GOOGLIES & CHINAMEN
An Occasional Cricketing Journal
Edition 134
February 2014
Really Irritating Trends in Modern Cricket No 1
I have been a fan of the Sky cricket coverage since its inception and their innovative approach has improved the sofa watching spectacle out of all recognition. Remember that the BBC coverage was limited to a camera at one end only. It has also changed the way that the game is played. In the old days umpires gave no LBW decisions on the front foot particularly to the spinners. Batsmen would shoulder arms to off spinners (eg Ken Barrington against Tom Vievers) safe in the knowledge that there would be no appeal let alone a decision against them. Following the introduction and ultimate acceptability of Hawkeye the umpires would watch the footage at their leisure and realize the high proportion of these deliveries that would have indeed hit the stumps. Led by Alim Daar they started to finger front foot appeals and when Hawkeye validated the decisions the umpiring fraternity followed suit.
So far so good. The management of the game remained with the onfield umpires and their decisions for good or ill stood. However, I have no truck with introduction of referrals to an off-field umpire. This undermines the onfield guys. There is no sadder sight than an onfield umpire having to reverse a decision that he has made following a successful referral. It has always been part of the game that there will be some umpiring mistakes and that they have to be accepted. It is part of cricket’s lesson to us all.
If you want to reflect on the nonsense that this leads to you only have to consider the ballyhoo that has followed Ravi Bopara’s dismissal in the fifth ODI. The onfield umpires thought that he might have been out stumped when Matthew Wade fumbled the ball which bounced off him onto the bails which appeared to be dislodged, but was Bopara’s foot raised simultaneously or not? If the third umpire saw the same pictures as the TV viewers there was no way that he could have concluded that Bopara was out but somehow he used this information to conclude that he was. When the onfield umpire relayed this bizarre decision to the players they all seemed surprised. The whole point of referring is to get the decision right not wrong. The sports channels love this sort of thing and everyone has an opinion. Some geezer from Lord’s was interviewed and he read out a chunk from the Laws of the Game. Its just bollox. The onfield umpire didn’t think he was out and should have just rejected any appeal, if indeed there was one.
The Indians may have got this right by refusing to get involved in this media intrusion into the umpiring of the game. Incidentally, I also think that referees are in charge of soccer matches and with the help of their linesmen must decide whether the ball has crossed the line whether for a throw in, a corner or a goal. I know, they are called assistant referees these days but I can’t get into that either.
Out and About with the Professor
I imagine for some that being a regular watcher of county cricket is a touch on the nerdy side of cricket enthusiasm. Being a member of a county cricket club supporters association probably counts as one or two standard deviations more along the nerdom scale. Attending a meeting of a county cricket club supporters association in the middle of January...well.
Still I'm glad I went. The meeting coincided with the announcement of the death of Graham Stevenson who had, so I was told, been ill for some time but who is fondly remembered in Yorkshire for being a fine cricketer and, as they say, a bit of a character. He seems to be just about the only person in the fractious Yorkshire dressing room at the time, who could take the mickey out of Sir Geoffrey and get away with it and he did, of course, together with the great man, set a Yorkshire record for the last wicket of 149 when he scored 115* (I’m not sure if Boycott contributed 30; he was the last man out, which enabled Stevenson to say that he had to carry him and protect him from the quicks). He is also remembered for leaving the field against Northants when he had taken the first 8 wickets. He gave up the chance of all ten because he "wanted to change his shirt". Googlies readers may well have their own reminiscences.
There was much chat of the Yorkshire players in the current England set up: Balance, Bairstow, Bresnan and Root and questions about who else they might take…Gale? As always there is a dissonance between pride in their elevation and annoyance at their resulting unavailability. Also under discussion was the very successful Yorkshire Academy programme which has seen five Yorkshire schoolboys into the England under-19 squad. Three of them turned up and answered questions about what it was like to be in the Academy and indeed in the England set up, they were: Karl Carver, Matt Fisher and Josh Shaw (son of Christopher). They were a little nervous but did very well and batted back questions about whether the coaching was better in Yorkshire or with England (they apparently, even at the age of 15/16, have "media training"...ye gods). They are also tutored on such issues as drugs, finance and illegal betting. Given the prevalence of the latter and the fate of Mervyn Westfield at Essex, it all seems very sensible. Apparently there were instances at Headingley this year of organised betting scams (not involving players). On one occasion a spectator was found with 12 mobile phones. He was giving a commentary on a televised match to a dozen different recipients in India and thereby beating the speed of the TV signal. It seems that there is enough time delay to allow a bet to be placed on what will happen the next ball. I can see why someone would want to place these "bets" but why would anyone ever accept them?
Anyway our young lads are innocent and carefree and just starting out on their careers as professional cricketers. Was it difficult, they were asked, integrating with other young England players? No, no problem. Did they all have the same attitude to the game? Well, not exactly, you see the Yorkshire lads played in the leagues and were used to it being pretty hard whereas several of the other England boys had been to namby-pamby private (commercial) schools and were at bit soft. Still, our lads will toughen 'em up.
Sofa Cricket
New Zealand v West Indies 3rd ODI at Queenstown, 1 January 2014
This match was reduced to 21 overs per side and the West Indies put the New Zealanders in to bat. It was good to see the tonker and piss artist Jesse Ryder back in their side and he duly made 104 from 51 balls with five sixes but, extraordinarily, this prodigious feat was completely upstaged by Corey Anderson who made 131 from just 47 deliveries in an innings that included 14 sixes. New Zealand made an almost certainly ungettable and possibly never to be repeated, 283 for 4. The West Indies replied with a rather pathetic 124 for 5 and they lost by 159. Serves them right.
New Zealand v West Indies 4th ODI at Nelson, 4 January 2014
New Zealand won the toss and made 285 with Guptill top scoring with 81. Following a rain interruption the West Indies revised total to chase was 193 from 33 overs and they failed to make any real impact on this finishing with 134 for 5.
New Zealand v West Indies 5th ODI at Hamilton, 8 January 2014
Brendan McCullum won the toss and put the West Indies in to bat and they rattled up 363 for 4 with Edwards and Bravo making hundreds. New Zealand didn’t get half way in their chase and were all out for 160 in under thirty overs. There must have been something good on the tele. Serves them right.
Pakistan v Sri Lanka 1st test at Abu Dhabi, 31 December 2013
Pakistan won the toss and put Sri Lanka in to bat and rolled them over for 204 of which their skipper, Angelo Mathews, with 91 scored almost half. In reply Younis Khan and Misbah both scored hundreds as Pakistan took a substantial lead making 383. Sri Lanka batted better the second time around but at 186 for 4 they were still in trouble. But Angelo Mathews stepped up again to play a captain’s innings. First he added 138 with Chandimal and then 156 unbroken with the wicket keeping Jayawardene. He finally made a token declaration at 480 for 5 when he was 157 not out. In the remaining time Pakistan made 158 for 2.
Pakistan v Sri Lanka 2nd test at Dubai, 8 January 2014
This time Sri Lanka won the toss and put Pakistan in. Surely they don’t get green tops in the desert? Either way Pakistan were skittled for 165. Sri Lanka replied with 388 thanks to Silva (95) and Jayawardene the batter (129). Pakistan made 359 the second time around with skipper, Misbah, making 97. Sri Lanka coasted to victory by nine wickets.
Pakistan v Sri Lanka 3rd test at Sharjah, 16 January 2014
Sri lanka won the toss again and decided to bat at Sharjah. They accumulated a very slow 428 with Mathews and Perera both making nineties. Pakistan’s reply was based around opener Ahmed Shezhad’s 147 and they reached 341 all out. But then Abdur Rehman and Saeed Ajmal got to work and bowled Sri Lanka out for 214 with no batsman reaching fifty. The scoring rate for the first three innings had been less than 3 per over but Pakistan got the bit between their teeth and rattled along at 5.25 runs per over as they reached their target of 302 for the loss of five wickets. Azhar Ali made 103 and Misbah saw his side home with 68 not out.
New Zealand v India 1st ODI at Napier, 19 January 2014
India won the toss and put the Kiwis in to bat. but it was the middle order that contributed the bulk of the runs with the most telling contribution coming from Anderson who made 68 not out from 40 balls. New Zealand closed on 292 for 7. Virat Kohli made 123 in reply but got insufficient support from his colleagues as they were bowled out for 268. Serves them right.
New Zealand v India 2nd ODI at Hamilton, 22 January 2014
India put New Zealand in again at Hamilton and once again it was Anderson with 44 from 17 balls including five sixes that got them up to a respectable 271 in an innings restricted to 42 overs. Under D/L India had to score 293 to win but despite 78 from Kohli and 56 from Dhoni they fell short by 16 runs. Serves them right.
New Zealand v India 3rd ODI at Auckland, 25 January 2014
Some people never learn. Dhoni put the Kiwis in again and they said “thanks very much” as they rattled up 314 with Martin Guptill (remember him?) making 111. India were reduced to 184 for 6 but Ashwin and Jadeja scored quickly and the latter was there at the end on 66 not out with four sixes. But their total was only 314 which resulted in a tied match.
New Zealand v India 4th ODI at Hamilton, 28 January 2014
Dhoni decided to bat first but his top order let him down and when he was joined by Jadeja they were 151 for 5. These two were still together at the close as they reached a gettable 278. Kane Williamson made a slowish 60 and was out at 188 for 3 but this brought Brendan McCullum out to join Ross Taylor and these two saw the home side to victory with a couple of overs to spare. Taylor made 112 not out.
Gillette Matters
The Great Jack Morgan stretches his memory back to 1965
In 1965, the Gillette Cup was in its third season, Sussex having won the trophy in each of its first two seasons. In the first round, Middlesex comfortably disposed of Buckinghamshire at Lord’s by 158 runs. Man of the Match Bob Gale hit 13 fours and 2 sixes in his 86 as Middx totalled 269 for 9 in their 60 overs, then Ron Hooker (3 for 29) and John Price (3 for 39) bowled the visitors out for 111 in 38.1 overs for an easy win. Middlesex had much more of a struggle to overcome Derbyshire at Lord’s in round two in a tight, low scoring contest. Skipper Fred Titmus top scored for Middx with 40*, but a total of 161 all out did not look like being enough. However, good bowling by Don Bennett (4 for 27), in particular, saw Derbyshire descend to 77 for 8 before keeper Bob Taylor (53* with 6 fours and a six) was joined by pace bowler Harold Rhodes in a fighting stand for the ninth wicket. They put on an unbroken 74, but could not quite take their team across the finish line and Middlesex had won by 10 runs, though the MotM went to Taylor.
Then it was the turn of Sussex, who had never lost a Gillette Cup match, to visit Lord’s for the third round tie on June 23rd. Juvenile admission was 2 shillings (I still have my ticket) and the scorecard was 6 old pence. Sussex were struggling in the Championship, but they had a strong five man pace attack that had shown that it knew how to win one day matches. However, Titmus won the toss and Gale (74) and Peter Parfitt (66) put together a superb second wicket stand of 126 in good time to put Middlesex on top and this advantage was emphasised by a brilliant knock from keeper John Murray, whose innings of 49 included 5 fours and a six. Wickets tumbled towards the end of the innings, but Middlesex still managed to reach a very competitive 280 for 8 after 60 overs. England quick bowlers Ian Thomson and John Snow each picked up two wickets, as did Don Bates (a true local boy who was born in Hove and played football for Brighton and Hove Albion), but the weak link was ex-England captain Ted Dexter, whose 8 overs cost 57 runs without success. Ken Suttle (47), who toured WI with England in 1953-54 and another who played football for Brighton, shared a promising stand of 77 for the second wicket with Dexter (46), but they were unable to match the Middlesex scoring rate. After that, only England wicket keeper Jim Parks looked capable of taking the visitors close and when he fell at 142 during a very handy spell from Bennett, it looked all over. Sussex were eventually all out for 190 after 53 overs, with Bennett taking 4 for 42 and Middlesex had dethroned the "kings of one day cricket" by 90 runs. There were several good candidates for the MotM award, but it was Murray, who added three good catches to his fine innings, who received the award from Cyril Washbrook.
In an entertaining semi-final at the Oval, Surrey beat Middlesex by 5 wickets: Middlesex made 250 for 8 (Eric Russell 70, Mike Brearley 60, Ken Barrington 3 for 41), but Surrey reached 252 for 5 in the 56th over (John Edrich 71, Barrington 68*, Mike Edwards 53*) with Edwards receiving the MotM award. In the final, Surrey were soundly thrashed by Yorkshire. Despite two complete failures, Gale was Middlesex's leading scorer in the 1965 Gillette Cup competition with 162 runs at an average of 40.5, while Brearley, Titmus, Parfitt, Russell, Ted Clark and Murray all made significant contributions. Bennett was the most successful bowler with 10 wickets at an average of 12.5, with Price the next best and the others who chipped in usefully were Titmus, Hooker and Clark. Murray was the leading catcher with 8.
In the Championship that year, Middlesex were sixth for the third consecutive year, winning eight and losing seven of their 28 matches and they were never a real threat to the top two of Worcestershire (champions) and Northamptonshire who both won 13 matches and lost 4. Parfitt was the top batsman with 1242 runs at 47.76, Russell made 1724 at 39.18 and Clark 1352 at 32.97 while almost everyone else was slightly disappointing: for example, Gale averaged under 30, Mike Smith 21, Brearley 20, Bob White 12, Hooker 11, Bennett 9.7 and Pasty Harris 9.4. With Price playing in only 12 matches because of injury, the bowling was distinctly lacking in genuine pace so most of the wickets fell to the spinners and medium pacers. Titmus was the outstanding bowler with 75 wickets at 16.9, followed by Harry Latchman 17 at 20, Price 33 at 23.68, Bennett 54 at 24, Hooker 86 at 24.32 and Don Bick 51 at 27.07. In all Middlesex first class matches, Murray took 65 catches and made 10 stumpings while the best close catchers were Hooker (34) and Russell (29). Parfitt, Russell, Titmus and Murray were all selected for the England tour of Australia that winter.
Wisden & Britcher Matters
The Professor sent me this
Thanks for the latest Googlies and how nice to have some feedback! The subject of the early editions of Wisden raises more general questions about collecting and I suspect that people who are keen on cricket have a marked propensity to collect books, scorecards and whatnot which, in truth, they very seldom look at. As Robin Brodhurst points out, if it is simply an information search, on-line is quicker and normally more comprehensive. So why do we keep all this stuff? I recall you telling me that your collection of Playfair Annuals sits on a shelf gathering dust untouched by human hand. I very much doubt if you are alone in that. Still somehow the early cricket publications have an attraction...perhaps a psychologist could explain it all to us.
I would like to reassure David Rayvern Allen that, while in Manchester, I did have a quick look at a Britcher: A complete list of all the grand matches of cricket that have been played in the year 1793 was the document in question. Other "treasures" included Nicholas Wanostrocht's Felix on the bat: being a scientific inquiry into the use of the cricket bat; together with the history and use of the catapulta and C F Pardon's: The Australians in England: a complete record of the cricket tour of 1882... "Felix" Wanostrocht's book was, I read, an early instruction book on how to bat but I didn't have time to examine the scientific credentials. He also appears to have invented a form of bowling machine (the catapulta) and india-rubber batting gloves. Add to that a "career" (he was, of course, a gentleman amateur) as a classical scholar, musician, linguist, inventor, writer and artist and Felix seems to have been a splendid chap who doubtless would be contributing to Googlies now had he not inconveniently died in 1876. It would be good to hear more about cricket memorabilia from Googlies readers.
Hart Matters
Bill Hart knows how to get the best out of the winter months
It has been said before in this newsletter that ex-South Hampstead players are obsessed with looking at old scorebooks, and that is a complete calumny. However, at the risk of upsetting Steve Wright once again, it is time for me to brave the phalanx of readers who love to be told of the latest matches, or even some old ones, which have been played by various county second elevens. I am going to upset them by interrupting the articles that they love to read, by calling on the SHCC segment of "Googlies" readership, to help me get to the bottom of a problem, which relates to our own days of playing this wonderful game.
Recently our editor, the redoubtable James Sharp, asked for my help in loading some recalcitrant computer files on to his website. They were part of the archive work done by Alan Cox and I, on the SHCC scorebooks of the 1960's & 70's. Don't ask me how, but as a result of this request, I found myself looking at the 1974 South Hampstead 2nd XI individual averages. Riveting stuff isn't it. Anyway, in that year's averages lies a very unusual situation, concerning a certain A.Williams, who, at the time, was completely unknown to me. (Jim Sharp has since told me that it was Tony Williams, Stephen Thompson's brother-in-law). He does not appear in the scorebooks for 1973 or 1975, but in 1974 he was absolutely outstanding for the SHCC 2nd's.
As a team, they played 40 games that season, and Tony played in 38 of them, splendid availability if nothing else. Two of these 38 were abandoned, without his having a chance to bowl, and in another one he wasn't even asked to bowl, but the remaining 35 tell of his truly remarkable efforts.After playing 27 games, Tony had taken no less than 76 wickets at under 11 runs apiece, i.e. nearly 3 victims per match. Sadly, in the remaining 8 he took only 11 at just under 30 each, which gave him 87 for the season..At no time in the season was he picked for a first team match !
What a shame that he wasn't able to finish the job, and get to the magic 100. What a story that would have made! "Second XI star bowler takes 100 wickets and is ignored by the selectors". What I want to know from those of you that were there is, what happened? I suspect it was pressure from his team-mates conscious of the enormity of the achievement. Can somebody please tell me the facts, and can Steve Thompson tell me how Tony is getting on, and pass on my commiserations.
Wright Matters
Steve Wright joins the smallest club in the world-those who agree with me…
I enjoyed your comments on the success our boys enjoyed "down under" and you should contribute more to what is, after all, your own publication. If you no longer read the newspapers you may have missed the similarities that were drawn between this series and that of 1958/59 when our side (captained by Peter May) was touted as being the strongest ever to have toured Australia. Trueman, Tyson, Loader, Lock, Laker, Bailey, Godfrey Evans etc, etc. We had won the previous 3 Ashes series but were of course comprehensively stuffed 4-0. There certainly are some similarities. Laker declined to play in two tests, the fast bowlers had a terrible time but really it is surely inevitable that there will be similarities when two sides are beaten as comprehensively as these were. The batsman don't get enough runs, the bowlers are short of wickets and there is plenty of internal strife as well.
I should declare a financial interest here as I had a small wager on the Aussies before the series started. This result did not come out of a clear blue sky did it? We struggled in New Zealand and were fortunate to beat Australia last summer at all, never mind the eventual margin of victory.
Our only strategy as you pointed out, was to take 3 giant fast bowlers (in addition to Broad) and to confidently expect that it would be "business as usual". Australia planned their campaign in great detail. They put a couple of mid-wickets in for Pietersen which he gratefully took advantage of, didn't bowl to Cook's strengths and attacked Swann. It was clear that we had no faith in Panesar (so why did we take him) and so we shipped in another spinner (a part timer) to play instead of him after we had already been well beaten. Tremlett struggled to get to 80mph, Rankin got cramp and Finn was eventually sent home.
I agree with you about Swann. His refusal to see out the tour was a disgrace. The word is that he was told that he would not be selected for the 4th test and decided that that was enough for him. All this baloney about being "war weary" must have gone down really well with his mates. All he had to do was say to Flower I don't feel too good, leave me out of the last two tests and he could have slipped home at the end of the tour with his reputation more or less intact.
When apportioning blame for the shambles I take what is probably a slightly offbeat line. Our biggest failure in the series was that our bowlers were just not good enough. Australia's batting was very ordinary. On several occasions at pivotal moments in the series they had lost at least half their wickets for around 150 and we never ever looked like bowling them out cheaply. Australia on the other hand have a high class fast bowling unit. In my view Harris is a terrific bowler, not that much slower than Johnson but very skilful and then after those two there is Siddle bowling line and length at about the same pace as our guys. How many runs would the Australians have scored if they had been facing their own attack I wonder? It will be very interesting to see how they cope in South Africa against their new ball attack! "
I don't think I have come across Robin Brodhurst, one of your new readers and if I have I apologise to him for not remembering. So he wants even more of Jack Morgan does he? I think Robin must either be a real anorak or he has a strange sense of humour. I like Jack but I became slightly disturbed when he started to go on about what Wayne Larkins was up to in 1989. I shouldn't think even Wayne Larkins is too concerned about that, assuming of course he is still alive. How long will it be before Jack gets back to the ton he scored against Robespierre in a The French Revolution?
Did anybody see that pathetic spectacle of Brett Lee bowling an over to Piers Morgan? Morgan is a great chum of KP of course and was trying to make some point although what it was I am unclear about. He came out of it with a broken hand and a broken rib so it wasn't a complete waste of time. Who were the wonderful commentators? My least favourite pair - Mark Nicholas and Michael Vaughan. Am I alone in being sickened by these two?
Really Irritating Trends in Modern Cricket No. 2
The next time that you get offered tickets for an international match I suggest that you curb your excitement and give consideration to the following before you accept:
1. Before play commences there will be a pointless rendition of Jerusalem performed by some D-list celebrity and joined in by that portion of the crowd who have already located the bars.
2. The oft described “knowledgeable crowd” does not exist. You will witness leg byes getting ecstatic applause and bump ball catches cheered.
3. You may well find yourself sitting next to a group of people wearing ridiculous fancy dress. These morons have no interest in the cricket, of course, and will spend the whole day trying to attract the notice of the TV cameramen. It will be ten time worse if you are behind and not next to these individuals.
4. You will be paying as much as £100 for the ticket for which there will be scheduled just 90 overs if it is a test match. The players, encouraged by the umpires, will be eager to short change you and you can expect to lose upwards of 10% of your due watching.
5. There will be none of the traditional decorums that you might expect. Silence is not observed when the bowlers run in and people will get up and leave their seats and return to them mid over. Cretins will also stroll about behind the bowler’s arm and act affronted if directed not to by the umpires.
6. Play will constantly be interrupted by a rotation of substitute fielders for bogus injuries or comfort requirements (although strangely wicket keepers never need emergency slashes). They also are constantly bringing out additional kit to the participants. All this is tedious and contributes to the slow over rates.
7. As the day wears on many of the attenders get bored or drunk or both and will start to try to amuse themselves by creating plastic snakes from the beer glasses. Their chums will start a Mexican Wave which will acquire an importance way above that accredited to the cricket.
You have been warned.
George Arthur
The Professor sent me these notes
The very, very sad news of the death of George Arthur leaves us, I think, with a double loss. We have lost a true and delightful gentleman and we have also lost a link with the past. Everyone will have their favourite reminiscences of George depending perhaps, upon their age. You may recall him as a more than useful player; as a captain, particularly of the 3rd XI which he, in effect, founded; as an able, effective and extremely conscientious administrator both for the Club and for the DPSA; as an umpire; or perhaps just for his enthusiasm and encouragement; for the stories and the famous recitations; or, just for standing at the bar smiling and chatting… and being George. George was one of the first people I met when I joined the Club in 1971 and I remember thinking that here was a very nice man, a decent man…a “proper chap”. In the forty-odd years that have passed I have never had cause to revise that opinion. And I have never met anyone who thought differently.
But I think there is something more. George was, of course, a link to past: the history of the Club (obviously) but also to the way that the game was played in the past. I sensed that George loved cricket not just because it was an exciting test of skill, nor just because of the competitive element (no fading flower, George, he loved a close hard-fought competitive game) but because cricket - the cricket that George played - was a game of values, a game of sportsmanship and decency. Could anyone even imagine George claiming a catch that he didn’t take, or remaining at the crease when he’d snicked it behind? No. Or abusing an opponent or an official? Of course not. Why would anybody want to play sport like that?
In losing George the Cricket Club has lost a great character, a great supporter and a great friend. It has also lost someone who exemplified and in a sense personified the spirit of the game.
Please forget it Matters
1. Shortly before the Ashes tour the ICC named Alastair Cook as captain of their Test Team of the Year – ahead of Michael Clarke, who also made the XI. Cook leads a dream team that includes Graeme Swann and James Anderson. The only other Australian to make the side is Mike Hussey, who retired from cricket last winter but was chosen because the selection period runs from August 2012 to August 2013. Here is the team in full: Cook (capt), Pujara, Amla, Clarke, Hussey, de Villiers, Dhoni (wk), Swann, Steyn, Anderson, Philander.
2. Before the T20 matches started England captain Stuart Broad said that his batting line up was “scary”. By the time the series was lost none of the top six had made a half century.
Roger Kingdon
I very much regret having to report that Roger Kingdon died in January following a fall at Brentham CC. I will be happy to include any tributes, anecdotes or reminiscences in the March edition. Send them to my address below preferably by email.
Old Danes
Despite a fair degree of indifference there will be an Old Danes Gathering in 2014 at Shepherds Bush CC. The date is Friday July 25. Please let me know if you plan to come and I will circulate lists as previously. Why not plan to bring an Old Dane with you who has not attended before?
www.googliesandchinamen.com
I have been adding more stuff to the website including the South Hampstead CC scorecards for the 1st and 2nd XIs for 1960 to 1975. If you have any photos or data you would like to see included please email me. It doesn’t need to be SHCC or SCD matters!
Football Matters
Ken Molloy was hoping to have a spare seat next to him on a recent flight but unfortunately found it occupied by Andrew Baker’s January window signing. He complained of a most uncomfortable flight as his neighbour apparently “flopped over the arm rest” and proved an unwelcome distraction. To prove his point he sent me this photo.
Googlies and Chinamen
is produced by
James Sharp
Broad Lee House
Combs
High Peak
SK23 9XA
Tel & fax: 01298 70237
Email: [email protected]
An Occasional Cricketing Journal
Edition 134
February 2014
Really Irritating Trends in Modern Cricket No 1
I have been a fan of the Sky cricket coverage since its inception and their innovative approach has improved the sofa watching spectacle out of all recognition. Remember that the BBC coverage was limited to a camera at one end only. It has also changed the way that the game is played. In the old days umpires gave no LBW decisions on the front foot particularly to the spinners. Batsmen would shoulder arms to off spinners (eg Ken Barrington against Tom Vievers) safe in the knowledge that there would be no appeal let alone a decision against them. Following the introduction and ultimate acceptability of Hawkeye the umpires would watch the footage at their leisure and realize the high proportion of these deliveries that would have indeed hit the stumps. Led by Alim Daar they started to finger front foot appeals and when Hawkeye validated the decisions the umpiring fraternity followed suit.
So far so good. The management of the game remained with the onfield umpires and their decisions for good or ill stood. However, I have no truck with introduction of referrals to an off-field umpire. This undermines the onfield guys. There is no sadder sight than an onfield umpire having to reverse a decision that he has made following a successful referral. It has always been part of the game that there will be some umpiring mistakes and that they have to be accepted. It is part of cricket’s lesson to us all.
If you want to reflect on the nonsense that this leads to you only have to consider the ballyhoo that has followed Ravi Bopara’s dismissal in the fifth ODI. The onfield umpires thought that he might have been out stumped when Matthew Wade fumbled the ball which bounced off him onto the bails which appeared to be dislodged, but was Bopara’s foot raised simultaneously or not? If the third umpire saw the same pictures as the TV viewers there was no way that he could have concluded that Bopara was out but somehow he used this information to conclude that he was. When the onfield umpire relayed this bizarre decision to the players they all seemed surprised. The whole point of referring is to get the decision right not wrong. The sports channels love this sort of thing and everyone has an opinion. Some geezer from Lord’s was interviewed and he read out a chunk from the Laws of the Game. Its just bollox. The onfield umpire didn’t think he was out and should have just rejected any appeal, if indeed there was one.
The Indians may have got this right by refusing to get involved in this media intrusion into the umpiring of the game. Incidentally, I also think that referees are in charge of soccer matches and with the help of their linesmen must decide whether the ball has crossed the line whether for a throw in, a corner or a goal. I know, they are called assistant referees these days but I can’t get into that either.
Out and About with the Professor
I imagine for some that being a regular watcher of county cricket is a touch on the nerdy side of cricket enthusiasm. Being a member of a county cricket club supporters association probably counts as one or two standard deviations more along the nerdom scale. Attending a meeting of a county cricket club supporters association in the middle of January...well.
Still I'm glad I went. The meeting coincided with the announcement of the death of Graham Stevenson who had, so I was told, been ill for some time but who is fondly remembered in Yorkshire for being a fine cricketer and, as they say, a bit of a character. He seems to be just about the only person in the fractious Yorkshire dressing room at the time, who could take the mickey out of Sir Geoffrey and get away with it and he did, of course, together with the great man, set a Yorkshire record for the last wicket of 149 when he scored 115* (I’m not sure if Boycott contributed 30; he was the last man out, which enabled Stevenson to say that he had to carry him and protect him from the quicks). He is also remembered for leaving the field against Northants when he had taken the first 8 wickets. He gave up the chance of all ten because he "wanted to change his shirt". Googlies readers may well have their own reminiscences.
There was much chat of the Yorkshire players in the current England set up: Balance, Bairstow, Bresnan and Root and questions about who else they might take…Gale? As always there is a dissonance between pride in their elevation and annoyance at their resulting unavailability. Also under discussion was the very successful Yorkshire Academy programme which has seen five Yorkshire schoolboys into the England under-19 squad. Three of them turned up and answered questions about what it was like to be in the Academy and indeed in the England set up, they were: Karl Carver, Matt Fisher and Josh Shaw (son of Christopher). They were a little nervous but did very well and batted back questions about whether the coaching was better in Yorkshire or with England (they apparently, even at the age of 15/16, have "media training"...ye gods). They are also tutored on such issues as drugs, finance and illegal betting. Given the prevalence of the latter and the fate of Mervyn Westfield at Essex, it all seems very sensible. Apparently there were instances at Headingley this year of organised betting scams (not involving players). On one occasion a spectator was found with 12 mobile phones. He was giving a commentary on a televised match to a dozen different recipients in India and thereby beating the speed of the TV signal. It seems that there is enough time delay to allow a bet to be placed on what will happen the next ball. I can see why someone would want to place these "bets" but why would anyone ever accept them?
Anyway our young lads are innocent and carefree and just starting out on their careers as professional cricketers. Was it difficult, they were asked, integrating with other young England players? No, no problem. Did they all have the same attitude to the game? Well, not exactly, you see the Yorkshire lads played in the leagues and were used to it being pretty hard whereas several of the other England boys had been to namby-pamby private (commercial) schools and were at bit soft. Still, our lads will toughen 'em up.
Sofa Cricket
New Zealand v West Indies 3rd ODI at Queenstown, 1 January 2014
This match was reduced to 21 overs per side and the West Indies put the New Zealanders in to bat. It was good to see the tonker and piss artist Jesse Ryder back in their side and he duly made 104 from 51 balls with five sixes but, extraordinarily, this prodigious feat was completely upstaged by Corey Anderson who made 131 from just 47 deliveries in an innings that included 14 sixes. New Zealand made an almost certainly ungettable and possibly never to be repeated, 283 for 4. The West Indies replied with a rather pathetic 124 for 5 and they lost by 159. Serves them right.
New Zealand v West Indies 4th ODI at Nelson, 4 January 2014
New Zealand won the toss and made 285 with Guptill top scoring with 81. Following a rain interruption the West Indies revised total to chase was 193 from 33 overs and they failed to make any real impact on this finishing with 134 for 5.
New Zealand v West Indies 5th ODI at Hamilton, 8 January 2014
Brendan McCullum won the toss and put the West Indies in to bat and they rattled up 363 for 4 with Edwards and Bravo making hundreds. New Zealand didn’t get half way in their chase and were all out for 160 in under thirty overs. There must have been something good on the tele. Serves them right.
Pakistan v Sri Lanka 1st test at Abu Dhabi, 31 December 2013
Pakistan won the toss and put Sri Lanka in to bat and rolled them over for 204 of which their skipper, Angelo Mathews, with 91 scored almost half. In reply Younis Khan and Misbah both scored hundreds as Pakistan took a substantial lead making 383. Sri Lanka batted better the second time around but at 186 for 4 they were still in trouble. But Angelo Mathews stepped up again to play a captain’s innings. First he added 138 with Chandimal and then 156 unbroken with the wicket keeping Jayawardene. He finally made a token declaration at 480 for 5 when he was 157 not out. In the remaining time Pakistan made 158 for 2.
Pakistan v Sri Lanka 2nd test at Dubai, 8 January 2014
This time Sri Lanka won the toss and put Pakistan in. Surely they don’t get green tops in the desert? Either way Pakistan were skittled for 165. Sri Lanka replied with 388 thanks to Silva (95) and Jayawardene the batter (129). Pakistan made 359 the second time around with skipper, Misbah, making 97. Sri Lanka coasted to victory by nine wickets.
Pakistan v Sri Lanka 3rd test at Sharjah, 16 January 2014
Sri lanka won the toss again and decided to bat at Sharjah. They accumulated a very slow 428 with Mathews and Perera both making nineties. Pakistan’s reply was based around opener Ahmed Shezhad’s 147 and they reached 341 all out. But then Abdur Rehman and Saeed Ajmal got to work and bowled Sri Lanka out for 214 with no batsman reaching fifty. The scoring rate for the first three innings had been less than 3 per over but Pakistan got the bit between their teeth and rattled along at 5.25 runs per over as they reached their target of 302 for the loss of five wickets. Azhar Ali made 103 and Misbah saw his side home with 68 not out.
New Zealand v India 1st ODI at Napier, 19 January 2014
India won the toss and put the Kiwis in to bat. but it was the middle order that contributed the bulk of the runs with the most telling contribution coming from Anderson who made 68 not out from 40 balls. New Zealand closed on 292 for 7. Virat Kohli made 123 in reply but got insufficient support from his colleagues as they were bowled out for 268. Serves them right.
New Zealand v India 2nd ODI at Hamilton, 22 January 2014
India put New Zealand in again at Hamilton and once again it was Anderson with 44 from 17 balls including five sixes that got them up to a respectable 271 in an innings restricted to 42 overs. Under D/L India had to score 293 to win but despite 78 from Kohli and 56 from Dhoni they fell short by 16 runs. Serves them right.
New Zealand v India 3rd ODI at Auckland, 25 January 2014
Some people never learn. Dhoni put the Kiwis in again and they said “thanks very much” as they rattled up 314 with Martin Guptill (remember him?) making 111. India were reduced to 184 for 6 but Ashwin and Jadeja scored quickly and the latter was there at the end on 66 not out with four sixes. But their total was only 314 which resulted in a tied match.
New Zealand v India 4th ODI at Hamilton, 28 January 2014
Dhoni decided to bat first but his top order let him down and when he was joined by Jadeja they were 151 for 5. These two were still together at the close as they reached a gettable 278. Kane Williamson made a slowish 60 and was out at 188 for 3 but this brought Brendan McCullum out to join Ross Taylor and these two saw the home side to victory with a couple of overs to spare. Taylor made 112 not out.
Gillette Matters
The Great Jack Morgan stretches his memory back to 1965
In 1965, the Gillette Cup was in its third season, Sussex having won the trophy in each of its first two seasons. In the first round, Middlesex comfortably disposed of Buckinghamshire at Lord’s by 158 runs. Man of the Match Bob Gale hit 13 fours and 2 sixes in his 86 as Middx totalled 269 for 9 in their 60 overs, then Ron Hooker (3 for 29) and John Price (3 for 39) bowled the visitors out for 111 in 38.1 overs for an easy win. Middlesex had much more of a struggle to overcome Derbyshire at Lord’s in round two in a tight, low scoring contest. Skipper Fred Titmus top scored for Middx with 40*, but a total of 161 all out did not look like being enough. However, good bowling by Don Bennett (4 for 27), in particular, saw Derbyshire descend to 77 for 8 before keeper Bob Taylor (53* with 6 fours and a six) was joined by pace bowler Harold Rhodes in a fighting stand for the ninth wicket. They put on an unbroken 74, but could not quite take their team across the finish line and Middlesex had won by 10 runs, though the MotM went to Taylor.
Then it was the turn of Sussex, who had never lost a Gillette Cup match, to visit Lord’s for the third round tie on June 23rd. Juvenile admission was 2 shillings (I still have my ticket) and the scorecard was 6 old pence. Sussex were struggling in the Championship, but they had a strong five man pace attack that had shown that it knew how to win one day matches. However, Titmus won the toss and Gale (74) and Peter Parfitt (66) put together a superb second wicket stand of 126 in good time to put Middlesex on top and this advantage was emphasised by a brilliant knock from keeper John Murray, whose innings of 49 included 5 fours and a six. Wickets tumbled towards the end of the innings, but Middlesex still managed to reach a very competitive 280 for 8 after 60 overs. England quick bowlers Ian Thomson and John Snow each picked up two wickets, as did Don Bates (a true local boy who was born in Hove and played football for Brighton and Hove Albion), but the weak link was ex-England captain Ted Dexter, whose 8 overs cost 57 runs without success. Ken Suttle (47), who toured WI with England in 1953-54 and another who played football for Brighton, shared a promising stand of 77 for the second wicket with Dexter (46), but they were unable to match the Middlesex scoring rate. After that, only England wicket keeper Jim Parks looked capable of taking the visitors close and when he fell at 142 during a very handy spell from Bennett, it looked all over. Sussex were eventually all out for 190 after 53 overs, with Bennett taking 4 for 42 and Middlesex had dethroned the "kings of one day cricket" by 90 runs. There were several good candidates for the MotM award, but it was Murray, who added three good catches to his fine innings, who received the award from Cyril Washbrook.
In an entertaining semi-final at the Oval, Surrey beat Middlesex by 5 wickets: Middlesex made 250 for 8 (Eric Russell 70, Mike Brearley 60, Ken Barrington 3 for 41), but Surrey reached 252 for 5 in the 56th over (John Edrich 71, Barrington 68*, Mike Edwards 53*) with Edwards receiving the MotM award. In the final, Surrey were soundly thrashed by Yorkshire. Despite two complete failures, Gale was Middlesex's leading scorer in the 1965 Gillette Cup competition with 162 runs at an average of 40.5, while Brearley, Titmus, Parfitt, Russell, Ted Clark and Murray all made significant contributions. Bennett was the most successful bowler with 10 wickets at an average of 12.5, with Price the next best and the others who chipped in usefully were Titmus, Hooker and Clark. Murray was the leading catcher with 8.
In the Championship that year, Middlesex were sixth for the third consecutive year, winning eight and losing seven of their 28 matches and they were never a real threat to the top two of Worcestershire (champions) and Northamptonshire who both won 13 matches and lost 4. Parfitt was the top batsman with 1242 runs at 47.76, Russell made 1724 at 39.18 and Clark 1352 at 32.97 while almost everyone else was slightly disappointing: for example, Gale averaged under 30, Mike Smith 21, Brearley 20, Bob White 12, Hooker 11, Bennett 9.7 and Pasty Harris 9.4. With Price playing in only 12 matches because of injury, the bowling was distinctly lacking in genuine pace so most of the wickets fell to the spinners and medium pacers. Titmus was the outstanding bowler with 75 wickets at 16.9, followed by Harry Latchman 17 at 20, Price 33 at 23.68, Bennett 54 at 24, Hooker 86 at 24.32 and Don Bick 51 at 27.07. In all Middlesex first class matches, Murray took 65 catches and made 10 stumpings while the best close catchers were Hooker (34) and Russell (29). Parfitt, Russell, Titmus and Murray were all selected for the England tour of Australia that winter.
Wisden & Britcher Matters
The Professor sent me this
Thanks for the latest Googlies and how nice to have some feedback! The subject of the early editions of Wisden raises more general questions about collecting and I suspect that people who are keen on cricket have a marked propensity to collect books, scorecards and whatnot which, in truth, they very seldom look at. As Robin Brodhurst points out, if it is simply an information search, on-line is quicker and normally more comprehensive. So why do we keep all this stuff? I recall you telling me that your collection of Playfair Annuals sits on a shelf gathering dust untouched by human hand. I very much doubt if you are alone in that. Still somehow the early cricket publications have an attraction...perhaps a psychologist could explain it all to us.
I would like to reassure David Rayvern Allen that, while in Manchester, I did have a quick look at a Britcher: A complete list of all the grand matches of cricket that have been played in the year 1793 was the document in question. Other "treasures" included Nicholas Wanostrocht's Felix on the bat: being a scientific inquiry into the use of the cricket bat; together with the history and use of the catapulta and C F Pardon's: The Australians in England: a complete record of the cricket tour of 1882... "Felix" Wanostrocht's book was, I read, an early instruction book on how to bat but I didn't have time to examine the scientific credentials. He also appears to have invented a form of bowling machine (the catapulta) and india-rubber batting gloves. Add to that a "career" (he was, of course, a gentleman amateur) as a classical scholar, musician, linguist, inventor, writer and artist and Felix seems to have been a splendid chap who doubtless would be contributing to Googlies now had he not inconveniently died in 1876. It would be good to hear more about cricket memorabilia from Googlies readers.
Hart Matters
Bill Hart knows how to get the best out of the winter months
It has been said before in this newsletter that ex-South Hampstead players are obsessed with looking at old scorebooks, and that is a complete calumny. However, at the risk of upsetting Steve Wright once again, it is time for me to brave the phalanx of readers who love to be told of the latest matches, or even some old ones, which have been played by various county second elevens. I am going to upset them by interrupting the articles that they love to read, by calling on the SHCC segment of "Googlies" readership, to help me get to the bottom of a problem, which relates to our own days of playing this wonderful game.
Recently our editor, the redoubtable James Sharp, asked for my help in loading some recalcitrant computer files on to his website. They were part of the archive work done by Alan Cox and I, on the SHCC scorebooks of the 1960's & 70's. Don't ask me how, but as a result of this request, I found myself looking at the 1974 South Hampstead 2nd XI individual averages. Riveting stuff isn't it. Anyway, in that year's averages lies a very unusual situation, concerning a certain A.Williams, who, at the time, was completely unknown to me. (Jim Sharp has since told me that it was Tony Williams, Stephen Thompson's brother-in-law). He does not appear in the scorebooks for 1973 or 1975, but in 1974 he was absolutely outstanding for the SHCC 2nd's.
As a team, they played 40 games that season, and Tony played in 38 of them, splendid availability if nothing else. Two of these 38 were abandoned, without his having a chance to bowl, and in another one he wasn't even asked to bowl, but the remaining 35 tell of his truly remarkable efforts.After playing 27 games, Tony had taken no less than 76 wickets at under 11 runs apiece, i.e. nearly 3 victims per match. Sadly, in the remaining 8 he took only 11 at just under 30 each, which gave him 87 for the season..At no time in the season was he picked for a first team match !
What a shame that he wasn't able to finish the job, and get to the magic 100. What a story that would have made! "Second XI star bowler takes 100 wickets and is ignored by the selectors". What I want to know from those of you that were there is, what happened? I suspect it was pressure from his team-mates conscious of the enormity of the achievement. Can somebody please tell me the facts, and can Steve Thompson tell me how Tony is getting on, and pass on my commiserations.
Wright Matters
Steve Wright joins the smallest club in the world-those who agree with me…
I enjoyed your comments on the success our boys enjoyed "down under" and you should contribute more to what is, after all, your own publication. If you no longer read the newspapers you may have missed the similarities that were drawn between this series and that of 1958/59 when our side (captained by Peter May) was touted as being the strongest ever to have toured Australia. Trueman, Tyson, Loader, Lock, Laker, Bailey, Godfrey Evans etc, etc. We had won the previous 3 Ashes series but were of course comprehensively stuffed 4-0. There certainly are some similarities. Laker declined to play in two tests, the fast bowlers had a terrible time but really it is surely inevitable that there will be similarities when two sides are beaten as comprehensively as these were. The batsman don't get enough runs, the bowlers are short of wickets and there is plenty of internal strife as well.
I should declare a financial interest here as I had a small wager on the Aussies before the series started. This result did not come out of a clear blue sky did it? We struggled in New Zealand and were fortunate to beat Australia last summer at all, never mind the eventual margin of victory.
Our only strategy as you pointed out, was to take 3 giant fast bowlers (in addition to Broad) and to confidently expect that it would be "business as usual". Australia planned their campaign in great detail. They put a couple of mid-wickets in for Pietersen which he gratefully took advantage of, didn't bowl to Cook's strengths and attacked Swann. It was clear that we had no faith in Panesar (so why did we take him) and so we shipped in another spinner (a part timer) to play instead of him after we had already been well beaten. Tremlett struggled to get to 80mph, Rankin got cramp and Finn was eventually sent home.
I agree with you about Swann. His refusal to see out the tour was a disgrace. The word is that he was told that he would not be selected for the 4th test and decided that that was enough for him. All this baloney about being "war weary" must have gone down really well with his mates. All he had to do was say to Flower I don't feel too good, leave me out of the last two tests and he could have slipped home at the end of the tour with his reputation more or less intact.
When apportioning blame for the shambles I take what is probably a slightly offbeat line. Our biggest failure in the series was that our bowlers were just not good enough. Australia's batting was very ordinary. On several occasions at pivotal moments in the series they had lost at least half their wickets for around 150 and we never ever looked like bowling them out cheaply. Australia on the other hand have a high class fast bowling unit. In my view Harris is a terrific bowler, not that much slower than Johnson but very skilful and then after those two there is Siddle bowling line and length at about the same pace as our guys. How many runs would the Australians have scored if they had been facing their own attack I wonder? It will be very interesting to see how they cope in South Africa against their new ball attack! "
I don't think I have come across Robin Brodhurst, one of your new readers and if I have I apologise to him for not remembering. So he wants even more of Jack Morgan does he? I think Robin must either be a real anorak or he has a strange sense of humour. I like Jack but I became slightly disturbed when he started to go on about what Wayne Larkins was up to in 1989. I shouldn't think even Wayne Larkins is too concerned about that, assuming of course he is still alive. How long will it be before Jack gets back to the ton he scored against Robespierre in a The French Revolution?
Did anybody see that pathetic spectacle of Brett Lee bowling an over to Piers Morgan? Morgan is a great chum of KP of course and was trying to make some point although what it was I am unclear about. He came out of it with a broken hand and a broken rib so it wasn't a complete waste of time. Who were the wonderful commentators? My least favourite pair - Mark Nicholas and Michael Vaughan. Am I alone in being sickened by these two?
Really Irritating Trends in Modern Cricket No. 2
The next time that you get offered tickets for an international match I suggest that you curb your excitement and give consideration to the following before you accept:
1. Before play commences there will be a pointless rendition of Jerusalem performed by some D-list celebrity and joined in by that portion of the crowd who have already located the bars.
2. The oft described “knowledgeable crowd” does not exist. You will witness leg byes getting ecstatic applause and bump ball catches cheered.
3. You may well find yourself sitting next to a group of people wearing ridiculous fancy dress. These morons have no interest in the cricket, of course, and will spend the whole day trying to attract the notice of the TV cameramen. It will be ten time worse if you are behind and not next to these individuals.
4. You will be paying as much as £100 for the ticket for which there will be scheduled just 90 overs if it is a test match. The players, encouraged by the umpires, will be eager to short change you and you can expect to lose upwards of 10% of your due watching.
5. There will be none of the traditional decorums that you might expect. Silence is not observed when the bowlers run in and people will get up and leave their seats and return to them mid over. Cretins will also stroll about behind the bowler’s arm and act affronted if directed not to by the umpires.
6. Play will constantly be interrupted by a rotation of substitute fielders for bogus injuries or comfort requirements (although strangely wicket keepers never need emergency slashes). They also are constantly bringing out additional kit to the participants. All this is tedious and contributes to the slow over rates.
7. As the day wears on many of the attenders get bored or drunk or both and will start to try to amuse themselves by creating plastic snakes from the beer glasses. Their chums will start a Mexican Wave which will acquire an importance way above that accredited to the cricket.
You have been warned.
George Arthur
The Professor sent me these notes
The very, very sad news of the death of George Arthur leaves us, I think, with a double loss. We have lost a true and delightful gentleman and we have also lost a link with the past. Everyone will have their favourite reminiscences of George depending perhaps, upon their age. You may recall him as a more than useful player; as a captain, particularly of the 3rd XI which he, in effect, founded; as an able, effective and extremely conscientious administrator both for the Club and for the DPSA; as an umpire; or perhaps just for his enthusiasm and encouragement; for the stories and the famous recitations; or, just for standing at the bar smiling and chatting… and being George. George was one of the first people I met when I joined the Club in 1971 and I remember thinking that here was a very nice man, a decent man…a “proper chap”. In the forty-odd years that have passed I have never had cause to revise that opinion. And I have never met anyone who thought differently.
But I think there is something more. George was, of course, a link to past: the history of the Club (obviously) but also to the way that the game was played in the past. I sensed that George loved cricket not just because it was an exciting test of skill, nor just because of the competitive element (no fading flower, George, he loved a close hard-fought competitive game) but because cricket - the cricket that George played - was a game of values, a game of sportsmanship and decency. Could anyone even imagine George claiming a catch that he didn’t take, or remaining at the crease when he’d snicked it behind? No. Or abusing an opponent or an official? Of course not. Why would anybody want to play sport like that?
In losing George the Cricket Club has lost a great character, a great supporter and a great friend. It has also lost someone who exemplified and in a sense personified the spirit of the game.
Please forget it Matters
1. Shortly before the Ashes tour the ICC named Alastair Cook as captain of their Test Team of the Year – ahead of Michael Clarke, who also made the XI. Cook leads a dream team that includes Graeme Swann and James Anderson. The only other Australian to make the side is Mike Hussey, who retired from cricket last winter but was chosen because the selection period runs from August 2012 to August 2013. Here is the team in full: Cook (capt), Pujara, Amla, Clarke, Hussey, de Villiers, Dhoni (wk), Swann, Steyn, Anderson, Philander.
2. Before the T20 matches started England captain Stuart Broad said that his batting line up was “scary”. By the time the series was lost none of the top six had made a half century.
Roger Kingdon
I very much regret having to report that Roger Kingdon died in January following a fall at Brentham CC. I will be happy to include any tributes, anecdotes or reminiscences in the March edition. Send them to my address below preferably by email.
Old Danes
Despite a fair degree of indifference there will be an Old Danes Gathering in 2014 at Shepherds Bush CC. The date is Friday July 25. Please let me know if you plan to come and I will circulate lists as previously. Why not plan to bring an Old Dane with you who has not attended before?
www.googliesandchinamen.com
I have been adding more stuff to the website including the South Hampstead CC scorecards for the 1st and 2nd XIs for 1960 to 1975. If you have any photos or data you would like to see included please email me. It doesn’t need to be SHCC or SCD matters!
Football Matters
Ken Molloy was hoping to have a spare seat next to him on a recent flight but unfortunately found it occupied by Andrew Baker’s January window signing. He complained of a most uncomfortable flight as his neighbour apparently “flopped over the arm rest” and proved an unwelcome distraction. To prove his point he sent me this photo.
Googlies and Chinamen
is produced by
James Sharp
Broad Lee House
Combs
High Peak
SK23 9XA
Tel & fax: 01298 70237
Email: [email protected]
