HARLEQUINS (AWAY) - Thursday, June 19, 2003
|
And so to Oaklands, and the Harlequins. These were the chaps who had brought our unbeaten run to a cruel end in 2002 with defeat by just two runs, a defeat experienced by nine of the Loafers' lineup this evening: would we be able to turn the tables on the 'Quins this time, on a wicket and in balmy conditions very similar to last season's match?
With the Harlequins winning the toss and electing to bat, Neil Holmes and Nick Pennicott opened the bowling for the Loafers, Holmes in particular keeping things tight with successive maidens. Steve King then played a masterstroke, electing to save Holmes' remaining overs for the death and bringing himself on, with the result that a Harlequin soon lost his castle. However, the 'Quins consolidated their position, helped - as last season - by a useful contribution from the ever faithful Mr Extras, who added a handy number of byes in his innings. Gradually the Loafers began to run through the Harlequins batting, grabbing a second wicket courtesy of a Dave Burford run out, followed by a brace from Phil Low, with Neil Holmes returning to claim a fifth wicket at the death. But with opener Redman dropping sheet anchor - scoring 23 in 15 overs - as the other batsman played their shots, the 'Quins totted up the useful total of exactly 100 which, on a pitch of distinctly uneven bounce, looked to be a tall ask. It was also one more than the total the Loafers had failed to get last season�
Out came the Loafers' trusty openers, Burford and Alec Wallsgrove. "Will Daddy be back soon?" inquired Miss Carmen Burford. Pretty soon as it turned out, with eight runs to his name. Subsequently, the opening bowling of Kelsall and Downey then proved unfathomable to Wallsgrove and Lee Russell, who scratched around adding five in four overs before Russell departed. Then the first umpiring controversy of the day, as Wallsgrove - assuming that a chest high full toss would have been called "no ball" - thumped it straight to the field. But it wasn't, and so another Loafer skulked back to the pavilion. The Loafers were by now losing wickets at steady intervals, and pretty soon were five down for around the fifty mark. It was at this point that your correspondent - having been sent out to umpire after smashing the ball straight to the midwicket fielder for not very many - earned himself the soubriquet of "Trigger". Your correspondent will now talk you through each of the dismissals in turn. Number one: Phil Low hits ball to shortish extra cover. Phil says (or thinks): Bump ball. Are you blind, ump? Ump says: Walkies, Phil. Four balls later, and its number two: Gary McDougal, leg before. Gary: Possibly going over. Ump says: You wuz in ure crease, Gary. Sorry, buddy. And then, after Neil Holmes has thrashed an angry 19, the top score of the innings, he marches down the pitch and misses, and with your correspondent at square leg, it's decision number three: Holmes out stumped. Holmes says: several expletives deleted. By this time there was just enough time left for Steve King and Keith Budd to lose their wickets as well, and the Loafers are short yet again.
The two teams retired to the Coach & Horses, to ruminate moodily on the defeat over pints of Ferret, to dream of the glories of last season, and to wonder what the hell's happened this year. Do YOU know what's happened to the Loafers this season? Maybe YOU have some information that could help. Please contact K. Budd (c/o Coach & Horses, St Pancras) so that our barren run can come to an end. All replies will be treated in strictest confidence. Probably. Well, probably not, actually. Keith will probably say, "So-and-so's phoned in and he thinks that's what's happened this season is that we're crap." And even though so-and-so is right, we'll all take it the wrong way, and wait for so-and-so down a dark alley one night and say, "Call my batting over, would you, you sod? Then have some of that." Actually� this isn't really encouraging people to provide information, is it? No wonder they never tried it on Crimewatch. Harlequins won by x runs |
