Scorecard

Broadclyst v Erratics Cricket Club Erratics on Sun 13 Jul 2025 at 1.30pm
Erratics Cricket Club Lost by 89 runs

Match report This fixture was advertised as follows:
Sunday 13th July 2025
Broadclyst
Away
1.30pm
Friendly

Was this an accurate billing?

Selector Rik Lindsay – who has performed a sterling job in the face of challenging availabilities – had diligently checked the start time with our hosts, and been reassured it was indeed a 1.30 start. We turned up to be greeted by a sign listing the start time as 2.00, which was also confirmed by our hosts. Still, with the Erratics on the ground an hour early, at least that same welcome sign had said ‘bar open’. Reader, it wasn’t.

These are quibbles of no real significance. Part of the vagaries and charm of village cricket. What I’m more concerned with is whether this game could accurately be described as a ‘Friendly’.

What exactly is ‘friendly’ cricket? Is there anything more to it than saying hello with a smile, and shaking hands politely at the end? Some of us think so.

In the ‘Presidential Foreword’ to Unicorns Rampant (the third volume of the club’s history, published in 2020), Peter Thomson referenced the 1954 work of Spike Hughes, which set out some of the key principles of friendly cricket (as opposed to ‘club’ or ‘league’ cricket). The first principle is that the game is for the enjoyment of the players. And not one or two of them, but all of them – or at least as many as the two captains can possibly manage to create an enjoyable game for. The second is that the result of the game is of the utmost unimportance, at least relative to the first principle.

When the latter becomes more important than the former, you stray into the territory of league cricket. It happens. As Peter himself noted in that Foreword, we have played such games – ‘one against Broadclyst in the summer of 2019 is a painful example’ – where the desire to win, or more than that, to dominate from start to finish, has threatened the friendly ethos, and stymied that aim of providing enjoyment of the game for as many participants as possible. Peter says: ‘anyone who has played in (or watched) one of those games in which an egregiously competitive team crushes [their opponent] will sympathise with Spike Hughes’s lament for “a wasted afternoon against opponents desperately keen to preserve an unbroken record”.’

Our recent opponents Ram Exiles, a touring side from Bath, capture the ethos of friendly cricket nicely on their website: ‘We aim to play competitive cricket with good humour, grace and a sense of fun. We hope that at the end of each game both teams will go home happy and all players will have contributed. We welcome players of all abilities and try to create an atmosphere in which players are valued for themselves, not their cricketing skill.’

Playing friendly cricket does not mean playing uncompetitive cricket, or cricket in which the way the game plays out is unimportant. Far from it. Whilst the end result should not be held in high regard, the creation of a close, well-fought contest, between well-matched cricketers, is to be valued highly. Peter again: ‘the ideal game of cricket is one in which any of four results is possible at the start of the last over. You might reasonably hope for (and even work towards) two in a season.’ That’s my emphasis on the ‘work towards’. When Isis arrived for a fixture with us a few weeks ago, their Captain’s first question to me was ‘what sort of first innings score would set this up to be a great game?’ We tacitly agreed that we would try to arrange our resources in such a way that made a close finish as likely as possible. It doesn’t always come off of course – you work towards it, you don’t manufacture it artificially. That is friendly cricket.

I forget where precisely in Erratics lore this is written, but someone once described a game of friendly cricket as a blank canvas, on which the captains try to create something beautiful. What is crucial to note about this way of thinking about the game is that the captains to some extent need to be working together; perhaps not very directly or explicitly, but at least in the sense of having a shared set of aims. Done right, a friendly cricket captain should not only be thinking about the enjoyment of their own players, but of the enjoyment of everyone there who has given up their afternoon to make the game happen.

It is rarely possible to satisfy everyone playing in a game of cricket. So, what should a captain do? Surely it is better to send home an excellent cricketer feeling a bit dissatisfied that they didn’t get to show off their full range of skills that day. If friendly cricket does not provide a satisfying challenge to them, there are plenty of league teams who would happily accommodate them. The more modestly tooled among us, if left to graze in the outfield on the periphery of the game because the result has become more important than making sure all players have had a chance to contribute, have nowhere else to go. If the league mentality takes hold of friendly cricket, the quintessential friendly cricketer is left homeless.

Anyway, I’m digressing here into some random musings on what I think friendly cricket could and should be about. Those who have played against Broadclyst in recent years can decide for themselves if this game is a ‘friendly’, or if Broadclyst are essentially a league side playing under the ‘friendly’ banner.

Did I enjoy the game? I genuinely didn’t mind being hit for two sixes in my opening over. No, really. I relish the chance to bowl against the best league batters in the county, and I learned a lot. Did I get bored by the fact that the game at no stage felt like it was in the balance, and was in no way a close and exciting contest? Reader, I did.

Still, in the best traditions of friendly cricket, we made our own entertainment. Next time you find yourself struggling to get absorbed in the cricket, you could try these conversation starters: if you were a medieval warrior, what weapon would you wield? If you could be an Olympic athlete, what would your discipline be? Why is there a long jump and a triple jump, but no double jump? Who has bowled the most no-balls in a single Erratics innings? (This one you can find in the Stats section of the website).

This all helped to pass the time whilst the game crawled to its inevitable conclusion: a big defeat. At least we had managed to avoid conceding the highest ever total scored against us, by a margin of one run! (The record is still therefore held by, *checks notes*, Broadclyst). Fraser’s economy rate of 3-and-a-bit was extremely impressive given the total of nearly 300. Phil bowled very well under pressure. Roger hit some fine biffs on his way to an Erratics personal best. JK’s resistance insured we were not bowled out, and could lay a weak claim to the moral draw. So, there were some scraps of enjoyment.

But in a proper game of friendly cricket, that’s not a phrase a match reporter should ever have to reach for.

Mark Hailwood


Broadclyst Batting
Player name RunsMB4s6sSR
extras
TOTAL :
 
for 4 wickets
0
297 (40.0 overs)		     
George Daldorph Retired Not Out  105 56 10 8 187.50
Andrew Daldorph Retired Not Out  100 89 12 4 112.36
David Urch ct  L Grant b D Chave 1 9 11.11
Robert Meakings Not Out  60 62 8 96.77
Daniel Pooley b  P Power 10 8 2 125.00
Vishnu Nambiar st  L Grant b M Hailwood 11 15 2 73.33
Steve Tregedeon b  R Putman 1 2 50.0
Philip Walker JR Not Out  2 4 50.0
Priyadharsan Prabhakaran  
Muhammad Shoaib  
Hamish Edmond  

Erratics Cricket Club Erratics Bowling

Player NameOversMaidensRunsWicketsAverageEconomy
Mark Hailwood8.0061161.007.62
Phil Power8.0145145.005.63
Duncan Chave8.0088188.0011.00
Fraser Chave8.002600.003.25
Martin Weiler4.004700.0011.75
Roger Putman4.0030130.007.50

Erratics Cricket Club Erratics Batting
Player Name RMB4s6sSRCatchesStumpingsRun outs
extras
TOTAL :
 
for 5 wickets
0
208		        
Lee Grant ct  P Walker JR b M Shoaib 0 1 1
Richard Lindsay b  M Shoaib 6 1
Matt Crawford b  M Shoaib 20 4
Duncan Chave Retired Not Out  51 7
Fraser Chave ct  P Prabhakaran b P Walker JR 9
Jonathan Kirby Not Out  36 4
Roger Putman ct  R Meakings b V Nambiar 30 2 2
Mark Hailwood Not Out  1
Phil Power  
Martin Weiler  
Martin Wright  

Broadclyst Bowling

Player nameOversMaidensRunsWicketsAverageEconomy
Muhammad Shoaib8.012939.673.63
Hamish Edmond8.004600.005.75
Philip Walker JR4.00818.002.00
Priyadharsan Prabhakaran6.004200.007.00
Steve Tregedeon4.00800.002.00
Daniel Pooley5.003600.007.20
Vishnu Nambiar4.0020120.005.00
Robert Meakings1.00500.005.00