Melbourn won 18-8

With the Summer League having bled through most of September with re-arranged games, it felt like we had barely had a gap when the Cambs Winter League kick-off rolled around. A good thing or a bad? The summer matches meant everyone was at least match-tight, which was hopefully going to prove the difference against newly promoted Cambridge 4ths.

Fifth string Will Bradshaw certainly looked up-to-speed as he produced his most comprehensive Cambs League performance to cruise past Florin Grosu. Will started well, exposing that Florin was going to struggle to retrieve his shots from the back corners. This got a little bit obsessional and the power was unconstrained, leading to the first game ending with a closer score than it maybe should have done (12-all at one stage), but once that one was in his pocket Will relaxed fully, got the weight of his shots right, and was also benefitting from having run Florin around loads in the opener which meant gaps were appearing in the second and third. This all hung together to produce a 15-12, 15-6, 15-3 victory that is indicative of Will’s burgeoning level of play.

Gareth Jones (4) was a different case, as he missed most of the summer with a wrist injury (and anyway plays AGAINST Melbourn in the Herts Leagues!). This meant his match against the hard hitting Andrew Stott formed part of his injury comeback.
Gareth started fine, building rallies and looking like he had his opponents measure. Unfortunately comfort in the rallies inspired Gareth to try for winners, and this were rusty as hell as countless drop shots went into the tin and that allowed a good lead to slip away in the first. The second was better… but the errors were still there and still a major hinderance. Gareth had his chances but this one also escaped him.
Game three saw a change of approach, with the ball kept deep. Gareth also started to float his serves in, which is completely against type but was an inspired idea as Andrew is a low, hard, driving player who likes pace on the incoming ball he can use. This added up to a game back, but could Gareth do it again? Well, no, because match fitness now came into the equation. Both players were tired, but it was Gareth who could least afford mistakes. Nip and tuck play saw Gareth get the game to 12-all, only to follow it with two errors to be 14-12 down. Back against the wall, he played a full commitment rally to scrap back at least three balls seemingly past him to save the first match ball in dramatic fashion. However, Gareth now had ball-in-hand, ready to serve and the temptation to go for something high and pinpoint was enormous. Your correspondent and marker could feel it coming, thinking ‘Don’t serve out! Don’t serve out!”. Reader, Gareth served out. That meant the final score was 9-15, 13-15, 15-10, 13-15 in Andrew’s favour.

The next match on pitted Moises Estrelles Navarro, whose recent improvement was acknowledged with a promotion to third string, up against Bryan Taylor.
Bryan was on top in the opening few rallies, but from 3-7 down Moises found his mojo with Bryan increasingly bemused by how much the El Bandido could retrieve – shots the Cambridge player had logged in his brain as “winner” were coming back. 8 rallies won in a row had Moises 11-7 up, which proved a decisive lead. He continued the momentum through the second to build a two games to love lead, seemingly on the way to a clean win.
The third game was nothing like straightforward though as Bryan dug in and Moises got tense. Missed opportunities saw the Cambridge player first to game ball at 14-12, but Moises saved both with some “keep nothing back” running. He then had a match ball at 15-14, and had a chance to win it… but a tense arm resulted in a high drop that Bryan was able to counter-punch away. And this put us into a ding-dong tie-breaker, that went on and on. Moises had further match balls at 16-15, 17-16, 19-18 and 20-19, with Bryan having a further game ball chance at 18-17. On at least two of the match balls there were clear chances for Moises to finish things, only for a tight arm resulting in drops shots finding the tin. That let Bryan off the hook and he finally took the game on his fourth chance at 21-20!
Moises came off court frustrated at the missed opportunities and complaining of tiredness. However, he just looked a bit red – Bryan was bright purple by this stage. If Moises could calm down the shot-making and just play consistently he was going to win. This message was taken on board, an early 8-2 lead was built in the fourth as Bryan noticeably slowed down, and the match was effectively done. Moises won 15-9, 15-6, 20-22, 15-8.

Melbourn were 2-1 up then as Matt Walker (2) was taking on Henry Letch.
Matt was giving Henry a few years on the legs, but this was tipped the other way in terms of experience. Shot-making was also stronger from Matt, especially his trademark volley-drop, which worked initially well to get his nose ahead early in the first. However, Matt was also trying to out-drive and out-rally a player whose game was based on running, driving and rallying, and this didn’t work, leading to the lose of the opener. A reset for the second, taking the pace off the ball, worked the little opening Matt needed to tip the balance the other way in the second, levelling things up. However, trying to build on this to dominate rallies didn’t work in the third and Matt found himself 2-1 down.
The answer was essentially defend and lift and wait for Henry’s to make an error on a tight ball. An exhausting prospect, but one Matt delivered from the last two to turn things around and claim an excellent 10-15, 15-10, 9-15, 15-10, 15-10 victory.

Matt’s win meant Melbourn had the victory bonus before Jan Brynjolffssen (1) took on Russell Lewis.
Russell is a strong shot-maker, who has played at a higher level (Division 1) previously, but has now dropped down the tiers. The shots were apparently from the outset as the Cambridge player established an early lead in the opener, which he held to the end despite Jan making something of a late comeback that made the game score more respectable. Russell also got off to a flier in game two, racing into a decisive 10-2 lead.
Jan needed something to change – teammates advised that he was trying to wrong-foot a player who was holding position, so play to the open court. His own idea was to get on the ball quicker and hold his shots, get Russell to guess and then go the other way. However, it was a third factor that really turned things around, which was the underlying reason for Russell’s drop down the league structure; an underlying condition. Jan was playing better for sure, but the telling point came at 5-0 in the third as Russell stumbled and fell seemingly over nothing more than jelly legs. He was basically out of gas, which meant Jan’s aim was to stay focused, try to deliver his game properly rather than seeking to exploit a tiring opponent (that approach usually backfires) and see things out. Apart from one last hurrah from Russell, when he flew around the court in the fourth to claw 2-6 back to 6-6, he was running on empty. The end of the fourth proved to be the end of the match, Russell offering his hand to give Jan a 12-15, 7-15, 15-5, 15-8, retired victory.