July 17, 2004
LATHAM'S CALL ON CARS
Mark Latham collects one sector of the sporting electorate:
Mr Latham supported Mr Howard's view of champion Sri Lanka spin bowler Muttiah Muralitharan as a chucker. "If I was an umpire at square leg I'd be no-balling him a fair bit," he said.
And Latham sheds another:
Posted by Tim Blair at July 17, 2004 04:28 AMLabor may struggle for the rev-head vote after Mr Latham revealed an indifference to all motor sports. "I just don't get much out of it, I'm sorry," he said.
I've come to suspect that Latham is an android, produced by the same company that produces the Roomba robotic vacuum cleaner.
Evidence:
As soon as he starts on a given topic, he goes round and round in circles until he bumps into something. He then keeps changing direction, until he finds a place where he can go round in circles again.
Posted by: 2dogs at July 17, 2004 at 06:50 AMNever, ever trust anyone who doesn't like cars.
Tim - I'm going to the Brian Redman International Challenge in Wisconsin this weekend. More vintage Ferraris, McLarens, 917s, Lolas, Scarabs, Maseratis, etc., than you can shake a stick at. Expect photos.
Posted by: iowahawk at July 17, 2004 at 07:44 AMHe doesn't like cars?
He's got my vote.
It really depresses me when this excellent site - one with international standing - stops still when Tim says "car" and all the boys start going "vroom, vroom."
If Mark Latham was standing at square leg, umpiring, he'd need Bob Brown and P.Garrett next to him to come to a decision;
Latham: "Was that out boys?"
Brown: "Of course, those poor trees that died for those stumps and bats, I can hear their moans"
Garrett: "Whatever you and Bob say Mark"
Posted by: scott at July 17, 2004 at 11:20 AMThen again Lathan could always go to the third umpire.
Latham: "Hang on boys I'll check with Dick Morris"
Posted by: scott at July 17, 2004 at 11:22 AM"If I was an umpire at square leg I'd be no-balling him a fair bit," he said.
Hey! Lahtam is intefering in sovereign affairs!
Posted by: Andjam at July 17, 2004 at 11:23 AM
I can maybe - MAYBE - trust a guy who's not into sports at all.
But indifference about cars? Man, that's sketchy.
Posted by: Dave S. at July 17, 2004 at 04:19 PMUmmm I dont think the umpire at square leg can make a call on the bowler's action - its the one behind the stumps that does it. I believe that the square leg umpire can only call no-ball based on the height of the delivery as it passes the batsman. I dont think "the chucker" bowls too many bouncers or doodlebugs.
Can't this guy get anything right???
As for cars vrooom vrooom vrooom!!!!
Posted by: Rob at July 17, 2004 at 07:36 PMEither umpire can make a call if a ball is thrown rather than bowled. (Law 24.2)
Unless it is a certain Sri Lankan bowling, in which case nobody is allowed to make the call.
Posted by: Pedro the Ignorant at July 17, 2004 at 08:48 PMDavid, did you take some sort of religious vow to read every single word of every single post and comment thread here? If not, then simply skip the car posts. If I were like you, I'd whinge and moan every time Tim put up another post about cricket.
Posted by: Andrea Harris at July 18, 2004 at 02:09 AMYes, Andrea, I do read every single word on this excellent blog. But I will follow your advice.
And thanks to Rob for that good-natured reply.
Latham doesn't like motor sports? This is his demographic - the blue collar rev-head. If word gets around this may cost him safe Labor seats. Bush and Kerry go to some lengths to court petrol-heads.
Posted by: walter plinge at July 18, 2004 at 10:30 AMCricket is played between two teams and thus a sport. Mr M is a chucker since he has no arm ball and thus cannot swerve the ball away when he chucks.
Cars that go round and round is not sport.
Posted by: Homer Paxton at July 18, 2004 at 11:24 AMMy point, Homer, is that I find all "sport" boring. But I don't complain because someone else finds it interesting and wants to talk about it to those of like interest. Capisce?
Posted by: Andrea Harris at July 19, 2004 at 01:41 AM