Well played Darren (it is Darren, isn't it?) Pattinson

The subject of overwhelming scorn and derision over the last 4 days, he only did what everyone posting here would love to do given half a chance. At least now he can say he played Test cricket and even has some runs and wickets to his name. That's certainly more than any of us could ever claim. And he was hardly the worst player on the field. He took more wickets than Flintoff or Broad and scored the same amount of runs as Michael Vaughan. So there.

No, we can't play him in the next test.

Go away.

I hear for the next Test England will be fielding a young boy in a wheelchair with half a bladder. He won it as a prize on a game show.

Next time I'm down at Trent Bridge, I shall certainly give him a pat on the back. Tried his best, not good enough, too Australian, et cetera, but has come out of this Test with figures that are no worse than anybody else. No damage done to his reputation; he probably didn't have one before this. He's now a worldwide name even if not necessarily in the way he would have liked.

Soon, he'll be back to the easy pickings that the County Championship has offered him so far, and I'm grateful for it. I wouldn't be surprised to see him play a ODI in the future, but that's about the best he can hope for, I should think - I'd personally rather see him playing for Nottinghamshire seeing how England have stolen nearly all our bowlers already.

bliksem wrote:I hear for the next Test England will be fielding a young boy in a wheelchair with half a bladder. He won it as a prize on a game show.

The wheelchair or the bladder?

Augustus wrote:Next time I'm down at Trent Bridge, I shall certainly give him a pat on the back. Tried his best, not good enough, too Australian, et cetera, but has come out of this Test with figures that are no worse than anybody else. No damage done to his reputation; he probably didn't have one before this. He's now a worldwide name even if not necessarily in the way he would have liked.

Soon, he'll be back to the easy pickings that the County Championship has offered him so far, and I'm grateful for it. I wouldn't be surprised to see him play a ODI in the future, but that's about the best he can hope for, I should think - I'd personally rather see him playing for Nottinghamshire seeing how England have stolen nearly all our bowlers already.

I don't doubt for a minute he was giving his all out there... it's whether he should have been selected to do so is the gripe!

Oooh well done Pattinson. F*cking amazing and he's only bleieorging what we'd all shmemshmal.

Ribbie-dibbie-dibbie-doo-baa-day. Ribbie-dibbie-dibbie-doo-baa-day.


Ribbie-dibbie-dibbie-doo-baa-day.


Tings dem alright.

bliksem wrote:I hear for the next Test England will be fielding a young boy in a wheelchair with half a bladder. He won it as a prize on a game show.

I didn't realise I was getting a test call up!?

Not Pattinson's fault that he was the product of a deeply flawed decision making process. I'll eat my left arm if he plays another test though.

Monty needs to bat at 11 I think. When Pattinson retires.

DJ_Smerk wrote:Monty needs to bat at 11 I think. When Pattinson retires.

How Monty manages to bat above anyone, I don't know. He's clearly not as good as Anderson as batting (who he's often batted above), or even Pattinson. He's got a Test average of 5.85 FFS. How you can average that and not bat anywhere other than 11 I do not know.

Struggling to think of any England batsman worse than Monty - even big Dev could slog the odd massive 6 now and then. And Tuffers had a bit of talent with the bat - he was just sh!t scared of fast bowling!

Pete Such

He once made a heroic duck that lasted about 2 hours once I think though (shame Ramps was at the other end podding the badge off it!)

Gary 111 wrote:

DJ_Smerk wrote:Monty needs to bat at 11 I think. When Pattinson retires.

How Monty manages to bat above anyone, I don't know. He's clearly not as good as Anderson as batting (who he's often batted above), or even Pattinson. He's got a Test average of 5.85 FFS. How you can average that and not bat anywhere other than 11 I do not know.

When he first came into the side he didn't look as bad as people made him out to be. But in recent times he's been in the Chris Martin league. These stats support that observation:

2006: 86 runs @ 10.75 (almost justifies being a number 10)
2007: 42 runs @ 4.60
2008: 36 runs @ 3.60

Anderson on the other hand I don't think has ever looked as bad a batsman as people made him out to be, and has clearly improved to the point where he can hold his own as a number 9/nightwatchman.

Jimmy Anderson knows he's not very good at batting. So he covers his stumps, is compact and tries to bat for his partner. That's why he has only been dismissed 15 times in 38 innings. He will play and miss outside off stump loads, but it will usually take a good ball to get him out (like Steyn's today).

Monty meanwhile, is probably just as naturally hopeless as Jimmy, but seems to inexpliacbly defend his first three balls then the first ball on the stumps he tries some expansive shot and gets bowled.

Tuffers, Malcolm, Mullaly... three batsmen worse than Monty without any thought.

At least we won't hear any more of Bothams 'bat Monty up the order' BS he was peddling for a couple of years...

JKLever wrote:At least we won't hear any more of Bothams 'bat Monty up the order' BS he was peddling for a couple of years...

Why? Has Botham retired?

bliksem wrote:I hear for the next Test England will be fielding a young boy in a wheelchair with half a bladder. He won it as a prize on a game show.

Well, that's quite a breakthrough.

Congratulations Buckaroo on being the first FBer to be chosen for Test cricket.