ball was a vicious bodyliner, first glimpse i
had of the thing was off the seam; too late to look composed and
elegant, so i did the next best thing (well, my subconscious did); my
bat flew at the line of the ball, one handed, i heard true contact,
and a great roar of applause; i looked round to square, and the ball
was sailing majestically over the boundary. I thought to myself,
"that's probably your best strategy, matey; beacuase, you really ought
to have gone to specsavers!".Lol.  I believe i scored a respectable
50+ runs; dont remember much of it; i do remember the great appeal for
caught behind; didnt bother looking back or at the umpire before
walking; you just know when you've had a damn fine run of luck! :)

Oh, the days...



On Aug 2, 4:41 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sometimes it really did seem that lethal Para - the ten wickets fell
> for 7 runs.  The following year, again in the last game of the season,
> needing to tie to win the championship we were 120 for none chasing
> 130 with me due to bat at 4.  I was on nights so asked the skipper if
> I could shower and get ready to leave early.  He gave me the nod.
> Wickets started to fall quicker than trousers in a brothel and I had
> to pad up again.  I got in at the 7th wicket down with us needing one
> to win, smashed my first ball just wide of cover.  He ran out the
> other guy, leaving me off strike.  My best mate came in, walloped his
> first ball and was caught at long on.  We crossed, so I had strike on
> what was now the last ball.  The scores were tied, leaving me either
> to score one to win or get out so it was a tie and not a draw.  The
> bowler had taken four wickets in the last over, plus the run out.  I
> charged the ball and swear the non-striker was passing me as I screwed
> up the slog and dropped the bat on the ball and sprinted to the
> bowler's end.  I think I made it anyway, but the ball missed the
> stumps.  The rain, which had held off all day unleashed and I was
> soaking by the time I got back in the pavilion. You got the back foot
> raider right - for most of my scoring shots - I'd have been your bunny
> with that in-ducker.  I bowled 13 consecutive maidens in the first
> game mentioned before taking the first wicket - a pre-arranged quick
> one with the keeper down the leg-side for a stumping.  My execution
> was dismal, the ball a foot wide of off, taking a bottom edge and
> resulting in the best keeper's catch I've ever seen.  I was bowling
> off-breaks by then.  The last ball of that game is recorded as leg
> before, though the batsman would disagree as he thought he'd glanced
> it for four.  We offered to rescind our appeal after the match, but
> their skipper declined on the grounds the other team that would have
> won the title were a bunch of slimy toads.
>
> On Aug 1, 9:20 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Wow Archytas, that must have been one heck of a strip...10 wickets in
> > 8 balls...amazing.
>
> > I used to be a pace opener, with a late outswing starting at middle,
> > seaming just short of a length, four slips, a deep gully/point, and a
> > short square leg; my party trick was the shade slower, fuller, 1 late
> > inswinger of the over, just the trick for back foot raiders like
> > yourself :) Great days indeed...takes me back to a time when i was
> > just 12st or under :)
>
> > On Jul 31, 10:06 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > I played at a 'tidal club' Para - as far from the sea as you can get
> > > in England, but tidal nonetheless.  Very hard to describe the 'tidal'
> > > conditions, but it would all start with the kind of rip-snorter Swanny
> > > got in the current Test.  When I was still young enough to bowl chin
> > > music we'd have the other side's batsmen remembering urgent
> > > appointments and driving off without taking their turn.  The trick at
> > > these times was to bowl slower and just let the pitch spit the ball at
> > > the poor sod batting.  When batting you had to give up playing forward
> > > and only play square of the wicket to get runs - the game was turned
> > > upsidedown.  We beat a few county sides on that track thanks to the
> > > 'tide'.  The tide seemed to be inspired by using the heavy roller at
> > > tea.  Great days.  We won a championship on the last day on a tide
> > > pitch after the opposition were 72 for none chasing 80 to win.
>
> > > On Jul 31, 9:06 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > Sold! I'll take them all! Lol.
>
> > > > On Jul 31, 8:35 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > There's a lingerie football league and beach volley ball, etc.
> > > > > Seriously, sports are often a ballet of form and extraordinary display
> > > > > of what the body/mind is capable of. It's real- versus paintings or
> > > > > statues of nudes at a museum. And the horses! :-)
>
> > > > > On Jul 30, 7:31 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Err, yeah...might depend on the sport in my case, rigsy :)
>
> > > > > > On Jul 30, 8:31 am, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Also football uniforms. Well, we are admiring bodies and 
> > > > > > > physiques in
> > > > > > > sports, aren't we? :-)
>
> > > > > > > On Jul 29, 2:39 pm, paradox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > I've always thought that baseball players have an interesting 
> > > > > > > > sense of
> > > > > > > > dress style, rigsy; somewhat "hugging"? :)
>
> > > > > > > > On Jul 29, 2:21 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > We have baseball. :-)
>
> > > > > > > > > On Jul 28, 4:42 am, paradox <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Lol. Yeah, i've seen some innovation in rugby, for sure.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Well, cricket is one sport that i am passionate about (at 
> > > > > > > > > > least as far
> > > > > > > > > > as i can be passionate about sport). It's at once a game of 
> > > > > > > > > > supreme
> > > > > > > > > > patience and incredible reaction speed. You have the 
> > > > > > > > > > batsman who, with
> > > > > > > > > > the right "guard" and standing perfectly motionless, is 
> > > > > > > > > > practically
> > > > > > > > > > impenetrable, against a bowler and 10 strategically placed 
> > > > > > > > > > teammates
> > > > > > > > > > who patiently and cleverly induce the batsman to make a 
> > > > > > > > > > "false" stroke
> > > > > > > > > > with ever so subtle changes in the speed, flight, movement, 
> > > > > > > > > > trajectory
> > > > > > > > > > and/or spin of the ball. When it happens, it can be a 
> > > > > > > > > > beautiful
> > > > > > > > > > thing :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > On Jul 28, 7:23 am, Allan Heretic <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Until I came to Europe I never was a fan of any sport, 
> > > > > > > > > > > since I have become a fan of rugby ,, ever since I 
> > > > > > > > > > > watched a man fall on the ball with the other team piled 
> > > > > > > > > > > on top.  But his legs were sticking out of the pile. So 
> > > > > > > > > > > his mates (6) grabbed his legs and used him like a wheel 
> > > > > > > > > > > barrow. As for cricket,, I have never gotten it wrapped 
> > > > > > > > > > > around my mind.
> > > > > > > > > > > Allan
>
> > > > > > > > > > > On 27 jul. 2011, at 17:42, paradox 
> > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > I thought that Relativity was pretty revolutionary, 
> > > > > > > > > > > > actually; less
> > > > > > > > > > > > "fundamental" than perhaps String Theory, but frame 
> > > > > > > > > > > > shifting for sure.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > So, you're a rugby man, eh? I'm more cricketer myself; 
> > > > > > > > > > > > all that
> > > > > > > > > > > > physical contact would have strained my control beyond 
> > > > > > > > > > > > breaking
> > > > > > > > > > > > point :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > Btw, your ballet's not at all lacking :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 26, 5:35 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >> The point, Para, is not that Einstein is bull, but 
> > > > > > > > > > > >> that interpreting
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Relativity as 'new physics' always was.  I did my 
> > > > > > > > > > > >> dancing on the rugby
> > > > > > > > > > > >> field so you can expect my ballet to be clumsy!  
> > > > > > > > > > > >> Chemistry is more my
> > > > > > > > > > > >> line, but Ludwig and Snell satisfy me that the 
> > > > > > > > > > > >> 'paradigm' stuff is
> > > > > > > > > > > >> wonky.  I suspect we are collectively very dumb as an 
> > > > > > > > > > > >> alternative to
> > > > > > > > > > > >> enlightenment concepts - most people don't learn much. 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>  Thus they
> > > > > > > > > > > >> remain prey to the Old One.  Indeed, it's the 
> > > > > > > > > > > >> propaganda of the Old
> > > > > > > > > > > >> One that prevents enlightened society, aimed as it is 
> > > > > > > > > > > >> at the dumb.  I
> > > > > > > > > > > >> believe this may be what leaves us with only the worst 
> > > > > > > > > > > >> of democracy.
> > > > > > > > > > > >> There has been no enlightenment,only some space 
> > > > > > > > > > > >> developed away from
> > > > > > > > > > > >> the old Idols.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >> On Jul 26, 1:01 pm, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> Not sure of what you mean. Do you want e-books to be 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> controlled in
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> content? Take history, for a long time it was written 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> by the winners/
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> colonists, etc. until the "losers" started publishing 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> their stories/
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> recollections. A good example is "Bury My Heart at 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> Wounded Knee".
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> There are countless books/ personal confessionals 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> (St. Augustine,
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> Newman, C.S. Lewis, etc.) that have inspired others- 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> perhaps readied
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> them for a personal journey of their own. The 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> "enlightenment" is not
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> always religious/spiritual- there are the arts of 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> man/women which also
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> inspire an individual/society. There is also 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> propaganda and deceit as
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> a path to power.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> On Jul 25, 11:13 am, Allan Heretic 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> LOL. Yeah I am still here,
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Enlightenment is a fascinating subject, to me it 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> always will be an experience(s) yet there are may 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> book thumpers thumpers can sight article and books 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> many volumes justifying what they have to say. When 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> you get discussing enlightenment you begin 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> discussing personal experience not that of others.
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Putting it simply in my opinion your personal 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> experiences will stand on their own ..
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> Allan
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> On 25 jul. 2011, at 16:30, paradox 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Thing is archytas, though i dont altogether feel 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> "on board" with your
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> critical insights, your arguments are resonant and 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> very persuasive :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Nice pirouette with "optimism" :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> You think Einstein's work was "bull"? Steady 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> archytas, we have the one
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> "heretic" here already...alan? :)
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> Thanks for the insights.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> On Jul 24, 6:12 pm, archytas <[email protected]> 
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> That's more or less what I mean
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Reply via email to