Saturday 20th December 2025
Blog Page 2270

Oxfordmania!

0

 

I’m afraid I’m going to have to nail my colours to the mast straight off. Oxford is weird. Oxford people are weird. That is all. 

 

No doubt many of you have just reeled back from the page in horror, clutching your breasts and choking with indignation, “Weird? Moi?” Quite apart from the fact that you’ve just responded in French, the likelihood is that yes, even you, the most normal, well balanced and sober undergraduate that ever walked a mile in dark brown brogues, have some dark and lurking secret that skulks, guilty and sordid, in the dim places at the back of your mind.

 

A secret that requires only a certain atmosphere to burst forth, merrily clad in Morris-dancing clothes, and swagger off down the broad with handkerchiefs and bells held high.

 

Oxford is this atmosphere. Centuries of steadfastly ignoring the progression of the outside world, and the gradual accumulation of traditions in the manner of a bag lady collecting string, have left Oxford in the unique position of being thoroughly entrenched, in the public eye, against any sort of normalcy.

 

Ask almost anyone on any street in Britain what they think of when it comes to Oxford, and the traditional images leap or vault to mind; Pimms on the lawn, messing around on the river in various capacities, antiquated libraries with guttering candles, earnest conversations about Eliot or Woolf over sherry with avuncular and eccentric dons in horn-rimmed spectacles.

 

And then of course there are the negative stereotypes – everyone has an Eton or Harrow accent/education, is so intellectual as to be positively incomprehensible in everyday speech, cosy conservatism, unthinking prejudice and a hearty dislike for anyone with an accent north of Watford Gap.

 

In universities from Bristol to Edinburgh, the news that you go to Oxford, (regardless of that institutions own stellar reputation), is always greeted with a raucous collection of brays and a surge towards the alcohol, that the participants might raise containers and moo at each other in their fond imitation of ‘posh’.

 

To go to Oxford is apparently, as a result of this instant wealth of stereotype, almost an automatic system of excuse. No matter how eccentric your appearance, table manners or method of speaking, the fact that you’re an Oxon means that it is Only To be Expected.

 

Almost as soon as you leave school or home to come here, this fact falls like a blind between you and the family and friends from home, so that any statement vaguely bizarre, curious or related to an intimate detail of your subject that you find toe-curlingly exciting is met with an indulgent “He’s at Oxford…”.

 

This was brought to my attention most recently by the joys of the college garden party, a rare sign from the university that the students it domineers and terrifies in the strangest sadomasochistic relationship in the academic world were actually physically birthed, as opposed to manifesting, sweating and blinking with paralysing fear, just outside the office door of their interviewers. Here one got to see the attitude with which people’s parents approached their spawn, and the associates of their spawn, and this same, slightly wary idea was evident.

 

These were ‘Oxford students’, about whom weird and wacky things had been heard, and there was no telling what they might do – up to and including joining in the rousing chorus of the brass band adaptation of ‘Love and Marriage’ with an explosive, strawberry-filled finale.

 

This is not to say that other universities do not have their eccentrics, or that other institutes of learning are not thoroughly mad. The Slade School of Art, for example, in their recent exhibition, displayed a beautiful series of organically-shaped and beautifully inscribed miniature sculptures that turned out to be models of the artist’s own excrement, engraved with the sensations he apparently felt whilst…creating them.

 

Everyone has their faults, flaws, quirks and traits, and this is what makes people so exciting, but there is a sliding scale between those who occasionally rub a Smurf for good luck before going into an exam and those who feel a burning urge to perform evocative and very vocal drama in skimpy leotards on Cornmarket on an February midnight, to an audience that consisted of a fair mix of long-haired and eager student radicals and highly inebriated football fans themselves much concerned with the female actors’ bodily health.

 

Other universities are crazed also, but they, to an extent that Oxford blithely and majestically ignores, are related to the Real World; they occupy cities like Manchester or Birmingham or Liverpool, for example. In such cities, the sight of a bespectacled chemist in an academic robe being chased down a cobbled street and pelted with handfuls of flour, obscenely-shaped chocolates and small packets of washing-up liquid might be considered odd, or even in certain areas grounds for physical restraint.

 

It is the saturation of the city of Oxford with the eccentricities of a student population that is proportionately huge that means no such judgement, save in a passive sort of way, ever occurs. Thus, we are able to live in the Arcadia continually referenced by writers throughout the ages.

However, this is not to say that the ‘Oxford Mania’, as we might call it, is without its downsides. The bizarre relationship between student and tutor, where all of one’s pride, insecurity and sense of self-worth is compressed into an hour long discussion with one of the world’s finest minds, married to a bizarre affection and chivalrous desire to protect one’s own, breeds a special kind of neuroticism not found outside the tutorial system.

 

Then there is the sheer pressure of work, the amount of books, articles and essays that leaves you short-tempered when an old school friend calls to complain about their thousand-word thesis due in a fortnight. And then there are the exams that shred the summer-term joy from the freshers and instil all third-years with an air of gloom reminiscent of Napoleon on his way back from Moscow. 

 

Not for nothing are the famous dreaming spires closed to finalists. It’s a curious phenomenon, for such an apparently intelligent bunch we almost seem to self-sabotage. We have all done it, regardless of our apparent brightness – after a week of lazy reading, we’ve ended up hunched over a desk in the library at half-past four in the morning with an attractive cocktail of Red Bull and tar-like coffee in a gradually decomposing cup and a half-finished essay mostly lifted from an obscure Belgian scholar from the fifties.

 

Surely the most basic self-preservation instincts would strive to prevent this, and the subsequent shame of being dissected alive by one of the world’s most respected scholars. But no, we blunder on, driven by an insane desire to prove ourselves and, lest we forget, the love for our subject that we grudgingly admit still lives, despite the onslaught.

 

Clearly, the Oxford frame of mind, the supposed aim for all those frantic tourists who throng the city, is a difficult beastie. Without the moderating influence of the outside world, (if not for the BBC News website, I doubt the majority of Oxford would be aware of imminent nuclear holocaust), all our fancies are capable of running wild and free.

 

One might bring about the world premiere of an apparently unstageable play, or charge to the parks in homemade chainmail to hit one’s friends with very heavy swords. The parameters of normal behaviour are laxer here, and for the better.

 

Admittedly, I am not speaking from an entirely objective point of view. From an early age an unhealthy fixation with reading and a romantic disposition that borders on the pathological have combined to create, in what one might call selective logic, the resolution that I too must attend Oxford; Cambridge was never a possibility and was filed away as a nebulous and evil presence, a conclusion only ratified when I finally visited it many years later. This is a city where any peculiarities I possess are accepted or even ignored as entirely normal.

 

This entire reflection has been prompted, mostly, by the shameless blossoming of the Oxford stereotypes that come with Trinity term. Here, in the most high-pressure term for the majority of the students, any possible outlet is exploited – the ball season, where everyone abandons self-restraint and dignity in revelling that seems to inevitably revolve around the chocolate fountain, or Summer Eights, where on the Saturday the sleepy die-hard cheerleaders are bolstered by what seems a large portion of Oxfordshire and beyond, all of them trumpeting the virtues of management consultancy.

 

In Trinity, when the weather [periodically] supports the dreams of a thousand garden-party planners, the city finally rises into its position as a dreamlike Arcadia and takes possession of its status as a place apart, and thus it is the time when the glorious weirdness of those who sail in her is allowed to burn brightest.

 

So yes, Oxford is weird, and Oxford people are weird in a way entirely their own. This is No Bad Thing.

 

Oxford students, being weird.

 

Photos: Ian Bhullar

Stylist: Kate Shouesmith

Sub fusc: Models’ own

Lib Dems hold Holywell

0

See the full by-election results

The Liberal Democrats have won the Holywell by-election, retaining their second council seat for this ward.

Mark Mills, a student at Teddy Hall and the Lib Dem candidate, won with 183 votes.

Polls were open 7am-10pm for the by-election, which was triggered by Lib Dem councillor Richard Huzzey’s resignation.

Richard Huzzey stood down just days after the local elections, announcing he had been offered a post-doctoral research fellowship at Yale University, which he described as “too good to miss”.

Mr Huzzey was elected in 2006, and was not up for re-election in 2008 as Oxford City Council is elected in halves, with one of the two seats for each ward elected every two years.

At the time, Mr Huzzey said: “It’s been fantastic to work with Holywell residents over the past two years, and I’d have liked to continue for the rest of my four-year term.

“Yet an academic job at Yale is just too good to miss.”

 

Lib Dem success

The win will be heartening for the Lib Dems, who lost administrative control over the City Council after the local elections in May, when they lost ground to Labour.

The Council, however, still remains under no overall control.

The Lib Dems are likely to have benefited from the timing of the poll, as most students were still eligible to vote. However, many were sitting exams.

In the local elections recently held, the Lib Dems performed well in the two main student wards, Carfax and Holywell, but fared poorly elsewhere.

Lib Dem candidate Nathan Pyle won his Holywell ward seat with more than twice the votes of the second place Conservative candidate, Alex Stafford.

 

Familiar faces

Apart from the Lib Dems, the other party’s candidates were all familiar faces, having all lost in the May local elections.

Paul Sargent, who defected to the Conservatives from the Lib Dems during his term, and subsequently lost his council seat to Lib Dem Stephen Brown at the beginning of May, came second place in the by-election.

Green candidate Chip Sherwood also had a second attempt, having come third in the race for the other Holywell seat in May.

Sarah Hutchinson, a graduate student, stood for Labour, having lost in the Carfax elections in May.

 

Canvassing

Many students experienced heavy campaigning in the run-up to the by-election.

On the day, the parties were canvassing outside many of the Holywell ward colleges as well as the King’s Arms crossroads. Despite this, voter turnout was just 11.7%. At the local elections in May, turnout was 26.9% for Holywell.

At Teddy Hall, the college of winning candidate Mark Mills, a JCR motion was passed on Sunday banning all door-to-door canvassing.

 

Results

Candidate Party Votes
Sarah Hutchinson Labour 93
Mark Mills Lib Dem 188
Chip Sherwood Green 72
Paul Sargent Conservative 112

Turnout: 11.7%

New Linguistics faculty for Oxford

0

Oxford University will launch its new faculty for Linguistics, Philology and Phonetics on August 1 2008. The faculty will centralise Oxford’s research and teaching in the subject, which has traditionally taken place in separate faculties across the university.

The move, announced June 6 2008, is said to reflect current trends for interdisciplinary research in the area. Faculty members will work across the areas of linguistics and neuroscience, as well as working closely with the existing Experimental Psychology Department.

The creation of the new faculty should allow Oxford to extend its research into the areas of cognitive science, experimental psychology and computing in relation to the study of language. There are also plans to introduce new courses for undergraduates wishing to study this field.

Despite having had no centralised faculty until now, Oxford’s Linguistics department was named joint best in the country by the Times Good University Guide 2007. The new plans were welcomed by existing Linguistics staff and by members of the Humanities Division.

By-election polls open

0

By-election result here as soon as it is announced

Polls are open today for the Holywell by-election triggered by Lib Dem councillor Richard Huzzey’s resignation.

 

Richard Huzzey stood down just days after the
local elections, announcing he had been offered a post-doctoral research fellowship at Yale
University
which he described as
“too good to miss”.

  Richard Huzzey

Mr Huzzey was elected in 2006, and was not up for
re-election in 2008 as Oxford City Council is elected in halves, with one of the
two seats for each ward elected every two years.

 

At the time, Mr Huzzey said: “It’s been fantastic to work with Holywell
residents over the past two years, and I’d have liked to continue for the rest
of my four-year term.


"Yet an academic job at Yale is just too good to miss.”

 

Lib Dem hopes

 

The Lib Dems will be keen for success in the by-election,
after losing ground to Labour in the elections in May.

 

They will not want their influence in the council further reduced.


After the local elections, Labour extended their majority over the Lib
Dems and took administrative control of the council, although they
still lack the majority needed for overall control. 

 

The Lib Dems may benefit from the timing of the poll, as many students will still be eligible to
vote. However, many will also be sitting exams.

 

In the local elections recently held, the Lib Dems performed
well in the two main student wards, Carfax and Holywell, but fared poorly
elsewhere.

 

Lib Dem candidate Nathan Pyle won his Holywell ward seat
with more than twice the votes of the second place Conservative candidate, Alex
Stafford.

 

Candidates

 

Several by-election candidates stood in the recent local elections.

 

Two losing candidates from the Carfax election, Sarah
Hutchinson for Labour, and Paul Sargent for the Conservatives, are hoping for
better luck in Holywell.

 

Paul Sargent defected to the Conservatives from the Lib Dems
during his term, and subsequently lost his council seat to Lib Dem Stephen
Brown at the beginning of May.

 

Green candidate Chip Sherwood is also having a second
attempt, having come third in the race for the other Holywell seat in May.

 

The Lib Dems are fielding a fresh face, in the form of Mark
Mills, a student at Teddy Hall.

 

Council

 

While the Lib Dems will want to retain their seat, Labour will be keen to further extend their majority in the hope of achieving overall control at the next local elections.

 

Meanwhile the Conservatives are seeking to regain a presence in the council, after having lost both their seats in May’s local election.

 

The Green Party will be aiming to make up for a lacklustre performance in May.

 

Canvassing

 

Many students have experienced heavy campaigning in the run-up to the by-election, and the parties have been canvassing outside many of the Holywell colleges today.


At Teddy Hall, a JCR motion was passed on Sunday banning all door-to-door canvassing.

 

The Holywell polling station at the Magdalen Auditorium on Longwall Street is open from 7am until 10pm.


 


Cherwell will have the by-election result as soon as it is announced.

 

Results

 

Candidate Party Votes
Sarah Hutchinson Labour  93
Mark Mills Lib Dem 188 
Chip Sherwood Green  72
Paul Sargent Conservative  112

‘Violence and destitution’ at Campsfield House

0

Nejra Cehic investigates the plight of failed asylum seekers in the UK,
focussing on community activity around the issue in Oxfordshire.

 

During the video, Harris, a failed asylum seeker from Sierra Leone, recalls a violent incident he claims to have witnessed while inside Campsfield House, the detention centre just outside Oxford. 

 

A spokesperson for GEO Group UK Ltd., which manages Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre, declined to comment on the alleged incidents of violence mentioned in this programme.

 

This investigation was originally filmed for Cherwell24 in Hilary Term 2008.

Design award for Univ boathouse

0

University College’s new boathouse, which was unveiled to the public at Summer Eights last year, has been awarded a Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) award.

 

The boathouse, which was designed by Shahriar Nasser for Belsize Architects, was rebuilt at a cost of £2.7m following an arson attack in 1999 that left the old building unusable. The money was raised through a combination of insurance pay-outs and donations from Univ alumni.

 

The building is modern in appearance, featuring panoramic views of the river and a thin copper roof, and includes facilities for boat storage and repair as well as a gym and accomodation. It is used by students from University, Wolfson, St Peter’s and Somerville colleges.

Oxford state admissions fall

0

 

Oxford has made slow progress in boosting the number of state educated students it takes on despite large Government spending and campaigns by the University, figures show.

 

Performance figures for 2006-7 released by the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA), show that the proportion of state educated students at Oxford, Cambridge, and Bristol and several other universities actually decreased.

 

In 2006, Oxford had 53% state educated students, with Cambridge having 57.6%. The figures fall well below Government-set benchmarks of 76.7% and 77.4% respectively.

 

The disappointing figures come despite the Government spending large sums on schemes dedicated to widening university access to those from poorer backgrounds.

Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, said: “Over the past decade, in England alone, nearly £3 billion has been spent on measures to widen social class participation in higher education.

“We welcome the priority that has been given to this area. But there has been little progress, despite a lot of hard work by universities to attract and retain a wider range of students.

“The bottom line is that the punitive cost of higher education is putting the very students who the Government wishes to attract off applying.”

Oxford also has many access schemes in place, and recently launched an ambitious funding campaign to ensure students from poorer backgrounds are not deterred from applying.

A spokeswoman for Oxford University told the BBC: “For our part, we are doing our utmost to encourage academic ambition from a young age by working with students from 11 up, and by working closely with parents and teachers.

“One element of the picture is making sure that those who do study at Oxford from all groups, especially under-represented groups, are well supported and reach their potential.

“One of the lowest drop-out rates in the country indicates that our efforts in this respect are bearing fruit.”

The period for which the HESA figures have been released coincides with the introduction of top-up fees of £3,000.

Higher Education Minister Bill Rammell emphasised overall figures for UK universities showed that the proportion of students from state schools had increased.

“It is particularly encouraging to see that the proportion of young entrants from the lower socio-economic groups and from state schools has continued to rise and is in fact at their highest ever levels,” he said.

For 2006-7, the proportion of state educated students at university increased from 87.9% to 88.3%.

Both Oxford and Cambridge stress they are doing all they can to widen access. In their defence, some dons have attacked the Government’s targets as unrealistic due to the way in which they are calculated.

 

They also cite inequalities at early stages of schooling and in teacher’s attitudes towards encouraging students to apply to prestigious universities.

 

The figures also show that overall nearly a quarter of undergraduates fail to complete their degree, despite the Government spending large amounts on improving retention. At Bolton University, the drop-out rate has reached almost half.

 

Oxford has one of the lowest drop-out rates in the country, at 1.2% for 2006-7.

Oxford defeat in first Varsity Twenty20

0

 



 

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

0

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.