Loughton 'E' v Wanstead and Snaresbrook Cricket Club C Indoor Team on Sat 03 Mar 2018 at 9.00am
Wanstead and Snaresbrook Cricket Club Lost by 1 wicket

Match report Two Short Planks

This fixture was the cancelled one courtesy of the snow when the whole country came to a standstill and nobody could do anything.

Before I venture into the usual positive critical analysis aka character assassinations I would like to thank all of the people that have turned out for the Veterans team this season. Cliff has said it was a pleasure to see a team put fun first and not get involved in any shenanigans. I wholeheartedly agree with Cliff and thank all of you who answered the call to play on the Saturday mornings. It has been a lot of fun and it is because of this great attitude to playing this way that often the opposition remark on the positive aspect of playing this team. So well done Wanstead Vets and thank you.

With that formality taken care of, now to the reality of the match and the critical analysis.
Rosie was nominated as Captain for the day because he had rugby tickets so he needed to bowl first so he could get away early. So in he goes to ask the oppos if we could bat first. Argument number one begins. No the oppo captain wants to bowl first as well. So they have to scrabble around for a coin to toss. Anyway, after a 10 min delay finding a coin to toss Chris and Steve are padding up to open the batting for Wanstead. Rosie wasn't going to get away early for the rugby because Rosie cant even get a heads or tails coin toss right. Chris L also pads up and takes his place at square as we are also an Umpire short. Chris and Steve are quite productive in ticking over the total, 6 in the first over and 10 in the second. So Wanstead are off to a decent start. Steve is walking to the bench at the back of the hall after scoring a decent 14 runs playing all around a straight delivery. In goes Chris L with Matlooob going to umpire in his place. Rosie is up next after Chris P is retired on 25. Chris L is caught trying to hit out on a score of 4 sending Ramon into bat. Four 6's and a couple of balls hit against the wall and Ramon is sitting on the bench again after being retired. Thus it was up to Rosie and Matloob to see the inning out. Although with both Ramon and Chris P obviously with their eye in the logical thing to do is for Rosie and Matloob to sacrifice their wicket and let the two of them return and smash some extra runs. However that logic didn't prevail and Wanstead ended on a total of 112 off 12 overs, about 30 runs short of a winning total. Interestingly both Rosie and Matloob are considered bowlers so that will probably explain the nuances of trying to score runs. Bowlers all around the world think they can hit the ball well and score as many runs as the top order. Yes you might be thinking that this form of thinking is delusional and regards to what happened on Saturday, you would be correct in thinking so. But hey, what could we expect, they're bowlers. They lack the finesse of batsmen, the finer understanding of the game. Bowlers don't get that. (Hang on a minute...Ed, Are you saying that all Bowlers are thick? In answer to that question, no not all bowlers are thick, just a lot of them)Now some people might be concerned about the this problem. Discussion have been had at the highest seats of Government that should a person show any inclination to being a bowler that they immediately be enrolled in school for an extra couple of years so they can develop some critical thinking skills. However this would mean that some people would leave school at 20 instead of 18. For some of the bowlers that have ben seen, some of them might never leave education.
For the people that are reading this report today, you might be asking why the positive critical eye is being focussed on the bowlers today and that would be a reasonable thing to raise. Well the answer to that question please look at the extras that were awarded to the opposition. Now do you get it. Anything bowled down the leg side and that is considered a wide. That total is 25. I mean how difficult is it to bowl on the offside, obviously being a report author I don't fully comprehend the nuances of bowling. The intricate nature of being able to swing the ball. (Well, if you're swinging the into the batman and you don't know how you're doing it, then its not unreasonable to presume that maybe you might end up bowling down the leg side and if you think that's what happening then wouldn't it be a suggestion to try and bowl slightly wider of the off stump to take the swing into account?...Ed
Ed, I can see that there are no flies on you. You spotted the obvious solution. So the question one might consider is , Why didn't the bowlers do that as well? Ah, you raise a valid point, however that may require an answer that is too sophisticated an answer for this audience to comprehend or I could just say "see earlier paragraph about bowlers being thick".
By the way, for those who are intrigued about argument "Number 2", that is still being waged on What's App and believe it or not the bowlers are suggesting that the wides' and extras are because of the wicket keepers inabilities. In the keepers defence he had to battle against some seriously awful bowling. And in the need to appear neutral, the bowlers did bowl some rubbish. The aficionado's reading this piece will be able to see the reality of the situation. The bowlers put the keeper under a lot of pressure and he probably did really well to keep the extras to that score. But seeing as the keeper in the Veterans team is often singled out for ridicule I am not going pour more scorn on this individual who takes a lot of unjustified criticism from players all because he is happy to do a difficult job in difficult circumstances in a team where the bowlers find it very difficult to bowl wicket to wicket.

(Argument number 3 will erupt as soon as this report goes live)

Looking at the two totals made by the team, it must have been a close finish especially as the Vets only needed one wicket for a win? Please don't say that out too loud as the bowlers are using the 6 missed catches behind the stumps as another reason for the loss. Yes the catches would have been made of the keeper was AB De Villiers and not 17 1/2 stone and built to play second row in a scrum. Not exactly a dainty individual with the skill of leaping large distances with relative ease. Which is what was required if the catches were to be made.

So with all of the arguments now out in the open, what now for the team that the indoor season has come to a conclusion? A good question. I presume the team will double in size (by that I mean more players will be drawn in to make a team of 11, and not get fat, as some may have suggested, or as one person has added "get more fat!"). There has been a suggestion that the team try and develop a strategy for next seasons matches, however that has been shelved as none of the players, batsmen included struggle understanding the meaning of the word strategy and asking them to spell it would only cause more arguments.

So what are the positives for this season?
Err, that with the average age of the team being over 50, the boys can still cut it among the youngsters. The team are worthy of a round of applause for their efforts and the fun they brought to all of the matches. And finally, that the Veterans are a very good example for all people that sport can be played in a positive way all of the time.

And that is where this reporter ends writing for this season. Goodbye

Wanstead and Snaresbrook Cricket Club C Indoor Team Batting
Player Name RunsMB4s6sSRCtStRo
for 2 wickets

(12.0 overs)
Matloob Piracha Not Out  4
Steve Terrington Bowled  14
Chris Ley Caught  4
Ramon Chesney Retired Not Out  26
Richard Walsh Not Out  7
Chris Powell Retired Not Out  25

Loughton 'E' Bowling

Player nameOversMaidensRunsWicketsAverageEconomy
No records to display.

Loughton 'E' Batting
Player name RMB4s6sSR
25w 5b 1lb 
for 4 wickets
115 (11.4 overs)

Wanstead and Snaresbrook Cricket Club C Indoor Team Bowling

Player NameOversMaidensRunsWicketsAverageEconomy
No records to display.