Howells of Anguish as Middlesex fail to even Tye


Not enough support

By Dingy Bags
June 3 2016

Dingy Bags reports on a frustrating and ultimately disappointign T20 match for Middlesex. Not a gret day for spectators or players but an unusual twist from the bar staff at the end. Well done for being there and managing to write anything in the cold.

I suppose it’s not bad to get to June before a first defeat but it was still a disappointment to see it at MT on Thursday evening. I put on another layer, having shivered at Sandy Lodge on Wednesday and took up a position more or less on the spot where Darren had been refused permission to erect a gazebo. If he’d tried an igloo he might have had more luck.

In front of a decent crowd, given the cold, dark weather, we won the toss and batted. I am told we prefer to chase – you’d say our batting was stronger than our bowling - but with dusk already falling before we started, perhaps we thought batting towards the end of the game might be tough. The boundaries had not been moved in since the cc game so, by modern T20 standards, this game was played on a very large playing surface

A surprise to me was that we decided to open with our star batsman. I don’t follow the IPL but it seemed to me he would be appearing at four or five. But what do I know?  As often, the game started with a spinner taking the first over, Van Bunger. In fact both he and Tom Smith, once of this parish, bowled in the powerplay, both with the wind behind them, so hitting straight meant hitting into this.

Mala nudged the first ball for a single and our star defended the next three. His fourth ball he faced, just a tad shorter, he launched over the scorers’ tent. Attempting to do the same sort of thing to the last ball, he lobbed it up in the air and was caught and bowled. And that was that. Didn’t Gilchrist’s debut go in a similar fashion?

Things got even worse when Mala, in great form, hit one high in the air and was well caught by Cockbain running back. This bought Morgan to the crease. With two key wickets lost so early, they had to go a bit more slowly than might otherwise have been the case, so we were 43-2 at the end of the powerplay. Early on Morgan tried a reverse sweep off Smith which brought a huge lbw appeal. Tom would have liked that. He had just launched a six that would have landed in my beer if I hadn’t have moved when he tried the same at the other end, ie hitting with the wind, and got it on the toe and was caught at long off, from the bowling of Benny Hill, who always seems to do well against us. I would have tried to be flash and caught it but I had notes for this report in one hand and a pint in the other. I did not want to lose my notes, so I just stepped away.

Fortunately, Stirlo had his sensible head on and settled down to play a solid innings with nothing too risky for quite some time. Voges joined him and they put on  61 without ever dominating. Voges, also in good form, struggled to time quite a few shots, which suggested that the wicket was not totally straightforward for hitting. Stirlo also, like Morgan, hit a six and was out a ball or two later and it was left to Toby to provide the last bit of momentum. 159 felt a bit short of a par score but a game.

Toby gave us a great start with two quick wickets and the scores at the end of the powerplays were identical. As JW has already posted, a few key moments in their innings proved the fine margins. We gave away the sloppiest of buzzers from a throw that was just lobbed in and, as darkness fell and the game got tight, our outfielding was no match for their. The Glouc boundary riders were fast to the ball, neat in picking up and got the ball in low and fast; we were more inconsistent. And it has to be said that the fumble on the boundary, when Franklin had it covered in any case, cost two further runs. Apart from Toby’s efforts (spoiled a bit by his last ball, a full toss, much to his own annoyance), Franklin bowled well through the mid part of the innings. His bowling has suddenly looked a bit more like in the last week or so. Ravi bowled a few a bit too short and, though he got a crucial wicket, was not quite the trump card he sometimes is in this format.

Toby had to be bowled out earlier than usual because the disappointment was Pod, whose first over went for plenty. By the end, unless Stirlo was going to bowl again, it was laft to Fuller and Pod to finish. Fuller’s first ball was a full toss above waist height, not quite in the Tino class but still pretty unhittable in the gloom. This, the penultimate over, saw the fumble over the boundary and, although Chucker Taylor was then bowled, it left things closer than they should have been. Pod’s first three balls were good, which left 7 to win off three balls, but Roderick carved a four between our two point fielders and slogged the next for six over midwicket. Neither of these were poor deliveries, as far as I could see in the light. But all that matters is that Roderick could see them well enough and so it remains the case that we have NEVER beaten Glouc at T20.

Near the end, one of the barstaff came through the crowd asking if anyone wanted anything else from the bar. It was a bit like those St Bernard dogs that rescue people in the Alps with a tot of brandy. Well, I suppose it wasn’t quite that cold. The climate in Radlett is kinder.

Bookmark or share this story with:

Howells of Anguish as Middlesex fail to even Tye
Discussion started by Middlesex till we die , 03/06/2016 20:03
Middlesex till we die
03/06/2016 20:03
What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016:06:06:13:54:55 by BarmierKev.

BarmierKev
03/06/2016 21:12
Thanks Dingy for sharing. It's clear boundary fielding the difference.

Barmy Kev
I'm only here for the tele

Darren Gosling
03/06/2016 21:40
Good report Dingy, agree I felt at the time our score was too short for our current T20 bowling to defend and so proved the case. With McClenaghan to come yet I'm hoping this won't be the case in future games.

At least everyone in this group has lost at least once so we haven't lost any ground with this defeat. Would be nice to beat Gloucs one day in white ball cricket.....

Seaxe_Man
04/06/2016 17:00
Thanks for the detailed report db as I did'nt attend.

159 runs always looked short especially as you report their fielding was superior.

Richard Ayling's wickets seem to be seamer friendly looking at the last two years.

This could account for Rav being less effective.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net