Bathampton Sloths vs Bathampton Parents; KES; 06-06-21

It’s always good to see Sloths in good form with bat and ball. Yesterday afternoon, at KES, we were treated to the silky-smooth bowling action and decisive hitting of Harding (and her husband was quite good, too). Fresh was timing the ball sweetly, as ever, and accurate in his bowling. The only trouble being, they were playing for the opposition.

Fortunately for Sloths, the visitors’ keeper was unable to contain the pacier and/or wayward deliveries. So, byes were something of a feature on the scorecard. In fairness, this was a scratch Parents side, many of whom wouldn’t have played for many a moon and some not at all. So, Sloths’ newbie Ides put in another good showing, together with a surprising tally from N Balls.

Batting first, the visitors got off to a flying start, once the rather tentative returning Sloth Evetts was dismissed. His replacement took apart the bowling, comfortably finding the boundary in all areas, before a swift retirement. At the half-way mark, Parents had scored an alarming 90 runs and looked like running away with the game completely.

However, Sloths rallied later in the innings as less experienced Parents took to the crease. Harding, now umpiring, prevented the loss of one such wicket, when Wilf accidentally dislodged the bails at the non-striker’s end during his delivery. This was unfortunate for Wilf but – happily for Sloths – delayed the return of the Parents’ retirees.

Ant was on fine form, getting just enough movement from the seem to cause batsmen problems. Laurie asked some serious questions of daddy-Fresh, in an absorbing vignette of Oedipal cat and mouse. Wilf bowled good line and length, suffering only from the aforementioned no-ball and a probable caught-and-bowled, had he been paying attention (a true Sloth in the making).

And then there was Cox. Clearly a serious player in his youth, it took just one over for Stu’s neo-natal buddy to find his rhythm. His second over (or third?) was prematurely called ‘over’, before he steamed in for a glorious wicket with the last ball. But it wasn’t his bowling that stood out.

Cox was singled-out on the pavilion boundary for special treatment by the Parents’ batsmen. Here he arguably dropped two chances in succession. But, in truth, most Sloths would have contrived to: a) run in the opposite direction, b) fall-over, c) claim they were unsighted, or d) all three. Cox, however, prevented boundaries on each occasion. Then he pulled off an improbable, left-handed, diving save, before returning the ball neatly to the gloves of keeper Bond (who may or may not have caught the thing).

Chasing 145, from 25 overs, Sloths knew they needed a good start with the bat. And this was duly delivered by Messrs Painter and Howard. Painter, part of Sloths new inclusivity drive, has – of course – Special Knees. But this doesn’t prevent him from expansive stroke play and boundless positivity. The latter, sadly, got the better of him when he reached to swipe at a wide ball that was held in a remarkable, diving catch at slip.

Ant, on the other hand, is an untrained wind-up merchant, who somehow manages to be good at just about everything. His watchful yet urgent innings provided the perfect partnership to Painter’s commanding knock. Lodge, similarly, was up to the challenge. With characteristic grit and determination, he put important runs on the board, retiring on 30+ with his wicket intact.

Bond appeared to explode into action when his wife appeared on the boundary. If only she’d come sooner(!). Whilst these runs were vital, they were – unfortunately – too late. The intervening overs had seen the run-rate slow to a trickle. Which left an uphill struggle for the late-order batting.

Cox, on debut, was sadly dismissed for a duck. Yerbury tried his level best to get after the bowling but, too, was sent back to the pavilion. SDS’s eyes lit up when offered a dolly that asked to be despatched into the canal. Sadly, his attempt so to do had already ended before the ball arrived on the scene, going on to gently remove the bails. Mike and Madeye were possibly not the dynamic duo needed to complete the mission and Lodge’s return to the crease was an over too late to save the day.

So, Sloths both won and lost. Those with offspring at the school across the canal were, on this occasion, victors. And rightly so. They played with spirit, good humour, skill and – for those new to the game – a willingness to have a go. And maybe we’ll have picked up a couple of new Sloths in the process.

Over bargain-priced tinnies on the pavilion steps, answers were sought for the important issues of the day:

• If the umpire no-balls a bowler for failure to declare his action, is the bowler allowed to thump him?

• If the player who originally raised this abhorrent issue is watching from the balcony, are we all allowed to thump him?

• If Stumpchat and Bez both end up playing in the same game, will they cancel one another out?

• Should excitable, middle-aged Welshmen be allowed to drive cars with suggestively curvaceous bodywork?

Answers, please, written on a used box and left to moulder at the bottom of the Sloths kit bag.

Socrates, education correspondent, Slothful Times