Just a quick few updates on things as they stand.
Ashes Panel #001 will be up as soon as either Hillel or PaulE get their responses to me! I’m promised one response this afternoon (and I can add the other’s later). Good stuff so far. I thought I’d also set down some etiquette rules with it. I’m really grateful these people have put in time and effort to respond so be polite, people. Disagree, but don’t abuse. This will work if we do it right.
The second set of questions will be out for the next wave of the panel in the next day or so. A third set will come out for the third group towards the end of the week. I have 15 or so volunteers so grateful for that.
I am pleased people like the Ashes flashbacks, and I’m enjoying reading the individual stories you have. Please, please keep them coming.
The Leg Glance is back from his work assignment and has a couple of good things lined up for you.
I’m watching Cricket Writers on TV and it is one of the better ones. I think this is down to Charles Colvile actually, who asks journalist questions rather than some of the “how great were we” that Allott seems to be adroit at. I’ve always had a bit of a thing against Allott from 2002. We were queueing up in a long old line to get throught Brisbane passport control, and in front of me was a true England legend, one of the few who had made a triple hundred in tests, and there, breezing through on my right was Paul Allott. If I was John Edrich, I’d have been mad as a mongoose. Well, I was mad…..
Colvile posed questions on ICC that were asked in a really direct way. Etheridge is correct in that it doesn’t interest people who read the Sun, but that doesn’t make it right. Curbing the World Cup to 10 teams in perpetuity it seems. I’ve not gone on at the ICC on this blog, and that’s because I can only have a go at the ECB really before my head spins off its neck! But this is a load of convenient blindness. SimonH pointed out the tweets yesterday. The game itsn’t being developed properly. Hoult was right that England has been a soap opera, and that this takes precedence.
Etheridge of course, is wrong about his men in boots, men in suits, because while we all love (most of the time) watching the men in boots, it’s the men in suits relieving me of my money, determining what I watch and how much I pay for it, and determine what is right for me. Hence I can, and do, write about the men in suits.
OK. More later, including another Ashes memory possibly from me.