Science Showdown Highlight Reel: An Unusually Allochthonous Game

PRESS CENTER | PRINTABLE BRACKETS | FINAL GAME: Darwin v. HIV

It was Particle versus F=ma in the Sweet Sixteen, and BBC Radio 4 LW was broadcasting with those charming accents. Fortunately, geologist Chris Rowan was there to translate. Mostly.

This is what we heard when we first dialed in...

JA: Welcome back to the final session of this very special Science Spring Showdown one day international: we've just reached the end of the tea break, and the Particle batsmen are just making their way to the crease; the F=ma team are already in position in the field, poised, eager almost.

For those of you just joining us, it looks like we could be in for a grandstand finish, a situation which did not look likely earlier in the day. F=ma won the toss and elected to bat, proceeding to post a hefty 347-3 in their 50 overs. The backbone of the innings was an unbeaten 186 from team captain Isaac Newton. Christopher Martin-Jenkins - Newton was certainly in magisterial form today.

CMJ: Afternoon Johnners, indeed he was. But then he has always led from the front: some might say that he built the Second Law team from the ground up. In past matches with General Relativity - who the winner of today's game may very well meet in the final of the Orbit bracket - he's proven a bit vulnerable to the very fastest bowlers, but today the Particles just didn't have the pace to trouble him.

JA: Very true. Nonetheless, the Particles did well to contain the Second Law to less than 350, thanks mainly to some sterling spin bowling from Wolfgang Pauli. But it was a rather thankless morning in the field for them, and then they got off to the worst possible start with the bat when they quickly lost their opening pair, and were then restricted to 95-4 after 20 overs by some very tight F=ma fielding. No matter what shot was played, there always seemed to be a fielder perfectly placed to deal with it.

Apparently, the game had something to do with bats and stepping up to bowls and wickets -- wickets? -- yes, wickets. Jonathan Agnew, Christopher Martin-Jenkins, Henry Blofeld and Geoff Boycott explain it all here.

Oh Johnners.

More like this