Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl


Souless?
By Big Harvey
May 18 2015

Big Harvey describes the cricket of the day and his forthright opinion about the venue.

 After a horrible drive in the pouring rain, having reluctantly chosen to take my car to avoid a likely soaking, I arrived at the ground just before the scheduled start time. The Ageas Bowl was formerly known as The Rose Bowl, and is colloquially known – by fans of neighbouring Sussex at least – as The Toilet Bowl. I prefer the latter name. 

I was charged (a non-refundable in the event of no play) £8 to park my car, and another (also non-refundable) £21 for a ticket. After a sharp intake of breath, I went to check out the members' area. Entering “The Arlott Atrium,” I noticed a large bar on the right and a smaller one on the left in an area that was taped off reserved for members. The non-members' area actually seemed marginally nicer, so I sat there. Apparently there is another bar upstairs, but that's reserved for “premium members,” so not for the likes of me. The whole place was utterly soulless, and had both the appearance and atmosphere of one of those places where employees of big companies get dragged to for business briefings. In fact, I suspect that's precisely what it's used for when there's no cricket on.

I half expected someone to stand up with a microphone and start spouting all the latest buzzwords and management jargon about corporate plans for the coming “control period,” but instead was given a slip of paper telling me that Lunch would be taken at 1pm and there would be a pitch inspection after that assuming the rain stopped as forecast. Always nice to be kept informed of course, but a slightly unusual method of communication.

Play finally started at 2.15 with 63 overs deemed possible. Hampshire started on 295/5, with Smith on 52 and Ervine on 7. Finn opened the bowling, and at the other end TRJ accounted for Ervine (8), leg stump uprooted. 297/6.

This brought former Middlesex favourite Gareth Berg to the crease. There followed a quiet period of play in which Hampshire declined to take risks in pursuit of an extra batting point. They crawled to 333/6 off 108 overs during which time the Middlesex faithful derived more entertainment from the antics of a pair of pied wagtails nesting nearby than from the cricket. Meanwhile, Middlesex's over rate had plummeted to -5, and drastic action in the form of Dexter and Rayner bowling in tandem for ages (whatever the result in terms of runs conceded) was required.

This was the signal for Berg to cut loose, and he clubbed Ollie over his head for 6, followed by successive cover driven 4s. The Over rate deficit may have been coming down, but the run rate was certainly going up!

Berg's 50 came with a push to mid-on, for which he received deserved applause from all of us. Then, out of the blue, without adding to his 50, he pulled an innocuous-looking short ball from Dexter straight into the hands of Gubbins at deep square leg. 388/7.

Smith (93) followed soon after, brilliantly caught behind by Simpson after attempting to hook but only top-edging a Dexter tennis-ball bouncer. 392/8.

Fidel Edwards (1) joined the procession, deceived by a slower ball from Dexter, Finn diving forward to take the catch at mid-on. 393/9.

 

Hampshire should have been out for under 400, but TRJ put down Tomlinson off Dexter, and after playing a couple of shots, the same batsman was put down again, this time by Burns off Rayner.

 

Tomlinson (17) eventually became Dexter's 5th victim, after presenting TRJ with an easier chance than the first one at mid-on from which he made no mistake. Wheal (3*) was the not out batsman. Dexter finished with 5-64.

Hampshire 413 all out, and Tea was taken.

Robson and Gubbins initially looked comfortable enough against the new ball pair of Tomlinson and Wheal, but without warning, Robson (10) was castled by Wheal, seemingly done for pace. 17/1.

Wheal was replaced by Berg, who generated a surprising amount of pace during his spell, while at the other end, Fidel Edwards 1st delivery was even quicker and did for Gubbins (16) LBW. 33/2.

Berg was bowling well, and troubled both Compton and Burns, but aside from Burns being dropped by Carberry while on 8, nothing carried, found an edge, or found a fielder. By the time the 100 came up with a square cut by Compton off Tomlinson, Berg had been replaced by Ervine, who looked less threatening than Berg had. 

As so often happens however, the final over of the day had a sting in its tail, Burns slashed at a short one from Ervine, and the umpire adjudged it to have found the edge, caught behind by Wheater. 102/3, and from a fairly level position, Hampshire will now go into Day 3 with a slight advantage.

As a footnote, after today's awful drive, I instead plan to go to the match by train in the morning. The nearest station is Hedge End, which can't even be reached directly from Southampton Central without a change of train. The fact that the nearest station is named after the end of someone's hedge is very apt for giving the uninitiated an idea of just how obscure and in the middle of nowhere English cricket's most charmless and unlikely Test venue is. The Rose/Ageas/Toilet Bowl is about half an hour's walk from there in a village known as West End. Despite its name, West End is actually located to the East of Southampton, so my best guess is that like its neighbour, it's probably also named after the end of someone's hedge.  

 

 

Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl
Posted by: Middlesex till we die (IP Logged)
Date: 18/05/2015 23:37

What do you think? You can have your say by posting below.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015:05:21:18:53:55 by BarmierKev.

Re: Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl
Posted by: Beeamazed (IP Logged)
Date: 19/05/2015 06:16

Excellent BH
Better luck today with travel and weather....

Re: Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl
Posted by: WayOutWest (IP Logged)
Date: 19/05/2015 06:52

I half considered a trip to the game this week but £21 is very steep and had put me off. The ground is a nightmare to get to by train too.

Re: Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl
Posted by: BarmierKev (IP Logged)
Date: 19/05/2015 07:16

The £8 parking fee with no close by alternatives and £21 entrance is extortionate. This I'm sure put many off. What I found odd there was a small crowd in a big stadium no areas were cordoned off which meant they were splutterings of people all round. My final criticism there is little shade or protection from rain throughout.

Barmy Kev
I'm only here for the tele

Re: Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl
Posted by: Fozzie (IP Logged)
Date: 19/05/2015 09:00

Harv, the quaint method of communicating news about the start time may be down to the fact that the PA system dos not actually work around the ground - on Sunday there was actually a notice up to that effect in the open seating area near the scoreboard. Not what you would expect!

Re: Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl
Posted by: BarmierKev (IP Logged)
Date: 19/05/2015 10:25

Another issue was exessive bar queues during lunch and tea. They were non existent during play. Luckily that day I was not a regular visitor but felt they needed foresight to up staff levels during breaks.

Re: Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl
Posted by: Haringey Racer (IP Logged)
Date: 19/05/2015 10:56

Quote:
Fozzie
Harv, the quaint method of communicating news about the start time may be down to the fact that the PA system dos not actually work around the ground - on Sunday there was actually a notice up to that effect in the open seating area near the scoreboard. Not what you would expect!

No working PA? That must surely breach their safety certificate.

Re: Big Harvey Not Bowled Over By the Bowl
Posted by: Seaxe_Man (IP Logged)
Date: 21/05/2015 15:26

A thorough report Big Harve and as always, leaving no stones unturned.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net