Robin Jackman: My happiest years and the Wilmot walk-off of 1972

Pace bowler Robin Jackman played for Surrey, England and Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) between 1966 and 1983. He is now a television commentator and covered the recent tour of Zimbabwe by Bangladesh. He was pleased to be back in the country where he spent what he calls the happiest years of his cricketing life, as he told CricInfo. He recalls in particular the match where he recorded his maiden first-class 50, which was also the notorious 'Wilmot Walk-off' match - Rhodesia v Eastern Province at Queens Sports Club in Bulawayo, 1972/73. Robin's 119-run partnership with Paddy Clift during that first innings remains the record for the ninth-wicket in Zimbabwean first-class cricket.

The scores were: Eastern Province 301 and 283/9 dec; Rhodesia 261 and 318/6, needing 324 to win. Lorrie Wilmot, the Eastern Province captain, led his team off the field with the final over of the match unbowled and refused to continue. The umpires awarded the match to Rhodesia in accordance with the laws of the game, but this decision was arbitrarily overturned by the South African Cricket Association - which cost Rhodesia the Currie Cup.

"This was my first year playing for Rhodesia, a period that went right through to 1980," said Jackman, taking up the story. "This was the walk-off game, which we have never, ever forgotten - nor forgiven. We feel that it actually lost us the Currie Cup, and during all the time that I played we never managed to win it. We had a good side and we didn't play as well as we should have done at times.

It was certainly a sensational match. Mike Procter was batting particularly well in the second innings with 66 not out. Paddy Clift, with whom I featured in a record partnership in the first innings - he finished on 75 not out - was there with eight in the second innings when Wilmot took the team off. I'm surprised that first-class record still stands. Jackman and Clift - I'm quite proud of that!

"Eastern Province batted first and scored 301. Wilmot had a really good game, getting runs in both innings [85 and 129]. We were in a reasonable amount of trouble, but managed to get to 261, so we had a deficit of 40. Then Wilmot got a hundred in the second innings and they declared just short of 300, for nine wickets. I remember I got three wickets in the second innings, and so did Richie Kaschula. We were set a big target, 324 to win.

"Duncan Fletcher didn't open, as he did in the first innings; Stuart Robertson opened with Jimmy Mitchell. Both were pretty aggressive players. Peter Carlstein played particularly well for 53, and Brian Davison scored a lightning 32, I do recall that. It was a long time before today's one-day internationals where you reckon that over 50 overs on a good pitch you're certainly going to score 250 or 260. Here we were being asked to get 300-odd [in 66 overs, as it turned out] and it was a hell of a performance that we got anywhere near to it.

"We were 318 when they walked off over a discrepancy over the last 20 overs. I think the most irritating part about it all was that the umpires in charge, who were Ian Forrest and Chris Sweeting, according to the laws of cricket awarded the game to us because our batsmen didn't come off; Clift and Procter stayed at the crease. The umpires called "Play" and Eastern Province weren't there to play, so they awarded the game to Rhodesia, as it was then.

"Subsequent to that, it went down to the South African Cricket Association, who decided to deduct the points we should have gained from our victory, and that ultimately cost us the Currie Cup. I think that was the most irritating thing. If Lorrie Wilmot wants to do whatever he wants to do, who am I to stop him, but as far as I am concerned, if you read up the laws, basically what the SACA had done was to take away the decision on the umpire. That's like saying, "Hang on a second, I was given out caught behind in the first innings when I didn't hit it; would you mind changing that?" That's if you want to exaggerate it and be ridiculous.

"So it was very sad. There were many celebrations that night because we thought we had won the game, but that all changed. It was all about the 20 overs in the last hour. As the South African Cricket Annual says:

'In brief, the over before drinks began 61 minutes before stumps. Umpire Sweeting is alleged to have told the bowler (Pittaway) and signaled the scorers that it was the first of the 20 mandatory overs.' [In fact, my investigations indicate that, when asked by Wilmot, Sweeting merely replied "I think so," and then spoke to the senior umpire Forrest during the drinks break.]

"Drinks followed this over, 55 minutes before the scheduled close and during drinks the umpires held a discussion and the reserve umpire was dispatched to advise the scorers that the first over after drinks was to be considered the first of the last 20. Wilmot insists that when so advised he protested to the umpires and when 19 overs had been bowled after the actual drinks interval, his team considered that the 20 overs had been bowled and he led his team off the field.

"At that stage Rhodesia only required six runs for victory and Procter (66 not out) was really on the rampage. The umpires, after calling Play three times, observed that there was no reaction from the Easterns camp, uprooted the stumps and awarded the game to Rhodesia by default.

"The case was heard by the South African Cricket Association who ruled the match was a draw and on appeal, after considering statements by both captains and umpires, and officials of the Rhodesia Cricket Union, confirmed their original ruling.

"That was the bit that was so disappointing to all of us. But it was a game I won't forget. I remember John Dye, who used to play for Kent and Northamptonshire, played in that game. He and I were the overseas professionals of the two teams. It was a rare old game of cricket."

Robin adds his comments on the Rhodesian players of that era:

"We had a good side. Jimmy Mitchell was an attacking opening batsman. I see Jack Heron didn't play in this side, and I rated him very highly.

"Duncan Fletcher opened in the first innings but not the second. I always thought he was a wonderful utility cricketer because he batted everywhere from one to ten and bowled goodish seamers. He was always a handy all-rounder to have around.

"Stuart Robertson I thought was a wonderfully elegant left-handed batsman. Peter Carlstein was full of talent, he really was. He played for South Africa when he was only 19, a really fine player. I see in the first innings be was caught and bowled by Bezuidenhout for nought; that must have just about destroyed him! 'Bezzie' wasn't even a full-time bowler.

"Mike Procter - you don't have to say any more about him; one of the greatest all-rounders who ever played the game. Brian Davison, who now lives in Tasmania, was a very hard-hitting and aggressive batsman, a very competitive cricketer and person.

"Jack du Preez played for South Africa as a leg-spinner and was a very useful batsman as well. Howie Gardiner was one of the tallest wicket-keepers I have ever seen or played with, was also a good player; he made 54 in the second innings in that run chase.

"The late Paddy Clift - and what a tragedy that is at such a young age - was a wonderful cricketer who played many years for Leicestershire as well as for Rhodesia, and then for Natal. And then other than myself there was Richie Kaschula, who was possibly the most accurate left-arm spinner I have ever seen.

"So it was a really good side, and missing from it were the likes of Jack Heron, who also played at that time, and John Traicos. I see Heron played in the next home match and Dessie Evans also kept wicket in that next match, so obviously there was an injury or something to Howie.

"It was a super side and it stayed pretty much together for several years. I remember John Shepherd coming out somewhere around 1978, and he replaced me - it was a question of which of the two of us was to play and they went for the all-rounder, which was fine. Grahame Clinton and Barry Dudleston came from overseas as well and they played a few games at the back end of the seventies.

"But by and large that side played virtually through the 70s, and it was a very good and competitive team. We had a tremendous amount of fun, too, real fun. It wasn't as professional as it is now; we didn't get played for paying for Rhodesia, although I got paid for coming over and coaching. Everybody had jobs otherwise, and off we went and played. It was an honour and it was a tremendous amount of fun.

"We went on a Christmas tour every year down to Cape Town, Port Elizabeth and Durban, a three-week tour. The games in those days were three-day games, with a rest day on the Sunday. Those were days I'll never forget, possibly the happiest cricketing days of my life. My wife always says that the eight years or so we spent in Rhodesia were certainly the happiest we can remember.

"The people were fantastic and that hasn't changed, and here we are nearly 30 years down the road. From that point of view everybody is just as hospitable as they always used to be, and it was always great to come back. That's why I did it for eight years. My happiest holiday place is Kariba, and I just love it here.

"I disagree that I became a little less effective as the years went by, because I played for England in 1981, so I was actually getting better. I only had one winter break, 1980 because it was my benefit year, and then I got called up in 1981 to go to West Indies. I got better as I grew older, until my body eventually gave way at the age of 37.

"I thought that cricket 12 months of the year was good for me, so that's why I did it and kept doing it. It didn't make me any more tired; I bowled more overs the older I got. I went back to Surrey and had my better years at the end of the 70s and early 80s, so it helped me more than anything to play 12 months of the year."

Robin was asked to compare his Rhodesian team of the seventies with the Zimbabwe side of today, in view of John Traicos' view that the team of the 70s was much stronger.

"To compare eras is very difficult, if not unfair, but it's something that everybody does. If you look at that side that played in the 70s, yes, it was strong, but it didn't win too much. If you tried to put all those people together and then play them against this current side, all of the same age, I think it would be a good contest.

"There are some names that jump out of there that make you go "Wow" - Procter, Davison, Robertson and guys like that - but you must also look at a few names you've got around here right now - Streak; Andy Flower, who's one of the leading batsmen in the world at Test level.

"I wouldn't necessarily agree with what John Traicos says. I think that the experience these guys have got now is crucial, but whether that 70s side would have beaten the current side when they first started to play Test cricket I wouldn't necessarily argue. But this team now, from what I see of it, no matter who they're performing against, are very credible and they have some excellent cricketers.

"So I don't think one can say that that side of the 70s was better than today's team."