Mickey Mouse is killing Test game
I apologise if readers think I am simply repeating Sir Geoffrey Boycott’s excellent post-first Test column, but in light of the conspicuous batting weaknesses England showed in winning at Lord’s, the thrust of the great Yorkshireman’s argument is unanswerable. As he wrote, “youngsters should be playing more, not less” first-class cricket.
Sir Geoffrey was provoked – as was I – by comments from Rob Key, the new director of England cricket, that the first-class programme should be cut from the present mere (and inadequate) 14 matches a year to 10. All that was missing from the argument was any rationality, logic or what we used to call common sense.
Indeed, the only justification Key could give for this bonkers proposal is that a month’s worth of Mickey Mouse cricket – what Sir Geoffrey calls “whack-it cricket” – has been forced into the schedules, so a month’s worth of serious cricket must come out. In other words, Key appears to have taken on his new job and, rather than tell his masters where they have gone wrong in marginalising first-class cricket, he is allowing them to tell him that their boring cash cows must take precedence. If that is so, he must be an imbecile to have taken the post on that basis; and the last thing English cricket needs is another one of those.
I could not be more delighted England won at Lord’s – not because of patriotism, but because
Test cricket will die here if our team stop providing a serious contest for their opponents and to paying customers. If anyone thinks all that was wrong in the English game is now being cured, forget it.
Fundamentals remain wrong; and until they are addressed there will be more decline and more questions over the very future of the game.
Just 253.1 overs were bowled at Lord’s, despite three full days’ cricket. There was a pitiful over-rate, which is a swindle on the public who pay through the nose for tickets. A game that took three days and half a session should have been completed in under three days, in which 270 overs had been scheduled.
New Zealand were dismissed for just 132 en route to losing, even though they bowled out England for just 141. They were plainly suffering from a similar disease to England: too much whack-it-mickey-mouse cricket.
New Zealand compiled the highest total of the match in their second innings thanks to just Daryl Mitchell and Tom Blundell; England in their first innings had only three players in double figures (and one of those, Root, made just 11) and it was just three players (Root again, Foakes and Stokes) who carried them to victory. On both sides, there is a shortage of players who have extensive, Boycott-style experience of occupying the crease.
I wonder how much longer it will be before some grounds stop trying to get a Test because if they routinely finish after three days they will cease to be viable. Given the England and Wales Cricket Board’s obsession with money, that might convince it to do something to produce a more thoughtful sort of cricketer who can bat for two days, not just for 20 overs. The haemorrhage of money from Test cricket that early finishes cause, on top of the overpriced tickets for routinely truncated days’ play, is additionally corrosive to the game. One suspects England batted as well as they did because most of their players had played some county cricket, albeit in less than ideal conditions; sadly, Jonny Bairstow (pictured) looked like a man who had come straight from the Indian Premier League. I have no desire to prevent Bairstow and others like him from earning as much as they can in their short careers, but players ought to be told that unless they turn out for their county before the Tests begin, they need not expect to be picked.
Of course, if cricket were a game of two codes – whack-it-mickeymouse and first class – this would not be an issue; and that is one of the conversations Key should have with his new employers, rather than asking them how high they would like him to jump.
When New Zealand toured in 1965, playing a three-match series, they had played six first-class three-day matches before the first Test at Edgbaston on May 27. They played four more before the second Test and four more between the second and third. One wonders how much better they would have done at Lord’s this year had they played more than just two warm-up matches on their tour, one of which (against Sussex) was half lost to rain. Although 1965 was not one of his best seasons, Sir Geoffrey played 44 first-class innings and averaged 35. Colin Cowdrey topped the season’s batting averages at 63.42, scoring 2,093 runs from 43 innings, and John Edrich averaged just under 63, scoring 2,319 runs from 44 innings. And they played on uncovered wickets.
In every walk of life, history teaches us something. Perhaps when the ECB finally comes under new management it will acquire a leader who understands this, and we shall hear no more of Key’s nonsense (after all, what if things do not get better with 10 matches? Eight? Six?). Whoever takes over, he or she would be well advised to ask Sir Geoffrey in for a serious chat about the old days.