Old Walcountians made hard work of Saturday's Surrey Championship Division 3 match against Oxshott.
What should have been a routine run race turned sour as the OWs lost three wickets in five deliveries before scrambling to a 124-8 victory.
Despite conditions favouring batsmen it was the bowlers who dominated the match with OWs' off spinner Roberts taking 3-12 off eight overs.
The OWs' late struggle hardly looked likely as Dunckley and Flower put on 34 for the first wicket. One wicket very often brings two and in Saturday's case three, as Flowers, Blackburn and Porter were all dismissed within five balls as the middle order collapsed to ensure a tense finish. In the end they scraped home with two wickets to spare.
In the Championship's Division 1 Sutton beat Beddington by 78 runs after declaring on 192-9. Beddington, who won the toss, put Sutton into bat first and paid heavily for the decision against a well-organised side. Despite Amin's figures of 6-68 off 25.2 overs, Sutton's batsmen proved too strong for Beddington with Mansfield's 90 (not out) paving the way to a comfortable win. Other good innings came from Fry (38), and Patel (25).
Beddington's Tulsiana proved to be his side's best hope of clawing their way back into the game, scoring 56 before his LBW dismissal.
In other matches Wallington CC completed a successful weekend with all three of the club's sides winning. Wallington's 1st XI bagged their first win in the Fullers Surrey County Division 2, overcoming Westfield after bowling the visitors out for 147 to win. WCC's 2nds demolished Westfield's 2nds, bowling the visitors out for 69 after racking up an unassailable 248-1 with new boys Scott and Barker both smashing superb centuries (110 no and 108).
WCC's 3rds completed the club's hat trick, bowling out Carshalton for 69 to earn a one wicket victory.
Other results included Bec Old Boys' victory over Banstead, Bec recording 198-7 before bowling Banstead out for 88 to give the club an early season lift.
Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000.Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article