Tim Worstall

4 responses so far ↓

• 1 Rob // Jul 30, 2009 at 10:45 am

  Unfortunately, it will never happen. Cricket is an expensive game to prepare and play. I also imagine much of the Left detests it as ‘elitist’ and a public school game, which is absurd but there you go. I have heard several people claim that it is only played by tarquins in public school caps.

  Clubs are fine for youth cricket.

• 2 Matthew // Jul 30, 2009 at 10:51 am

  Nonsense. Tebbit was all about the employable getting on their bikes and looking for work. The Ashes heroes of the future must find us.

  Tim adds: Erm, the Tebbitt Test was about which team would recent immigrants and their children support at cricket actually. For example, would young people of Pakistani background but English birth support Pakistan or England in a test match?

• 3 Matthew // Jul 30, 2009 at 11:04 am

  Yeah, it was lame joke.

• 4 Ian Bennett // Jul 30, 2009 at 12:25 pm

  There’s a surprise; a former professional cricketer, who is now the head of the Cricket Foundation, wants more cricket to be taught in schools because “England’s future depends on [it]“. Once again, we see a sportsman conflating “England” with “the English sports team”, and ignoring the fact that the “excitement and instant appeal” depends on whether or not you give a damn about cricket. Personally,I’d rather watch granite erode. Cricket is also described as ten minutes of excitement crammed nto five days.

  Another surprise: “A lot of our Bengali children have academic difficulties and we have found that in sporting activities they may have a hidden talent. If you get them on a cricket pitch they are up there with their peers or even ahead. It gives them a sense of self-worth, that they are good at something, which raises their self-esteem.” Also, getting them to play cricket is a damn sight easier than addressing their “academic difficulties”, which is what teachers are paid to do.

Leave a Comment