Posted by 
Ged writes:
I was joined for the afternoon by Escamillo Escapillo. Actually, the fact that we were together watching Middlesex v Lancashire was a noteworthy matter in itself, as our previous attempts to do so had been thwarted:
- In 2009 by circumstances beyond our control – i.e. the perennially lousy London weather – see King Cricket match report here
- In 2014 as a result of our collective incompetence – see King Cricket match report for that debacle here
Inevitably, the conversation soon turned to the matter that pretty much everyone must have been talking about around that time.
“The pitch seems a bit flat,” said Escamillo.
“More than a bit low and slow,” I concurred. “It’s been getting this way for years. Strip probably needs a complete relaying, but I think Mick Hunt wants to leave that potential banana skin to his successor.”
“At Old Trafford,” said Escamillo, “we turned the whole square around 90 degrees. That did a grand job of it. Have thee thought of trying that here at Lord’s?”
We were sitting on the front terrace of the pavilion. I looked around sharply to check if any of the gentlemen might have overheard the remark. There were none within hearing aid range, mercifully.
I quietly asked Escamillo, “I take it you are aware of the hoo-ha our nation has just been through with the Brexit referendum?”
“Yes?” said Escamillo, quizzically.
“Around here, your square rotation idea would be far more controversial than Brexit.”
Send your match reports to king@kingcricket.co.uk. If it’s a professional match, on no account mention the cricket itself. If it’s an amateur match, feel free to go into excruciating detail.
I’d opt for a 180 degree rotation of the wickets, aka Rotation In Name Only (RINO).
A key advantage of this strategy is that it can be marketed both as “we rotated it square so much we even did it twice” (aka Hard Rotation) and “we basically just kept it the same” (aka Remain).
This just in: Theresa May says “Turning the Square 90 Degrees means Turning the Square 90 Degrees.”
Do you Lord’s types really use the archaic terms of address? Wonderful if so, and not merely a typo.
Escamillo Escapillo is not a Lord’s type.
He hails from Rochdale.
That should unequivocally explain his esoteric choice of pronouns.
Wot no prandial details?
The good news for you, Edwardian, is that there is a version with more details if you want to read them:
http://ianlouisharris.com/2016/06/27/middlesex-v-lancashire-at-lords-day-two-27-june-2016/
The bad news for you is that it was not a picnic-style gathering, so those additional details do not pertain to comestibles.
In other news, this should please KC and those who (like him and me) think pitches should get demerit points if they favour the batsman too much as well as if they favour the bowler too much:
http://www.espncricinfo.com/story/_/id/22343765/chittagong-pitch-rated-average-icc
The URL above is deceptively named as the pitch was rated below average!
Terrible from England this morning. England should have put Willey in early. Willey would’ve gone big.
Willey… Short… Four. Better length from Willey, and again. Two decent balls from Willey there. Having Wood at the other end is helping.