One of my biggest New Year's resolutions was to be nicer to people on the internet. I realized that there were things I was reading everyday that were making me want to rip off my own arm just so I could beat myself over the head with something, especially in places like The Express Tribune blog section. Now I've already dueled with commentors on the Tribune site and every now and then I will read something that will infuriate me, but I've been trying to let it go, because hey! It's the internet. Everyone is mean, opinionated, self-righteous, judgemental and batshit insane.
So I choose to ignore most comments and most dumbass articles. However, this latest piece in the Tribune's blog section is once-in-a-lifetime amazing in its batshittery.
Go ahead and read it. Then do what I did and read it again, not believing what you read the first time. Whats that? Can't read the whole thing? Stabbed yourself in the eye? I know. So I'm going to spare you reading the whole thing and give you the highlights.
Title of Article: "Will ICC Investigate England vs. India Match"
Author: Ahmed Fuad.
Premise: The ICC should investigate the England vs. India Cricket World Cup league match because it was a high scoring tie. Also Shane Warne predicted it, proving that it was fixed and Shane Warne is in fact, Satan.
Best Batshit moments:
"I was unable to understand why England was unable to secure a victory against India in the recent Group B World Cup match until I heard the breaking news on TV. Shane Warne’s Twitter prediction, although it reached me late, resolved the whole matter."
Other than the fact that he was unable to stop using the word 'unable', Fuad clearly had major issues understanding how a match could be tied, an outcome that has happened, oh I don't know, 24 times already in the history of One Day Internationals.
But luckily his mental anguish came to an end when he read this prophetic tweet from Shane "Dajjal" Warne.
Looking forward to the game between india and England today should be a cracker… My prediction a tie !
Damn you Shane Warne and your evil sorcery.
|Shane Warne, during his early days at Hogwarts.|
Warne later faked amazement and amusement that his flippant, cheeky prediction had come true
Before u think there was something untoward re prediction of a tie, thought it was going to be a cracker-tie was tongue in cheek-but right
He then offered a terrifying warning about the future mayhem he would wreck on cricket/world order.
Thanks for all your nice replys re my prediction.. Will think of some more for the rest of world cup-maybe have a flutter @...Anyway, our author clearly smelled something fishy using the following reasoning:
"Predictions in cricket are usually about victory or about a close contest, not about a draw. It is not like soccer or hockey where draws are routine. One day cricket matches rarely result in draws, but this is a different case altogether."
Yes. Because a draw is not a close contest. But then Mr. Fuad goes all Sherlock on our asses as he investigates the match itself.
"After Sachin Tendulkar’s outstanding innings in this match, no one knows what happened to the strong Indian batting line. Why could it not survive for a complete 50 overs? ...To me, the reason is that the Indian batting line-up is over-rated by their media and cannot survive when it needs to; they can only perform well in favourable conditions. The same happened yesterday."
To me this is the awesome logic used. The Indian batsmen are shitty. they only score well (like, above 300) when conditions suit them (like when the track is clearly a batting wicket where both teams can score 300). But yesterday, they were even more shitty (by scoring above 300) in conditions that didn't suit them (like when the track is clearly a batting wicket where both teams can score 300). Therefore: While the Indian batting is generally shitty, what is suspicious is when they are generally shitty.
Then there's my favorite part, where he reveals that the Indian bowlers had a plan to not fight back and indeed it was strange/suspicious that they in fact...fought back. But it didn't count as a fightback because they used shitty bowlers.
"The Indian bowlers hardly fought back. It was strange that they managed to topple the England’s batting line up thanks to Zaheer Khan. Now if it had been Wasim, Waqar, McGrath or Shane Warne, it would have been easier to digest."
"But Khan is someone who averages around 30 runs per wicket and has never enjoyed the status of being a fast bowler"
Yes. All this time, poor chootia that he is, Zaheer Khan has been fooling himself into thinking that he's a fast bowler and can't understand why Harbhajan keeps trying to teach him off-spin/bhangra. Indeed he has 'never enjoyed the status of being a fast bowler', so he should stop trying to bowl fast and kill himself.
|Zaheer Khan, after being denied fast bowler status and told to fuck off.|
Fuad then puts across another plausible argument,
"There could be psychological reasons behind England’s inability to defeat India. They were playing in a stadium where the audience was largely pro-India, a crowd that is known to be hostile. Remember the Sri Lanka/India semi final in the 1996 World Cup and Test match between Pakistan and India in 1999 when players had to leave the ground because of rowdy Indian supporters?"
Yes. So they decided to tie the match on the last ball. Because just outright LOSING it and handing victory to India in a World Cup Match would have just pissed off the jaahil Indians who couldn't decide who they wanted to win.
To end, I will pettily draw attention to Fuads use of the term "the land of bookies" repeatedly throughout his article. I don't really have to make fun of it since it was used legitimately. But since I'm corny and also kind of a douchebag, here is what I think the inhabitants of "the land of bookies" look like.