Result:  Alternatives cruise to victory

Score:  Alternatives 178 – 6
Phil Mannings XI 110 – 8

Alternatives win by 68 runs

 The game of cricket today stands at the very edge of the abyss – anarchists Manning and Melwood between them are challenging the very fabric of the game by wantonly removing the rules of the game one by one – Mannings started with the ” no LBW rule” and now Melwood has removed “being bowled”…. what next!! 

 

match report:

As is now customary, Phil Manning elected to play this game using the rules of a different brand of cricket, a game that he has personally evolved…a game that, in fact, may no longer be cricket. The main feature was to discard the LBW rule, allowing cricket pads to get greater prominence in the sport, whilst the cricket bat risks becoming redundant, like an appendix, as this apparent sporting evolutionary cul-de-sac is explored.

The Alternatives batted first and set off at a decent pace. Robertson played with assured calmness and gathered runs with a steady momentum. After the loss of two wickets, Boden joined Robertson and the innings accelerated onwards. The occasional panic (generally caused by the inevitable chaos of run-calling that often involved the “yes, wait, stop, no, go” combination) was relieved by fairly pedestrian opposition bowling. Both Robertson and Boden were forced to retire after scoring 35, setting up the final overs for a slog-fest.

Green played with his typical classical elegance and smashed hefty sixes off successive balls before he had to retire. Then followed frenetic hitting and a slow but steady tumble of wickets.

Controversially, Mellowship decided to vigorously contest the previously universally accepted cricketing rule that states when the cricket ball hits the stumps and dismantles the bails the batsman should be called “out” (hitherto referred to as “bowled”). Recalling a technical point from lost cricketing annals, Mellowship argued that the ball had bounced too much, or possibly too many times, for his liking. Just as a sit-in situation was developing that might have marred the rest of the innings, Mellowship magnanimously deferred to the umpire’s decision and left the field, although he was later heard muttering that the umpire was a “jobsworth”.

 

 

 

The innings finished with a good total of 178-6 off the allocated 30 overs and confidence was high that the Alternatives’ bowling could finish off the job.

Phil Manning sent out his conspicuously youngest, and healthiest, two players to open their batting. One of these openers duly smashed three consecutive 4s in the second over and a rising sense of panic could be felt within the Alternatives’ ranks. Robertson barely twitched. He smiled sardonically then carefully reassembled the field, setting a devious trap. Olliff delivered the right ball and it was launched by the batsman high towards the leg-side boundary. But there waiting was Green, with his soft hands cupped, gently collecting the ball to his chest. Although he complained unnecessarily about his stinging hands (a small sacrifice to the needs of the team) the catch was safely taken and already the game had been turned to the Alternatives’ favour.

Olliff accounted for the other opener and then followed total batting disarray as Goodwin’s leg-spin utterly confused and befuddled the opposition. Goodwin took 4 wickets as the batters’ capitulated to his spinning wizardry. Mellowship weighed in from the other end with his first recorded wicket (the batsman was “bowled” but without any of the previous controversy on this particular ruling). The Phil Manning’s XI had been reduced to 48-7 and the game was up.

All of the Alternatives’ outfielders had a chance to bowl and the eighth wicket partnership added a decent stand to take the score over 100 but the run-rate was hopelessly behind. Robertson bowled the final over and a smart stumping helped the game to end with a wicket maiden. The Phil Manning’s XI total was 110-8 and the Alternatives had won a game they dominated.

 

 

The main discussion in the pub afterwards was the award for man of the match. Should it be Robertson for his authoritative batting, decisive skippering and smart fielding? Or Goodwin, it had been his bowling that dissembled the opposition batting, twisting the knife whilst delivering the coup de grace. Into the night, the vote was still to be decided….

 

 

Who will be Man of the Match – you decide

Please submit your vote below – your vote will be displayed on the website,

should you wish to vote anonomously please eamil me at the usual address.