Energy Exiles Cricket Club

Match Summary: vs. Surbiton Imperials, Sunday, 03 Aug 2008

Ground: Old Tiffinians Grist Memorial Ground
Captain: Andrew Wingfield
Match type: 40 overs
Toss: Exiles elected to field
Weather: Drizzle, patchy pitch
Opposition: Surbiton Imperials scored: 49 all out (20.1 overs)
Exiles Score: 52 for 0 (12.1 overs)
Result: Won by 10 wickets
Man of the match: Phil Chamberlain 4 for 17

The exiles turned up in confident mood to take on a side they had narrowly beaten earlier in the season. On a miserable day, a grateful Andy won the toss and gleefully elected to field. Taking the new ball, he quickly accounted for their awkward opener who seemed in no mood to hang around, wafting airily at the first ball before having his stumps re-arranged the next. In case there was any doubt, the ball had also carried to our specialist slip fielder JPJ. Wingers soon had another victim with a smartly taken catch by Tither at mid off.

The ever economical Patel was replaced by the returning Chamberlain, who found his length and line immediately, keeping your author on his toes at point. Another ill-judged swipe across the line was well snuffled up and there was an exact repeat two balls later when the hapless batsmen sporting wicket keeping pads also holed out having a swing. Phil went on to take two further wickets, winning an lbw decision with 'the one that went the other way' and finally, a strange dismissal saw a batsmen so worried about the vicious pace, back away, until he hit his own wicket!

From the other end, the eager Gundry replacing the skipper, looked instantly dangerous. Several deliveries whistled past the veteran's, Eric's ear, until an inevitable edge was taken behind. However, an even better catch followed, when a cleverly disguised slower ball just about carried to Amil. Simon was particulary miserly, not conceding a single run.

With only the tail remaining it was left to Zieleniewski and Akthar to clean up proceedings, which they duly obliged. The latter knocking out the leg stump with his out-swinger not functioning, while in his new role, yours truly, ended the innings, with a brute of a delivery. Q doing the rest at gully.

Tea was not taken, as it seemed like a good idea to knock of the fifty runs to win whilst it had stopped raining. Messer's Searle and Davies strolled out hoping to complete the job without to much concern and thankfully they did just that. Apart from a poor drop at mid on, Q looked in imperious form and it was great to see the 'the stand and deliver' show in full flow. It took about 12 overs to record another comprehensive victory.

After a bite to eat, the exiles, somewhat foolishly agreed to a beer match, which ended in farce as half the team went seeking refuge in any available bush from the constant, heavy drizzle. The highlights did include a great run out (direct hit) from short mid-wicket and a few traditional lusty blows from Mr Gundry.

Report By: Martin Thomas

Captains log: Andrew Wingfield

Quite a contrast in conditions from the previous week, but another convincing result

Yeah, it was a bit of a strange one! During the preceding week I thought I'd probably bat if we won the toss - bearing in mind nearly 500 runs were scored in the equivalent match last year - but the rain in the air and the state of the pitch quickly changed my mind. And its certainly a great effort to win so convincingly again - the bowlers all used the conditions expertly, whilst Q and Jasp provided a gritty opening stand of 50 odd to complete the 10 wicket win...

Phil Chamberlain was probably the pick of the bowlers, he took to the conditions like a duck to water (sorry Phil, couldn't resist)

Phil got the most wickets - but certainly the first 2 were to very over ambitious shots, whilst he also got an unusual hit wicket. To be honest, any of the bowlers could have had a hatful. I thought Simon was virtually unplayable - and 2 for 0 off 3 overs suggest that!

There was some bounce in the pitch, but the ball was coming on deceptively slow; do you think their batsmen misread the pitch which contributed to some of their dismissals?

I'm not really sure - but the Surbiton batters certainly seemed way too over-aggressive in their approach - very few of them tried to get in line and defend properly - and against the bowling attack the Exiles had on Sunday, you're going to get in trouble playing like that. Perhaps they're used to high scoring games - like last year?

The Exiles bowlers also didn't get too carried away by the additional bounce however; the control shown by them must have been satisfying?

Yes - but I'd expect nothing less - all the bowlers were experienced campaigners who know how to use favourable bowling conditions.

Surbiton are a side we normally have a close contest with, do you think they just had a day off?

A bit of that sure, but also I think the Exiles had the strongest side out that it’s ever had against them. It would've been interesting to see what would have happened if the Exiles had batted first though...

Although we were only chasing 50 to win, you weren't worried our batting might collapse like there's did?

Whilst it's never over till it's over, I was very confident - as I knew our batters wouldn't play in such a kamikaze way as theirs did; but there was always the threat that if they had someone very quick he might nip out a few wickets and put some pressure on - and whilst they did have someone pretty quick, I thought our openers dealt with him splendidly.

The teams in the last few weeks have been very strong, but some of the people have not had a chance to get in the action; I know you find this frustrating, but is it fair to say unless you contrive a situation (i.e. rotate the bowling after each over, change the batting order), there's not much you can do about it to get everyone involved?

Indeed. I always feel slightly uncomfortable if people don't get much of a decent game - but there's not a lot that anyone can do in situations like Sunday. I did what I could - but there's still a bit of a gamble involved - for example, I took Simon off after 3 overs - when he had 2 for 0 - which might have backfired if we'd lost by 5 runs or something - but I was pretty comfortable with the knowledge that the experienced side we had out would keep the game under control, even if the opposition had fought back a bit...

How good was it to see John Tither back in the Exiles fold, even if he wasn't required to do the heroics of the year before?

It was excellent. John is one of those players who I'd love to have available every week - he's a class bat, an accurate bowler and a safe fielder. Obviously conditions are such that he can't play all that often at the moment, but he'll certainly strengthen our side whenever he plays. Also, to have won this week with John (and the other John for that matter) not required to bat or bowl, and following on from winning last week when Mr Gundry wasn't required to bat or bowl, just goes to show the excellent cricket that the club is playing at the moment. Long may it continue - though I think CYPOS might be a bit of a serious test this weekend!

Interviewed By: Jasper Searle

Interview with Man of the Match: Phil Chamberlain

Phil, another fine performance with the ball, you must have enjoyed bowling (initially) in those conditions?

Cheers. I feel I've managed to get a bit of a reputation with the Exiles of a "2 for 20" bowler. For the first two seasons I turned out for the Exiles, those would, on the whole, be my figures almost every match. Not that it is a bad thing to bowl tightly, challenging the batsmen with off-stump line bowling, conceding few runs, but every bowler will tell you that its wickets that count. It was definitely a bowler-friendly wicket on Sunday (although Q's thrashing to all parts approach to batting put that theory into question), and its often a shame when the wicket influences a game as much as it did. However, it was a excellent toss to win, and yes, I'm grateful for any extra support these days…!

You must be grateful Martin was in fine form at cover point, he took a couple of steeplers

Indeed. Although I've not played as many games as I'd like to this season, I've noticed from the match reports that the fielding could still do with some work. So to have two catches taken - which weren't necessarily straightforward, but I would have given MD (Mad Dog Martin Thomas) both barrels if he'd dropped them - was a relief. MD is usually good value in the field, and I'm sure by his exacting standards he would pride himself on taking both of those catches. What the batsmen thought they were doing though was beyond me. You could almost forgive the first - yes it was bad shot selection on that wicket, but we've all been guilty of that - but for the second guy to do exactly the same 2 balls later was a very strange decision indeed. However, I'm not complaining…!

That was a fine Exiles bowling attack we had in action on Sunday, so did it give you extra satisfaction to perform as well as you did?

In the few years I've played for the Exiles, the bowling has always been strong - it just depends on who turns out on the day (and how many hangovers are being suffered). I would say that the Exiles are spoilt for choice with "opening bowlers" at the moment - and that's without Mr Hilson's services so far this season. To have Simon Gundry come on first change, after Naren and the "Skip" have started the damage is a test for any batsman. When we have our best bowling attack playing, we don't give many batting teams a great deal of "easy deliveries". And with JPJ's addition to the side, along with Keith and The Plough, wherever he is, we also have that "quality spinning option" that every side needs…! Its a good thing that there is competition for overs and your place in the bowling attack, but its important to recognise what's right for the team - that is why I famously removed myself from the attack when things were not going my way during a game on the last tour - sorry, Andy…!

With the advent of 20/20, cricket gets played in all sorts of weather conditions these days; I take it you are more of a traditionalist when it comes to the playing conditions?

I'm all for the 20/20 revolution going through the game at the moment. Especially the cheerleaders, the constant flow of beer for spectators and the amount of money, which I hope makes its way to the grassroots of the game and not just the pockets of the gifted few. I also applaud any team's willingness to play in conditions that wouldn't normally suit cricket. However, let's not forget that this is for competitive cricket. What we play is friendly cricket. And the "beer match" arranged after Sunday's victory could not have been further from the razz-a-ma-tazz of 20/20. I would say there were a few things that I would have done differently when organising the beer match on Sunday:

- First, if you are having a beer match, make sure there is some beer. This was an appalling oversight, and the game really shouldn't have gone on without the bar being opened. Criminal. That put me in a bad mood from the start, and no number of chocolate cakes was going to change my opinion;

- Secondly, keep it short, simple and involve everyone. We finished tea at 5:30pm, so a full 20/20 game was out of the question. A 10 over thrash about, where everyone bowls an over and everyone bats an over would have done it. 15 overs, was far too many. I was bored by the 5th over of our innings, and I was trying to run our captain out…!

- And finally, if it rains, come off. The game doesn't matter. No-one could give a monkeys. And no, Martin, it doesn't count towards the averages…! The game was a farce from the moment we took to the field and the rain started. Players sheltering under the trees, most with hands in pockets or folded arms, and no desire to be stood out in the rain in ever-shrinking, unfashionable cricket whites. Pointless. Hrumph…

I should, of course, apologise for my language throughout that passage of play, my unprecedented grumpiness at mid-off and failing to bother going for a catch. But there is a lesson, of course, for us all here - never expect me to play in a "beer match" again that doesn't have any beer…!

Interviewed By: Jasper Searle

Last modified: 11 March 2018 14:31:46. Top of the page