In a tiny part of England a group of men are under siege. They are clinging conspiratorially to rules that have bound them, and their predecessors, for hundreds of years, and will not give up without a fight. They are the 17,500 or so members of the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC). These men rule the heart of English cricket at Lord's in London; but a small group of women has them in their sights.
As cricket clubs across Britain have relaxed their rules and admitted women as members, the MCC during its 211-year history has resolutely refused to allow women to don the "bacon and eggs" style club tie that is the preserve of their members.
For the most part, however, the admission of women has never really been an issue. MCC man - who is as likely to be a member of the local Rotary Club or Freemason Lodge as he is to be a former prime minister - has not had to bother about women roaming the hallowed corridors of Lord's cricket ground. They never wanted to join, never mind play, the game: that is, until now.
Later today, the MCC will vote for the second time in 209 days on whether to admit the enemy through the gates of Lord's, and by all accounts the outcome is a foregone conclusion. The old brigade has taken its last gasp. More and more women are taking up the sport and observers say it looks as if women will join the men in the members' bar after all.
It has been a long and weary fight, even though the last vote on women's membership was less than comprehensively defeated last February. Then, a ballot to admit women as members was won by 6,969 votes to 5,538 but failed to secure the two-thirds majority required by the club's rules.
The ban on women members has sparked off a public debate that at times degenerated into a gladiator-style battle of the sexes. "We have never admitted women, why should we change now?" cries MCC man.
Accusations of political correctness, New Labour modernisation and downright browbeating have been heard at the MCC. Even Wisden Cricket Monthly, the sport's bible, recently attempted to shake-up the old guard at the MCC when it published a women's issue with a woman in cricket gear on the front cover. No doubt some MCC members promptly cancelled their subscriptions.
However, the MCC vote is as much about money as it is about women. Since the club rejected the former England women's cricket captain, Ms Rachael Heyhoe-Flint, for membership in 1991, despite the support of the late cricket commentator, Brian Johnston, it has been denied £4.5 million in National Lottery funding on the recommendation of the Sports Council, partly because of the ban on women. As a result the MCC has been forced to go to its members to raise the cash for the last big building project at Lord's. Ms Heyhoe-Flint and others have pointed out that members cannot go on digging into their pockets forever. Rejecting female members is also likely to expose the MCC to other difficulties, legal and financial. New legislation on sex discrimination and access to facilities for women could see the MCC facing prosecution if it continues to impose the ban. Observers say the club has found it increasingly difficult to attract high profile sponsors because of the issue. As a result of the accumulation of opposition , the reformers at the MCC have gained some ground and a recent MORI poll, which claimed that members voted against admitting women because they did not fully appreciate their impact at the club, has justified their position.
Mr Colin Ingleby-Mackenzie, the president of the MCC, is keen to impress upon members the significance of the vote before next year's cricket World Cup in Britain when the eyes of the world will be focused on Lord's. He believes that women will "greatly enhance" the atmosphere at the MCC and has set about producing a glossy brochure full of former opponents who have been won over by the Yes camp.
The American billionaire, Sir Paul Getty, is one of them. He is quoted in the brochure slapping his own wrist for not appreciating "how this issue impacts on MCC's public role". In other words, the MCC hasn't got a hope of securing Lottery funding or fighting off legal action if it doesn't let the girls have their way.
Ms Heyhoe-Flint is hopeful. Women have been playing cricket on equal terms with men for many years. Although they face a possible 18-year waiting list to join the MCC, she is quite prepared to wait for the honour. For its part, the Sports Council has indicated that if the MCC does vote to admit women it will look more favourably on recommending Lottery funding.
If MCC man can overcome his hang-up about women, who knows, the ladies' team might even beat the men's!