Kevin Drum cites the following as an example of why "cricket writing is so deliciously, Britishly impenetrable that it's mesmerizing":
I'd have to say he's on to something, since I recognize most of the words but have no idea what that sentence means... it does indeed have an odd allure. If you look at the whole article, it's pretty much all like that... and they even use the word "tenterhooks", which I'm pretty sure you wouldn't see in a Peter King article.
Ian Bell, back at No3 and under the microscope, survived a torrid start to make 72 good runs, worth more than they appear, before dragging his first ball after the tea interval on to his off-stump, while Andrew Strauss batted superbly, hitting 11 fours in his 55, on the way protecting Bell from a Mitchell Johnson bombardment while he settled in.
I'd have to say he's on to something, since I recognize most of the words but have no idea what that sentence means... it does indeed have an odd allure. If you look at the whole article, it's pretty much all like that... and they even use the word "tenterhooks", which I'm pretty sure you wouldn't see in a Peter King article.
No comments:
Post a Comment