logotest3

3rd xI (don't) get out of jail at blunsdon

piercey  heynan450

Mea culpa. There, it’s said, and in Latin too. I’m sure everyone knows by now that the MCC treasurer was run out while batting with your correspondent last Saturday at Blunsdon. To add insult to injury, there was also a pulled hamstring involved, and a rather painful (and, it must be said, painfully slow) return to the pavilion. To his credit, Piercy’s restrained comments about his demise were insightful and introspective, and I am pleased to report the following quote, which I didn’t quite catch in its entirety: “What *** **** was that ******* ***** Vice-Captain ********? Is he * ******** ******* *****? ******* Professor, ***! I just hope that he doesn’t let this unfortunate incident affect his batting, as we may be in a bit of a pickle soon”.

The last remark was spot on because the delightful June weather had turned Blunsdon’s wicket into a wet and unpredictable surface upon which batting was going to be a testing experience. Never one to shy away from a challenge, the Skipper contrived to lose his first toss of the season and Marshfield were duly inserted. Ball 1 from Blunsdon’s opener pitched on a length, jagged in and thumped into the VC’s midriff just below the solar plexus.

So it was to continue: most deliveries dug easily into the soft surface, dislodging clods of turf and then stood up to various heights at various rates. Timing the ball was hit-or-miss and, unsurprisingly, all the wickets to fall (except one, of course, Andy) were caught, typically as the delivery ‘stopped’ and was then propelled into the air by a bat arriving too soon.

Only James Roper took on the doggedly accurate Blunsdon bowlers with any success before he too perished as described above, victim to one of several excellent catches held by the opposition’s lively and athletic fielders (not terribly sporting, but impressive to watch). The Marshfield no. 1 managed to last until the penultimate over of our 45, scoring at a blistering rate of 1.07 runs per over, and the 3rd XI innings closed on 96-9.

Even though batting conditions had not markedly changed over the course of the afternoon, the Blunsdon openers began positively and the Marshfield attack at both ends was subjected to some violent treatment. These batsmen, however, had obviously not paid sufficient attention to the way in which we had all succumbed (except Piercy, that is) and both suffered the ignominy of getting out “ct Guy b Dixon”. The oppo’s numbers 3 and 4, however, looked a slightly different proposition and their score had advanced past 50 when a sharp downpour took us all off the field for a short stoppage. When we returned, a “stonewall” LBW was politely declined and another 20 odd runs were added in no time at all. This prompted the Captain to take himself off (I kid you not) and tell ‘lucky’ Charlie Chivers to get ready to bowl the next over.

What happened next is a mystery, but surely the Dark Arts were involved in some way, as a large black cloud honed into view before Charlie could mark out his run and le deluge began. Within 15 minutes, it was obvious that the day’s sporting activity had come to an end, with Blunsdon stranded on 72-2 (off 14 overs… how did they do that?) and the wicket beginning to resemble Glastonbury on a bad year. Thus it was that we “escaped” from this match, somewhat red-faced, with a not-entirely-deserved 10 points.

This week, there can only be one champagne moment, sponsored by Mentholatum Deep Heat Balm – for details, see the opening paragraph. It’s not entirely clear at what point along the 22 yards between wicket and wicket that Piercy’s hamstring gave up the ghost but his final dive to the crease was one that Tom Daley would have been justly proud (warning: do not try to visualise Mr. Pierce in a Speedo swimsuit).

Man-of-the-Match is awarded to Rob Redman for his pre- and post-game performances. Prior to arriving at Blunsdon, Rob had been moved up and down between the 2nd and 3rd XIs on several occasions and had remained unfazed and most equable throughout the entire process, happy to play wherever he was most needed. After the game, Rob generously agreed not only to drive the treasurer’s car (and the treasurer) back to Marshfield, but also to carry out the duties of Acting Assistant Swineherd, Grade I, and help the encumbered Piercy to feed his pigs. By all accounts, this turned out to be more fun than expected for Rob… details cannot be revealed here, as Marshfield is a family cricket club, but those of you interested should consult http://naughtyporkersrus.com/marshfield/redman.html (you’ll need to turn the parental filter off and please note that MCC takes no responsibility if you are caught looking at this website when you are at work).

Richard Guy

Fixture Details

Type : League: Wiltshire League - Division 6 - 2012 Date : Saturday 23rd June 2012
Toss : Blunsdon CC - 1st XI won the toss and elected to field Start Time : 14:00
Ground : Sutton Park Rec Rules Type : Standard

Highlights :

Target for Blunsdon was reduced to 54 from 25 overs. Marshfield: Richard Guy 47, Mark Dixon 7-3-28-2 Blunsdon : P Jones 12-1-23-4, A Ramasamy 26 Not Out, P. Anderson 27
Result :    Blunsdon CC - 1st XI - Won

Marshfield CC - 3rd XI

Batting

NameHow OutBowlerRuns4s6sBalls
1 Richard Guy ct Unsure b  Dave Bott 47 2 0 0
2 Robert Redman ct Unsure b  S Turnball 0 0 0 0
3 Andrew Pierce run out (Unsure) 5 0 0 0
4 James Roper ct Unsure b  S Turnball 20 0 0 0
5 Martin Ould ct & b P Jones 0 0 0 0
6 Andy Wills ct Unsure b  P Jones 3 0 0 0
7 Michael Holman ct Unsure b  P Jones 1 0 0 0
8 Mark Dixon* ct Unsure b  P Jones 5 0 0 0
9 Charlie Chivers not out 3 0 0 0
10 Sam Burnstone ct Unsure b  A Ramasamy 0 0 0 0
11 Mike Threadgill not out 0 0 0 0
Byes (3), Leg Byes (2), Wides (7), No Balls (1) Extras13
Total 97
Wickets 9
Overs45

* = Captain, + = Wicket Keeper

Fall of Wickets

10-1 Robert Redman (Richard Guy-8*); 31-2 Andrew Pierce (Richard Guy-21*); 57-3 James Roper (Richard Guy-27*); 57-4 Martin Ould (Richard Guy-27*); 70-5 Andy Wills (Richard Guy-33*); 74-6 Michael Holman (Richard Guy-36*); 81-7 Mark Dixon (Richard Guy-38*); 96-8 Richard Guy (Charlie Chivers-3*); 96-9 Sam Burnstone (Charlie Chivers-3*); 

* = not out batsman

Bowling

BowlerOversMaidensRunsWicketsWidesNo Balls
1 A Ramasamy 11 1 29 1 1 0
2 S Turnball 12 2 24 2 3 1
3 P Jones 12 1 23 4 0 0
4 Dave Bott 10 3 16 1 3 0
Fielding Extras/Non-bowler wickets 5 1
Total 45 7 97 9 7 1

Blunsdon CC - 1st XI

Batting

NameHow OutBowlerRuns4s6sBalls
1 P Anderson ct Richard Guy b  Mark Dixon 27 4 1 0
2 D Tomlin ct Richard Guy b  Mark Dixon 0 0 0 0
3 A Ramasamy not out 26 4 0 0
4 Dave Bott not out 10 2 0 0
5 Julian Steele-Davis did not bat
6 Simon Legg did not bat
7 J Mundy* did not bat
8 P Jones did not bat
9 S Kumar did not bat
10 S Turnball did not bat
11 G Varian did not bat
Byes (2), Wides (5), No Balls (2) Extras9
Total 72
Wickets 2
Overs14

* = Captain, + = Wicket Keeper

Fall of Wickets

9-1 D Tomlin (P Anderson-8*); 51-2 P Anderson (A Ramasamy-16*); 

* = not out batsman

Bowling

BowlerOversMaidensRunsWicketsWidesNo Balls
1 Mark Dixon 7 3 28 2 0 0
2 Sam Burnstone 3 0 24 0 3 2
3 James Roper 4 0 18 0 2 0
Fielding Extras/Non-bowler wickets 2 0
Total 14 3 72 2 5 2

ADDENDUM

Despite our er.. "Heroic" attritional batting performance that we thought had saved us, due to ruddy new rules even our WACO umpire wasn't aware of, we in fact (deservedly) lost the game by 8 wickets. For those that are interested the new rules with this sort of situation are:

Rule 33.d.iv states:

If the maximum number of overs allowed to the team batting second falls below 25, then the number of runs required for the team batting second to win shall be calculated based on them having 25 overs available. The result shall be determined as follows:

  • If the number of runs scored by the team batting second is equal to or greater than the number of runs required to win off 25 overs, then the team batting second shall be declared the winners.
  • If the number of runs scored by the team batting second is exactly one run less than the number of runs required to win off 25 overs, then the match shall be declared a tie.
  • If the number of runs scored by the team batting second is more than one run less than the number of runs required to win off 25 overs, then the match shall be declared abandoned.

In summary: if the team batting second has already reached the 25-over target, they will win even if 25 overs have not been played. In this case, the target from 25 overs was 54 runs. Blunsdon reached 72-2 from 14 overs when the match was abandoned, and therefore won the match.

Stupid new rules........

Cpt Mark Dixon

{jcomments on}

Comments powered by CComment