Andrew Flintoff's ankle injury

England say that Andrew Flintoff has been experiencing 'discomfort' in his left ankle, but that it isn't a concern.

Well we're concerned. It's all well and good to say that he didn't bowl as a precaution, but he's supposed to be bowling. It's a Test match. It's a precaution when you're preserving something for a reason. A Test match IS the reason.

They also try and pass it of as being because of back-to-back Tests. You can't say that either. It's not some roll of the dice that's brought about that situation: The Tests are back-to-back. That's the way cricket is. You have to play according to those rules.

It's clearly time for a bionic ankle, anyway. We don't know why they didn't go ahead with this ages ago. They mucked about before they decided to invest in a bionic knee for Michael Vaughan as well. It shouldn't be that way. It should be: Ankle twinge - bionic ankle; neck twinge - bionic neck; back twinge - bionic back.

Bionics exists for a reason, you know. Mankind didn't create Robocop all those years ago so that England cricketers can just skive matches as they please. England: Heed the lessons of history and implement a policy of replacing body parts with bionic versions at the first sign of trouble.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, May 02, 2012


King Cricket latest


Contact us


Subscribe to King Cricket

3 Comments:

Anonymous scienticain lite said...

I have seen the future.
We will replace body parts with bionic elements until such a point as the entire England cricket team are basically Transformers.

Kick ass.

3:09 pm  
Blogger Mahinda said...

Bionic parts are all well and good, but what if some of a player's mojo resides in the part that gets replaced?

I'm seriously worried that Michael Vaughan's original knee might have contained up to 64% of his mojo, leaving him with only 36% or so left now that it's all gone bionic. Or bio-knee-c, at least.

5:38 pm  
Anonymous Blue and Brown said...

Some of the remaining 36% may even have been in his hair, which isn't quite as silky and luxuriant as it was in 2002.

Not that the silkiness is really an issue.

6:17 pm  

Post a Comment

<< Home