London Erratics Cricket Club

Thirty years of recreation and refreshment, 1974–2004

Sunday 1 August 2004
London Erratics v Bampton
at Langford

Erratics fall narrowly short in record run feast
Click on (Þ) symbol for photo images
BAMPTON — batting
1   b Ward 83
2   c Rowland b Ward 51
3   c Heller b Ward 8
4   c Bradley b Towers 52
5   not out 60
6   not out 0
7  
8  
9  
10  
11  
284 for 4 in 35 overs
Fall of wickets: 1–147, 2–148, ??

LONDON ERRATICS — bowling
Towers 6 0 42 1
Heller 7 0 43 0
Neal 7 0 59 0
Ward 7 0 38 3
Rivington 3 0 16 0
Bradley 5 0 49 0
Our special correspondent writes:
Bampton, having had to postpone the match earlier in the season because of firework damage to their artificial pitch, did their best to foil the Erratics by a late switch of venue to Langford, six miles further out from London. Nine Erratics nevertheless found the ground by 2.30, to be reinforced by two loan signings from Bampton, who curiously would be shared by the two sides and unluckily ended up fielding for the full 70 overs.
The ground was picturesquely sited, with tempting short boundaries (and, fortunately, not too deep rough in the surrounding fields), and an interestingly undulating though closely-mown outfield. The Bampton captain expressed a strong preference for a limited-overs game, on the interesting reasoning that the rules of a time game were too complex to explain to the younger players (Minister for Schools please note). He won the toss and Bampton batted, as they probably would have done if skipper Chris Dunabin had won, on a pitch that looked likely to offer bowlers little help apart from an interesting lateral slope.
Alex Towers and Richard Heller bowled tidily but with little penetration, and the Bampton openers accumulated steadily, helped by the short boundaries but — for once — not by Erratic misfields. Matthew Neal, replacing Alex, obtained huge away-swing but found getting his line right difficult, not helped by a strict interpretation of the wides law from the Bampton umpire.
Tristan Ward, replacing Richard, put a slight brake on the scoring; then, changing ends so the slope helped his spin, made the first breakthrough, but not until the score had reached 147. In the view of Jim Head (forcefully expressed) and most of the fielders, he should have had another next ball, but the umpire ruled against what looked a smart stumping by Jim. However, Tristan soon accounted for two more batsmen, one with the aid of a sharp reaction catch by James Rowland at slip off Jim’s gloves; and might have had a fourth if Chris and Jim hadn’t each politely left a skier to the other, with no ‘yours’, still less ‘mine’, to be heard. (Bampton, not drawing quite the right lesson, later gave Jim a life when two fielders crashed into each other, similarly without calling [was very funny — Ed].)
The Bampton fourth-wicket pair picked up the scoring rate again. James Rivington bowled a couple of tidy overs but then the batsmen found his measure; Tom Bradley, one of the loan signings, also bowled tidily, but by this time the batsmen were hitting good-length balls for four even with five men on the boundary; and Alex, returning for two overs, couldn’t check the run rate. Bampton came off after 35 overs on 284 for 4, a score the Erratics had never matched still less successfully chased.
LONDON ERRATICS — batting 4s  6s 
† Head run out 112 19   
Neal bowled 62 13   
Bush bowled 52 1  6 
Ward bowled 4    
* Dunabin NOT OUT  5    
Rowland run out 1    
Towers lbw 2    
Rivington NOT OUT  3    
Heller    
279 for 6 in 35 overs
Fall of wickets:  1–160, 2–253, 3–263, 4–271, 5–272, 6–275
Our special correspondent writes:
Had it been a time game, the Erratics batsmen would no doubt have had their minds set on a draw from the outset. Lacking that option, Jim and Matthew — promoted to open as a pinch-hitter — set out to overhaul the huge Bampton total. Right from the start, the score rose at around the eight an over required. Both Jim (Þ) and Matthew (Þ) , keeping pace with each other, despatched the Bampton bowling — never less than steady — to all parts of the ground. Two bowling changes checked the rate slightly, but Jim and Matthew went on accumulating, until, with the score on 160 (thought to be an Erratics record stand), Matthew, cutting at a wide ball, unluckily bottom-edged it onto his stumps.
With nine an over needed, the stage was set for Bill Bush. Disdaining even his usual one blocked ball to get his eye in, judge the pace of the pitch (slow), the light (bright), the field placing (deep) etc., Bill launched himself into the Bampton attack (Þ) . Bampton were perhaps slow to register that the optimum field for Bill has nine men in a ring from deep square leg to long on, and that straight good-length balls are what he likes best. Nevertheless, with Bill in this mood, the field would have been most usefully set mainly in the next field. In nine furious overs he struck six sixes in his 52 (thus neatly scoring his age). At the other end, Jim kept on vigorously accumulating, reaching his century with another delicate late cut. The rate required still hovered around nine an over. Hubris began to overtake the Erratics, at least those in the pavilion (egged on by Trevor Milne-Day, distinguished former Erratic). James Rivington was heard to say ‘If we win, this will be better than Hartfield...’
With thirty-odd still needed Jim was run out, and a few balls later Bill fell going for another big hit. Tristan, James Rowland and Alex all fell cheaply trying to accelerate before they were in gear. Chris poked a few singles but couldn’t penetrate the field, now in a ring on the boundary. James Rivington came in needing to score a six and a four from two balls, but unaccountably failed at this simple task: a three, helped by overthrows, maintained the tension only in so far as the bowler might lapse into a wide or no-ball. He didn’t. The Erratics had made their highest-ever total — but lost by 6 runs.
After the match, with the Langford pub closed on Sundays, the Erratics managed to find one alternative pub, Bampton presumably another. Sorry: no sour grapes, and we weren’t still upset about that stumping, really....
Post mortem: perhaps we should have pushed more men back to the boundary sooner. But, just as in the professional game, runs can be scored faster than we used to think possible.
Oscar nominations: a day for batsmen: Jim especially, Matthew and Bill all merit consideration. Tristan for bowling, James Rowland for fielding? — perhaps, in a thin year. [CD]
Erratics lost by 5 runs
2004 Season
Erratics HomePage