Working through a pile of swag from Record Store Day on Saturday. Early indications are that the star buy will not be the Wilco box set or Fleet Foxes live record but a Gene Clark solo album that I bought by mistake!
I watched one of the early games and it was noted by the commentary team that most of the sides this year had set up with underpowered bowling attacks to prioritise more hitting power. When so many sixes are being hit, is it exciting any more? I have to say, my view would be no.
I think anything of this kind comes down to whether you perceive a stigma to doing an activity solo. Some people do, some don't (others fluctuate between the two views).
Aye - I genuinely don't know the answer to this one, wonder what the all time worst is.
And also, how Scott Boland spun his 13 over contribution to his team mates!
Haha quite - though its an odd one because I have found the reference that led to my misunderstanding of the story, and the author concerned should be far pinker of face!
I went to research the details, and it turns out I have misremembered the tale! France actually took silver, behind Great Britain (as we then were).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cricket_at_the_1900_Summer_Olympics
One of the many delightful quirks of cricket's past.
Quite - it was a classic case of a fighter carrying the majority of the concussive power against one well schooled from the amateur game in how to accrue points. Neither of them, in my opinion, are elite level, but both entertaining domestic/European level fighters.
That score makes it 8-3-1 in terms of rounds. Thinking back over the fight, that is just about plausible if you gave Clarke all of the first three and a sweep down the stretch. Did I score it that way? No - I thought it was a point either way myself, but I don't think it is a hanging offence...