ricky, the portrait

Loooooook at it.

Really look at it.

This is the face of a man who wishes he was at a greyhound track.

In it there is pain.

There is torment.

There is a man who fees betrayed.

Someone who feels he is being attacked from all sides.

A person whose idols have turned on him.

Alone, hurt, and everything is against him.

This is what sadness looks like.


0 thoughts on “ricky, the portrait

  1. poopsie says:

    The person who added the hair plugs hasn’t betrayed him

  2. Damith S. says:

    you almost feel sorry for him.but you dont.

  3. Valerio says:

    No matter how hard I try, I can’t seem to get over or understand what happened on Day 4 at Nagpur after Tea. After following this grueling, at times tedious and mundane series for 18 and 2/3 days on radio, finally some drama had arrived during the Second Session of Day 19 of the Series. I am hoping someone can explain to me how, after India collapsed to 6/166 at Tea (losing 6/68 in the second session), it was possible for Ricky Ponting to introduce Cameron White firstly, then Michael Hussey and finally Michael Clarke into the attack, whilst Jason Krezja continued from the other end. None of White, Hussey or Clarke had bowled previously in the Indian second innings. Need I remind anyone who thinks this makes sense that the Border-Gavaskar trophy was still well and truly on the line. If you do not believe the trophy was still on the line then I am sorry, but you need to either pay more attention to what was happening, or have a good hard look at yourself in the mirror, or more positively, learn more about the game. So why did Ponting introduce these bowlers at this time? Do we really believe they were our best chances of taking a wicket? Was Mike Hussey really our best chance of taking wickets at this stage? If anyone believes this can they please explain to me on what basis they hold this belief? So if they weren’t our best chances of taking a wicket, why else were they bowling? Can we really accept that they were bowling to speed up the over rates? Are we saying that with the Border-Gavaskar trophy on the line after almost 19 days of cricket, all of a sudden the over rates became all important? Does anyone really believe this? If indeed it is true, what state is the game in? If as a fan, I have to sit through 20 days of cricket, only for the outcome to be decided by over-rates at the potentially decisive point of the series, what is the point of it all? I would be best off finding something else to do. Can someone please help me here? There are only two other possibilities that I can think of. The first is that Ricky Ponting (and whom-ever else was involved in the decision making) completely and utterly lost his /their minds, and actually believed that White, Hussey and Clarke, despite not having bowled all day, were actually the best options of taking a wicket, even though the other bowlers had contributed 6/68 in the previous session. This explanation to me is far and away the most palatable. The only other explanation is one that I certainly do not believe, but I think others may, and that is that there was some intervention from forces, and I mean dark forces, outside of the Australian cricket team. For anyone who thinks this is ridiculous, ask yourself what you would be saying if another country had done this in a game that you were not following closely? Needless for me to say it has happened before, and not just once or twice. Do I think it happened this time? The answer is no, but unfortunately I can not make an adequate argument to back this up, the only argument being as stated above that Ponting and his cohorts completely lost their collective minds in believing White, Hussey and Clarke were our best chance, and in doing so have brought the game into disrepute. I need to go one step further to fully communicate what I am feeling. And can I add I would be equally as angry if India or any other country for that matter had done what Ponting has done. I thought Australian cricket had reached its nadir in Sydney, but I was wrong. Where to from here ? Is it still worth it ?

  4. David Barry says:

    and whom-ever else was involved in the decision makingThat should be ‘whoever’.

  5. Valerio says:

    David – Thankyou

  6. Naked Cricket says:

    this is what dravid looks like

  7. 12th Man says:

    That’s pretty much the look on the face of a cricketer whose wife sat on the lap of a millionaire.

  8. Sunny says:

    who took the jam out of his donut?

  9. mr popodopolous says:

    Has Roebuck called for him to get the heave as captain again as he did after Sydney?

  10. Leela says:

    NC- my thoughts exactly!! He looks just like Dravid.

  11. Abhinav says:

    If this image is taken from the following post…http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/cricket/i-havent-gone-soft-declares-ponting/2008/11/11/1226318653740.htmlits the title rather than the photo which captured my imagination. Though I quickly turned it down (my imagination)The title says: “I haven’t gone soft, declares Ponting”And there’s one morehttp://www.theage.com.au/articles/2008/11/11/1226318654371.html”Ponting lets Roebuck feel pointy end of his pen”Is this common down under?(In australia I mean)

  12. horatius says:

    Couldn’t have happened to a better man.