Venturers vs Canal Taverners, Wednesday
4th July 2007
Author: Ian Gillard
Lost by 8 wickets. Venturers 98-9 Canal Taverners 99-2 (game reduced
to 16 overs per side)
The weather has been so bad recently we were surprised to find the game was still on, but we were even more surprised at the good condition of the pitch. It is uncertain what has allowed this patch of land to avoid the effects of repeated torrential downpours that have affected everywhere else, but it made the match much more entertaining and a proper contest. The last time the Venturers visited Victory field the position of the sun behind one end made it very difficult to bowl, but under a leaden sky this time there were no such concerns and in fact the match finished just as misty rain started falling. The good timing was largely due to a prudent reduction in the total overs for the match to 16 each way, which proved to be enough to give a good game. The game itself was of partnerships and debutants, with the Taverners fielding three new younger players and the Venturers fielding two who played their first game for us.
The toss saw Roger and Chintan gathering their bat and pads, but they had to wait while late fielders arrived, the last of these having to wait for the conclusion of the first over before joining the game. The opening bowler for the Taverners is pretty decent and bowled a tight line, and before Chintan had the opportunity to get his eye in he received a particularly good one. Ian joined Roger at the crease batting in the same position as in the previous match against the Taverners and was nearly out in equally short order again when the large and butter-fingered bowler dropped a dolly return catch an over later. A dozen runs were added to settle the nerves but the partnership was cut short when Roger was caught behind off a delivery that left him.
Simon took guard and got a difficult delivery almost straight away which he got away very fine past the keeper’s outstretched glove to the fine leg boundary. Unfortunately the buttery bowler did for Simon pretty much next ball, which moved into the right-hander and perhaps kept a bit low. With 16 on the board and 3 wickets down in the 4th over the alarm bells were ringing, but Kevin strode out to re-establish the innings and struck some solid drives which were well fielded.
Once again the partnership was settling in when a solid shot from Kevin whistled out towards the walled section of the boundary. At this ground there is a ridge in the outfield close to the wall which makes it impossible to see whether the ball has gone for four. Instead you have to wait for it to ping back off the wall, which is exactly what it seemed to do despite a fielder trying to get a foot to it. There was a lot of shouting from the fielders which gave Kevin the impression it had gone, and having run half of a second run he slowed to an amble to have a look at the pitch. At length the ball returned from the boundary fielder and on whipping the bails off about half the fielders appealed and the full-time umpire raised his finger. Kevin was incredulous and Ian objected strongly to a really farcical run out on the grounds that it was not in the spirit of the game. There was no question the batsman would have easily made his ground had the boundary (and foot) been visible as it is elsewhere on the field. Fortunately common sense prevailed. Thus, a few more runs were added to the partnership, but only an over later Kevin got the one that moved away and was unexpectedly bowled off stump.
Thus in the 7th over with the score on 28 Matt took guard, and after a carbon copy of Simon’s boundary he settled in and finally a partnership took root and runs came at a very respectable rate with good running between the wickets. The run rate briefly rose over 10 per over, but over the next 6 overs averaged 6.6, but it felt as though it was difficult to really accelerate against mostly straight, consistent bowling. Ian particularly found it impossible to hit into the off side, but this is a technical problem that the fielders remained oblivious to and obligingly left huge gaps on the on-side. With 4 overs and 5 wickets left the score of 68 needed some help and it was time to start slogging proper, but at this point the accurate left-hander came on who clearly has Ian’s number from last time and after failing to get two leg stump balls away the middle stump went back. Ian was replaced by Duncan who had obviously drawn the same conclusion about the run-rate and after a few singles to get his bearings promptly hit the largest six I have ever seen, clearing not only the controversial walled boundary, but the road and tennis court fence as well. Fortunately it missed the tennis players who remained blissfully unaware of the monstrous thunderbolt speeding out the sky until after it pitched. Despite this brush with death they casually threw the ball back with a smile – an expression not shared by the lefty bowler. His expression changed a moment later though when Duncan holed out. Aravind played his first ball from the crease but then he came down the pitch twice to the bowler, with a four and a wicket resulting and Matt was run out in the penultimate over finishing with an excellent 18 to keep us in the game. With only two balls left Rob B went in and ran ‘for’ (not ‘on’) a misfield first ball. That is to say ‘to run in the hope they will misfield it’. This is not as daft a strategy as all that at the death, but the fielder kept a cool head and the immediate and unexpected dismissal meant poor Steve had to go to the non-striker’s end with only a bat having been scoring. Steve’s padless, boxless guard following the running of an extra would have been worth seeing, but Alistair hit a boundary off the last ball which was worthy of note as it resulted in a post-match award to the fielder for catastrophically fluffing a stop on the boundary. He stopped it well with his foot but lost it between his feet, and turned away and threw his hands up in disgust before realising it was still only barely trickling to the line and had to watch it totter over agonisingly.
In the conditions against useful bowling 98 was a
competitive score. 120 would have been a really strong total, but
Duncan and Aravind got us off to a roaring start with a wicket and
just a few runs. The batsmen were pretty useful with their opening
bowler also taking the batting honours. He hits the ball as hard
as the left-handed who opened last time, and he opened with one of
their more experienced right-handers. If our batting was full of
incident the bowling was anything but. We needed to keep the run
rate down rather than take wickets and basically we did everything
right. The first 6 overs went for 31 and we were well in it, but
the next 6 went for about 49 and left a tricky 4 overs to negotiate
with only 18 runs in hand. The problem was when they could free their
arms it was expensive, and they got set quickly on their home turf.
Duncan was unable to hang on to a real bullet off his own bowling
early on but saved four several times with Alistair also fielding
really well. Aravind got the weaker-hitting right handed opener’s off-stump which brought a debutant to the crease. Any
hopes of a collapse faded as he batted well after some early scares
and the partnership took them almost all the way until Matt bowled
him around the 12th over with the score on 80. It was difficult to
put the pressure on the big hitters with overs and wickets in hand
and the lefty hit a four just over Ian at long off to finish the
match. We actually played pretty well in tricky conditions and I
guess we were about 20 runs short at the end which can only improve
now we can practice in nets. We had chip butties and a good laugh
with our opponents in the pub afterwards, and with our new nets next
season we will see those few extra runs and have a well deserved
win to talk about.