Bulls match report by Ian "St" Piggin (who wouldn't know a stroke from a stork, especially when it should be awarded to his own team; but then that's Lawyers for you: honest as Estate Agents, pious as priests... )
PS: That's me (right) trying to an impression of The Pig.
St Piggin writes:
Having come close to overturning Booker last week, the Bulls returned home to face Chesham 1879, another of the leagues high fliers. We lost 5-0 to 1879 in the second match of the season last September, and were hopeful, edging towards confident, of better things.
The evening didn't start that well. Nigel faced the youthful, gifted and mobile Charlie Yerrell. I missed the game but the result was never in doubt. Charlie taunted Nigel by allowing him to get to 7 points in a couple of games but The Camel lost 3-0.
I faced Steve French, who implausibly appeared thinner than normal. Having lost 3-0 to Steve in our last meeting, I was keen to make a mends. Things started off well and I took the first and a comfortable lead in the second. By this time, it was apparent that Steve wasn't his usual highly accurate self.
I couldn't figure out what was up with him and then why I was suddenly losing so many points. By the time I remembered it might be better to concentrate on the game, I'd lost the second. I took the next game and then got to 8-5 in the 4th. Although seeming to be as weak as a kitten, a resurgent Steve pushed it to 9-9 in the fourth before tinning a "sitter". I won 3-1. I commiserated Steve. He mentioned he'd had dysentery for a couple of days. I stepped away, quickly.
Whilst I was playing Steve (and then marking Jim, see next), Trevor "Joey Barton of South Bucks Squash" Jones was parading his glorious hair against the much less urbane (aren't we all?) Steve Ramsden. However, the general consensus was that Vidal's locks were magnificent from start to finish. Perhaps, they got a little ruffled when he needlessly dropped a game. Trevor is getting some great results and took this match 3-1.
Jim played the other Yerrell in the building, the more youthful, possibly more gifted but probably less mobile Joe. I marked the game and after Jim lost the first 9-0, I had no advice whatsoever. Joe was playing well constructed, patient rallies with deft touch and feel, all greatly belying his age. Reminding Jim that he was giving away 25 years didn't feel like the best message. Perhaps, Steve's dysentery might spread like wildfire (literally) through the Chesham lads. Erm, no. Joe took the second but Jim's persistence was starting to get to Joe. In the third game, Jim continued pressing and Joe's wheels started to come off and Jim took the game convincingly. The fourth game looked well poised for a battle. Jim was up 8-7, things got a bit tight and the calls for lets and strokes came in thick and fast. The fact that your good (and very objective) marker happened to give at least 3 calls against Jim, resulting in him losing that game 10-9 and the match 3-1 could have resulted in some "heat" from the rest of the Bulls. Save for Vidal ("you tosspot St Piggin"), team accord was maintained.
So, we come to the last game of the evening, evenly balanced at 2-2. Our young Natalie faced the very experienced Neil Hollister. I have no better summary than to repeat Neil's attempted ice-breaker with Natalie over the curry after the game. "You must get really annoyed by losing to awkward old fat blokes who aren't as good as you?", says Neil. With a steely glare Natalie says "yes".
A thoroughly frustrating evening for Natalie unfortunately; she loses 3-1.
Overall, much improved from our last game against Chesham 1879, but another case of so near, so far.
Piggin.
No comments:
Post a Comment