Oxford's oldest student newspaper

Independent since 1920

Blog Page 2165

Oxford defeat in first Varsity Twenty20

 



 

Oxford slumped to a disappointing defeat in the
inaugural Charles Russell Varsity Twenty20 match. Having let Cambridge score 155-8 in their overs, Oxford stumbled and fell thirty runs short of the
target.

 

Winning the toss and
electing to field, Oxford enjoyed a perfect start. In the first over, a confused call left both
batsmen at the non-strikers’ end. The fielders’ task was easy: AS Ansari was
run out. Cambridge’s running was poor throughout their innings,
as the batsmen struggled to react to the imperatives of Twenty20 cricket.


Another
failure to adapt to the game’s format was evident in Oxford’s bowling. Umpires Royle and Tomlin were as
strict on wides as in professional Twenty20 matches, and opening bowlers James
Macadam and Ed Morse were repeatedly called for straying too far from the
stumps.

 

The successful run out
of Ansari proved to be a Pyrrhic victory for Oxford, however. Wicketkeeper David King was injured
in the process, and had to be replaced behind the stumps by Brendan McKerchar.


Without
a specialist ‘keeper, Morse’s stray deliveries were even more costly than they
would have otherwise been, and the repeated concession of five wides did the
Tab batsmen’s work for them.

 

From the other end,
however, Macadam removed Timms. A wild slash found the edge, and the ball flew
straight to Hill at second slip. Two wickets in the first two overs, and Cambridge were reeling. New batsman MacLellan, after
hitting one huge six over extra-cover, was also run out.

 

Despite the constant
fall of wickets, Cambridge were scoring quickly enough to maintain a strong position. O’Driscoll
was next to go, slapping Hill to the man at mid-wicket. Cambridge’s run rate was impressive: just under ten an
over for the first half of their innings.

 

Just when Cook looked
like taking the game away from Oxford, another mix up led to another run out. The
new pairing, Owen and Heywood, accelerated the scoring, the former bringing up Cambridge’s hundred with a glorious straight drive for
four.


Cambridge’s captain Owen, leading their charge, fell to
a great diving catch by Alex Ball at midwicket off the bowling of Hill. Cambridge had looked like they would accelerate away
towards 200, but tight bowling from Hill (4-0-13-2) and Sadler (4-0-21-1)
restrained them.


Baker was trapped LBW
and Cambridge’s momentum was sapping away. Sadler took a
catch at midwicket to remove Heywood, before bowling Ben Jacklin in the next
over. The final over started with a big six from Hemingway, who was run out off
the last ball. Cambridge closed with 155, a strong total but not as
high as maybe it could have been.

 

Oxford openers Bernie McKerchar and Oli Sadler
started confidently: the former’s lofted drive for six into the pavilion was
the shot of the day.  The Dark Blue
openers raced to 38/0 off the opening bowlers Kemp and Jackson, but the
introduction of O’Driscoll worked for Cambridge.


Sadler clipped the ball straight to Hemingway
on the deep midwicket boundary. It was Hemingway who bowled the next over, as Oxford lost two quick wickets. Kruger, after hitting
his first ball for four, fell LBW and next man in Alex Ball skipped down the
pitch and was stumped. In a matter of minutes, 38/0 had become 42/3.


Having
lost King, the number five, to injury, Oxford could not afford for numbers three and four
both to get ducks.

 

Rebuilding began with
McKerchar, showing no signs of fatigue after his 19 overs of stand-in wicket
keeping, and new man Spencer Crawley. McKerchar had adjusted better to the
demands of Twenty20 batting than any batsmen on either team, picking the gaps
in the field and hitting out when necessary.


He was warmly applauded upon
bringing up his 50. Just minutes later, though, he was back in the pavilion. A
mix up with Crawley left McKerchar stranded, and he was the fourth
run out victim of the day.

 

With their best
batsman out, Oxford never recovered momentum. Crawley was next out, bowled by Baker for 22. Hill and
Dingle led a recovery, but some exceptional fielding from Cambridge meant that they could never sufficiently
increase the run rate.


The need for quick runs forced risk taking, and Hill’s
gamble resulted in his being stumped. Next batsman Shephard was run out coming
back for two. At 99/7 (but with only two wickets remaining because of King’s
injury), Oxford looked finished.

 

Dingle continued to
battle on, hitting a huge six to midwicket that sailed over the heads of the
throngs of spectators. Needing 38 from the final three overs, any hopes Oxford had left were extinguished when Dingle (26)
was out LBW off Ansari.


Macadam and last man Morse hung around for another
over, but it was now a lost cause. A diving catch at backward point by Ansari
dismissed Macadam and ended the match. Oxford were 125 all out: Cambridge had triumphed on foreign soil.

Worcester stroll to cuppers triumph

Having won the
Football Premier League and Football Cuppers, Worcester won their third major trophy of 2008, breezing
past Queen’s in cricket Cuppers final.


A match that was the warm-up act for
Varsity Twenty20 was not quite the contest it promised: Queen’s were set for a
mammoth score before being reigned in, and a ruthless Worcester top order sped
to the target with four overs remaining.

 

Put in to bat by Worcester captain Healy, Queen’s openers James Kelly and
Nick Woods got off to a solid start (putting on 26 for the first wicket in five
overs), before Kelly had his middle stump sent cartwheeling for three.  

Alex Bromsgrove,
slayer of St.
John’s
in
the semi-final, joined Woods at the crease.


Three fours in one over from Andrew
Shakespeare signalled his intent early on. The two batsman looked increasingly
confident, and Healy’s decision to insert the underdogs looked hubristic.


With
the score on 64/1, the introduction of Thomas Bryan was a masterstroke of
captaincy. In his first over, the seamer removed Woods’ off stump for 27.

 

Queens’ were panicked.
It could have been much worse: Worcester dropped two catches in quick succession. New
batsman Jonty Strachan was dropped at mid-on off Kunal Desai, before Bromsgrove
was put down on 37 at the same position.


The batsmen took advantage, Bromsgrove
keeping the rate at five runs per over. But for the third time, Worcester lost a wicket just as they looked set to break
away: Strachan was bowled for 9 leaving the score at 92/3.

 

Hemingway joined
Bromsgrove at the crease. They brought up Queen’s’ hundred in the twenty-first
over. With only three wickets lost, 220 or even 240 looked possible. But Desai
was doing a good job of stemming the flow of runs: he finished with 6-0-24-0, Bryan with the even more impressive 8-2-21-2.

 

Frustrated by the
slowing rate of scoring, Bromsgrove was caught behind for 54. At 114/4 off 27
overs, Queen’s could still have hoped to get close to 200. They did not make it
easy for themselves; Hemingway was run out for 8 after a number of risky
singles.


Just when Queen’s needed to up the rate, they were being hemmed in by
tight bowling and sharp fielding from Worcester. When Ecland clipped Bryan through mid on for four, it was more of a
relief than a statement of intent.

 

Accumulation, rather
than acceleration, marked the last few overs. Thomas Carpenter slashed at one
coming across him and was caught behind for 3, leaving his team on 132/6. Another
run out soon followed, before Chris Ecland became the third batsman of the
innings to fail to make his ground, coming back for a risky second. 142/8
became 142/9 soon later: Alfie Enoch was bowled off his first ball.


Richard
Bosworth hit a big one bounce four to long on off Gibson, he repeated the same
shot next ball and was caught. 92/2 had become 154 all out. Worcester were heavily indebted to their change bowlers:
not just Desai and Bryan but Gibson (7.3-0-21-2) and Martin (6-0-19-2) had
bowled immaculately.

 

Defending 154 against
a batting order as accomplished as Worcester’s was never going to be easy. Queen’s had to
bowl them out, a task they simply did not have the firepower to achieve.


Robin
Thompson and Tom Smith started confidently: hitting Alfie Enoch (3-0-26-0) out
of the attack. Jonty Strachan and Nick Woods proved more effective in holding
back the onslaught, but did not look like removing either of the openers.

 

It was not until the
introduction of James Kelly that the batsmen started to look at all
uncomfortable. Kelly, who bowls left arm seam from around the wicket, created a
difficult angle for the right-handed batsmen.


Many LBW appeals were made, none
were given, but the scoring rate dropped. Smith, who had brought up his fifty
with an effortless clip for six over deep mid-wicket, soon fell to Kelly. He
drove the ball straight to Woods at cover, falling for 52. But Worcester were 82/1 off 16 overs and still looking
dominant.

 

Queen’s did well not
to make it easy: eight overs bowled in succession by Kelly and the equally
impressive Woods (7.5-0-26-0) cost only ten runs, as Thompson and Bryan proved
a less dynamic partnership than Thompson and Smith.


Once Kelly (8-1-23-1) was
out of the attack, though, Worcester resumed their assault. Thompson regained his momentum with some
fantastic shots off new bowler Bosworth, and soon later brought up his 50.

 

Despite being
overwhelming favourites at this stage, Worcester did present Queen’s with chances to get back
into the game. But Bryan was dropped in consecutive overs: by wicket-keeper Banyard off
Bosworth, and then by Carpenter at slip off Strachan. After these let offs, it
was only a matter of time for Worcester to claim the trophy.

 

And in the thirty
fifth over, Thompson drove through cover for four, winning Cuppers for Worcester. He finished on 70*, Bryan on 28*. They had reached the target without
metaphorically, if not literally, breaking a sweat.

Holt is new Union President-Elect

LMH second year Charlie Holt has won the race for the title of President of the Oxford Union, following Friday’s election. He will commence his duties in Hilary Term 2009.

 

Leo-Marcus Wan was elected Librarian for Michaelmas 2008.

 


 The full results of the elections are as follows:

 

President, Hilary 2009

Charlie Holt: 767
Ed Waldegrave: 574

 

Librarian, Hilary 2009

Leo Marcus Wan: 665
Guagua Bo: 620
Spoilt, blank, void: 175

 

Secretary, Michaelmas 2008

Tom Hartley: 712
Simon Millar: 429
Spoilt, blank, void: 322

 

Treasurer, Hilary 2009

James Langham, unopposed


Standing Commitee, Michaelmas 2008

Nouri Verghese: 153

Ronald Collinson: 137

Ngu Atanga: 133

James Kingston: 114

Niall Gallagher: 113 

Runner up: Katy Minshall 

 

Secretary’s Committee, Michaelmas 2008
William Parry: 109

Judd Fischer: 88

Justine Potts: 85

Laura Winwood: 71

Sam Cullen: 68

Fenella Corrick: 68

Julius Hugelschofer: 67    

Han Yu: 64

Emily Gardner: 53

Runner up: JD Appleby 

Said donation protests

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VIDEO: Cycle crackdown at KA junction

 

 

Police issued fines to over 50 cyclists who jumped red traffic lights in central Oxford on Friday.

The operation, which took place at the junction of Broad Street and Parks Road, formed part of a road safety campaign.

Two plain clothes officers situated outside the junction between Broad Street and Parks Road radioed descriptions of cyclists who ignored red lights to uniform officers further down the road, who pulled them over.

The cyclists, the majority of whom are students, were issued £30 fines and given advice on road safety.

In Trinity Term last year, nearly 200 cyclists were fined in two operations at the same junction.

PC Stephen Higa said that police were not trying to victimise students.

“The main reason is safety. If a cycle were to go through a red light, the consequences are potentially catastrophic.”

However, the experience was too much to handle for some.

One female student, who was stopped for passing an amber light, broke down in tears after she was pulled over.

She was not fined as she did not pass a red light. Officers had only wanted to offer her safety advice.

A student who has just finished his course at Oxford Brookes was among those who received fines. He said that the police should “use more discretion”.

He continued, “A verbal warning would have been appreciated. I’ve got shit all money at the moment.”

PC Higa said that there were further operations planned this month on Queen Street and Cornmarket.

Police fine cyclists at KA junction

Cyclists were issued £30 fines as part of a police operation at the junction of Parks Road and Broad Street.  More soon.

New Vice-Chancellor named

The nominee for Oxford’s next Vice-Chancellor has been named as Professor Andrew Hamilton, the current Provost of Yale University.

Hamilton will become the 296th Vice-Chancellor when John Hood ends his five-year tenure in October 2009, if Congregation approves the decision made by the Nominating Committee.

He described the decision as “humbling” and “inspiring”.

Dons have suggested that there will be little opposition to the nomination and have largely welcomed the decision to back someone from an academic background – a departure from Hood’s nomination as a candidate with business credentials.

Hamilton is Benjamin Silliman Professor of Chemistry and Professor of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry at Yale, in addition to his role as Provost. He has been recognised internationally for his academic achievements.

Nicholas Bamforth, a member of the University’s Council, said, “It is good to have a distinguished academic nominated for this post.”

A senior member of the University also approved the choice to opt for such a prominent academic. “I very much welcome the fact that Professor Hamilton is a distinguished academic as well as a successful University administrator,” he said.

However another professor has criticised the decision to ignore Oxford’s own candidates and again appoint a V-C from outside the University. He said, “He is clearly a man of ability in terms of academic stature, which is very different to Hood, but he has no connection with Oxford and this is quite clearly undesirable.”

He also claimed that the Nominating Committee, which is chaired by the Oxford Chancellor Lord Patten, was “determined to exclude” candidates from the University’s own academic body and to appoint an “outsider”. He claimed this marked a “continued and gratuitous support for Hood.”

He added that the nomination had been used for the ends of “internal politics”, with the consequence of ignoring candidates from within the University.

Despite this criticism the academic admitted that Congregation was unlikely to seriously challenge Hamilton’s appointment and that any likely opposition would be “small”.

Dons are now looking to the challenges Hamilton would face during his tenure and have suggested a number of key tasks he must tackle in order to lead the University to its future.

A senior academic said the new V-C would need to smooth over rifts between dons that have recently occurred. “His main task will be to heal the divisions on ‘Hoodism’ and ‘anti-Hoodism’ that has risen in the last few years,” he said.

Another member of the University expressed hope that Hamilton could adapt to the Oxford system and go ahead with reforms to the University.

“He comes here from North America where, unlike Oxford, the senior academic officers of universities are appointed rather than elected by their colleagues.

But he will surely have done his research by the time he arrives, and have understood that the most successful Vice-Chancellors have recognised that Oxford is much more like a partnership than like a business corporation, and have conducted themselves as ”primus inter pares” (first among equals) rather than Chief Executives.

“I hope he takes an open-minded look at Oxford and works with his colleagues to make the reforms that are urgently needed to increase the quality and value-for-money of the services provided by the administration,” he said.

Hamilton has been Provost of Yale since 2004 in which time he has lead a number of developments, including the acquisition of a new a 136-acre research campus.

Professor Hamilton announced the nomination in an email to colleagues at Yale on Tuesday. “I am enormously honoured and excited at the prospect of helping steward one of the great centres of scholarship in the world,” he wrote.

Hamilton is held in particularly high regard at Yale where both students and academics say he will be greatly missed.

The President of Yale, Richard Levin, said, “Andy Hamilton has led major initiatives to strengthen Yale in science, engineering, and medicine while at the same time enthusiastically supporting investments in the humanities, social sciences, and the arts. He is a first-rate scholar, who is respected by his faculty colleagues as a wise academic leader.”

A comment on the website of Yale’s student newspaper, Yale Daily News, described Hamilton as “A great guy and a fantastic provost” and added, “Yale will certainly miss him.”

The Chancellor of Oxford University, Lord Patten of Barnes, who chaired the Nominating Committee, said, “Andrew Hamilton’s remarkable combination of proven academic leadership and outstanding scholarly achievement makes him an exceptional choice to help guide us into the second decade of the twenty-first century.”

He added, “This is a particularly exciting time for Oxford and in Professor Hamilton we have someone with the experience and talent to help us take advantage of these opportunities.”

The current Vice-Chancellor, Dr John Hood, said, “I am delighted that Professor Hamilton has been nominated as the next Vice-Chancellor of Oxford, from Autumn 2009. I look forward very much to assisting him in any way I can to prepare for his new role.

“For my own part, I shall remain fully committed over the next sixteen months to the University it is my privilege to serve,” he added.

A threatening agenda

Since 1979 the government of Iran has systematically persecuted members of the Baha’i community, the country’s largest religious minority.

 

This persecution escalated dramatically on 14 May 2008 when six Baha’i leaders were arbitrarily arrested and initially reported to be held in Evin Prison, in Tehran. After nearly two weeks since their arrest nothing has been heard from these men and women, generating growing concern about their condition.

 

This incident is all the more distressing when one recollects the harsh treatment of Baha’is in the early 1980s, when more than 200 Baha’is were killed and thousands of others imprisoned. The international outcry at the time – which included public statements by many Oxford dons – eventually subdued the overt actions of the Iranian government.

 

The executions stopped, but the persecution of the Baha’is has continued in the form of subtle policies to inhibit the progress of the community. They are barred from government jobs, denied many basic citizenship rights, and blocked from access to higher education.

 

Over the past year, many Oxford students have voiced their concern about the denial of higher education to thousands of our peers in Iran. Resolutions have been passed through JCRs, MCRs and the OUSU General Council.

 

We have asked our MPs to urgently call upon the Iranian government to comply with the international agreements it has signed, which uphold right of access to education regardless of religious affiliation. Members of this University have spoken out in support of the Baha’i students of Iran because we believe that the right to study should not be denied because of one’s religion.

 

We believe that a government that intentionally denies education to its people is capable of doing much worse, as recent events have shown. The May 14 arrests are the latest in a series of escalating actions targeting the Baha’i community. In 2006, 53 Baha’i youth were arrested in Shiraz while they were engaged in an educational project with underprivileged youth.

 

There has been a notable increase in reports of public harassment and ridicule of Baha’i children by their teachers. Most troubling of all, a government memo was recently leaked and revealed government instructions to security agencies to ‘identify’ and ‘monitor’ Baha’is around the country.

While the world is distracted by Iran’s nuclear posturing, government hardliners promote a coordinated and threatening agenda aimed at suffocating the Baha’i community. Iran’s actions to block an entire community from education indicate sinister intentions that should not be ignored.

 

Let Oxford make its position clear to Iran and to the world on this matter: access to higher education is a right that should be enjoyed on the basis of merit, not religion.

Bod pardons book thieves

The Bod is to hold a ‘book amnesty’ next week to recover books inadvertently removed from reading rooms.

Students will be able to return books that they have taken from the Bodleian’s non-issuing libraries without incurring a penalty.

The amnesty will happen prior to the installation of new book detection systems at the entrance to the Upper Camera and Lower Camera reading rooms.

Most other libraries in Oxford have electronic tags that cause alarms to go off at the entrance if a person has taken a book out with them.

Vanessa Corrick, the Deputy Head of Reader Services for the Bodleian Library said, “An approximate figure for the number of open shelf books which go missing is 90 in the calendar year 2007.

“It is difficult to be precise about this figure since quite a few books are found when we do an annual check of the open shelf books during the Long Vacation i.e. they have been incorrectly shelved, or have even fallen down behind other books.”

She added, “This is a fairly small figure, although of course we don’t even like one book to go missing.”

English student Julie Jackson commented, “I have never taken any books, I usually photocopy the articles I need, but I can see why people would be tempted to take them.

The security is poor, especially in the Rad Cam, and when people have deadlines to meet all it would take is someone to run out of money on their photocopy card and because it is easy people take the books they need.

“The security is good for only letting in students, you have to show your Bod card but for taking out books, the person on the door asks you to open your bag and can’t possibly recognise every Bodleian book.”

Jackson said, “I know people who have taken books and have just said to the security that they were from another library.”

Corrick also emphasised that students who do return the books will not be recorded or penalised in anyway; “[…] we are not taking notes of who returns material. We would be grateful to have books returned whatever their state as our conservation staff may be able to carry out repairs.”

For those who are struggling to tell whether a book in their possession is from the Bodleian libraries, Corrick said, “There should be a stamp with ‘Bodleian’ on it on books, most likely on the reverse of the title page.”

Girlz gone wrong

The Clique Girlz.

With a name like that, where does one start?

Quite apart from anything else, they’ve managed to worsen an already knotty issue of punctuation. What – and this has been keeping me up at night – is the genitive form of that band name? Would one say, ‘the Clique Girlz’s website’? Or ‘The Clique Girlz’ website’? ‘The Clique Girlz’z website’?

Lynne Truss has no answers for me. The angels weep.

Do have a look at that website, by the way. It’s www.cliquegirlz.com. Once you’ve recovered from the blast of ‘Then I Woke Up’ which greets you – and the pink and the hearts and the crowns and whatever their other beastly ‘group symbol’ is – you might notice the ‘hot videos’ section.

But I warn you that these hot videos are, well, not very hot. Partly because giggling and muffin-eating have never struck me as particularly erotic – but primarily because the Clique Girlz are aged twelve and thirteen.

When, I wonder, did it become OK to call a prepubescent child ‘hot’? The provocative poses in the photographs don’t quite manage to disguise the lack of breasts; the littlest girl in the centre continues to look stubbornly twelve. It’s all very sad and rather creepy.

Granted: it could be worse. BBC Four recently ran a follow-up to Painted Babies, a 1996 documentary about child beauty pageants. One image stands out. It’s the four year-old dressed as a burlesque dancer – running her hands tantalisingly up her thighs and over her (flat) chest, singing ‘Spend a little time with me…’

The moment has a grotesqueness that the Clique Girlz – say what you like about them – do not. One could argue that the latter are at least on the cusp of physical semi-maturity. Projecting an ostentatious front of sexuality onto a twelve year-old, although still dangerous, is not as grossly inappropriate as doing the same to a toddler.

However, people reach puberty at different ages. Menstruation has been recorded in girls as young as eight months. Does that make them ‘sexual beings’?

In Britain, the age of majority is set at 16 because physical and emotional maturity do not necessarily correlate. Perhaps we should use that age as a minimum elsewhere. And if anyone still thinks the sexualisation of children is ‘harmless’ or ‘cute’ after watching Painted Babies, they should answer this riddle: how is a burqa like a bikini?

Marriageable at nine, Iranian girls are rendered sexual overnight and expected thereafter to cover up. The presence of the hijab flags them as requiring concealment from lustful eyes. Growing up in Pakistan, I remember the bewildered sense of having suddenly become a temptation – my ankles transformed against my will or understanding into something indecent.

Dressing a child in fishnet stockings and feathers essentially does the same thing – marks her body out as a sexual entity. The burqa seeks to conceal it, the bikini to show it off. The thinking is the same: the only difference is in the response.