EW Swanton: One-Day Legacy Threatens Future Of The Game (28 Oct 1996)

28 October 1996

One-day legacy threatens future of the game

By E W Swanton

THE future of cricket! Those of my distant generation, and of others who played the game a while after we had retired from the field, cannot but be apprehensive of developments in the years ahead.

The fear is not that cricket will decline in public interest and support. The many millions who were enthralled by the recent World Cup, and the many millions it generated in the currency of the nations involved, would seem to ensure that the instant limited-over edition is and will remain the popular recipe.

And it is foolish to be snooty about it. One-day cricket calls for many of the basic skills, though some in much lesser degree than the authorised version. Close finishes are frequent and they can be almost unbearably exciting. It`s good melodramatic theatre.

Its fundamental limitation, however, is that it denies one of the two essential objects of the game as they have been pursued for centuries, namely for the batting side to score runs and for the fielding side to take wickets. The arts and skills of the game have developed around this simple basic conflict.

No longer is this so. Under limited-over regulations the bowler who bowls his maximum 10 overs for 20 runs without taking a wicket has probably served his side better than if he had had two or three for 45. The side which in its 50 overs scores 250 for few wickets or even none is defeated by opponents who pass them with nine wickets down. After the first few overs the bowler`s role is normally purely defensive, the fielding captain`s tactics likewise. We may see thrilling fielding: speed and throwing are all. But the bowling virtues are diminished.

In my view the standard of bowling from top to bottom of the game in England is depressingly low, and I hold the proliferation of one-day cricket from the beginning of the Seventies chiefly to blame. What has changed is the general psychology of the bowler. The old `uns knew they had to bowl the enemy out before they could take their boots off.

Other factors have also affected the attitude of the firstclass bowler. The covering of pitches, which started in 1981, deprived the game, according to the Editor of Wisden in that year, of `a part of the very heritage of English cricket - a drying pitch and a sizzling sun`. That extreme apart, full covering, denying the turf the gifts of nature, has helped to make for a dull surface, lacking in life. Nor has the jump from three Championship days to four encouraged bowlers to attack. Unless they find a pitch to give real help they are inclined to plug away with little thought or experiment, waiting for the batsman to commit some indiscretion.

I believe that most of the retired county cricketers now in their sixties and beyond - especially, perhaps, those of Yorkshire and Lancashire whence I have always looked so much for cricket wisdom - would largely agree with this analysis.

I think I still see sufficient Test and county cricket to judge that there is far too much hitting across the line of the ball rather than through it, and as for the sweep shot in its varieties, it is surely overdone

As to the effects of so much one-day cricket on English batting technique - and remember that a county`s chief batsmen play almost as many one-day as first-class innings - the style of play has led to a lessening of respect for orthodox principles. Coaches must take considerable blame here, many of them being far too keen on endless physical fitness routines at the expense of net practice. The best way of getting fit for cricket is to bat and bowl in the nets, and, of course, to catch and throw. Was it not Winston Churchill who, inspecting troops in the war and being told by an exercise-fanatic officer: `Must get them fit, sir,` asked, `Fit for what?` I think I still see sufficient Test and county cricket to judge that there is far too much hitting across the line of the ball rather than through it, and as for the sweep shot in its varieties, it is surely overdone.

To moderns inclined to think otherwise I would ask this: how do they account for the lack of great English batsmen and bowlers coming through since the plethora of one-day cricket, covered pitches and the four-day formula became the order of the day? If they are thinking of such names as Ian Botham and the three Gs - Gower, Gooch and Gatting - all were already spreading their wings before I retired as Cricket Correspondent in 1975.

BUT enough of cricket problems. My concluding note must be of deep thankfulness for my life in cricket, for all that it has brought me in so many ways. Old men forget, Duff Cooper thought, and of much this is mercifully true. But so deeply happy are many cricket recollections that for me they remain wonderfully clear.

The luckiest thing I ever did was to found the Arabs. We celebrated our Diamond Jubilee, courtesy of Mr J P Getty, last summer on his lovely ground at Wormsley, and I am deeply grateful for friendships in every generation. I can go back even before the first Arabs of the 1930s to favourite cricketers of the 1920s whom I came to admire not only on the field but subsequently off it: to paraphrase Francis Thompson,

As the run stealers flicker to and fro - to and fro Oh, my Hobbs and my Woolley long ago.

Fond memories too of so many grounds and places: Barbados and Adelaide, the Oxford Parks, Fenner`s at Cambridge, the Saffrons at Eastbourne pre-war, Beckenham on either side of it, Trent Bridge, much-lamented Bramall Lane and the Oval, each with its own atmosphere, St Lawrence, Canterbury, most gracious and beautiful of county grounds.

Lord`s, however, is for me a place apart, a home from home, hallowed as only the richest of histories can make it, both a symbol of the past and, surely, a pledge for the future. I have known Lord`s, of course, from several aspects, first and always as a reporter, as a probationer, as a member privileged to play there, as serving on Committees dating from the late 1960s to the present, and finally as a Life Vice-President with the privileges that go with that great honour.

From such a fortunate perspective my opinion may be rated as of limited worth. Nevertheless, let me express the estimation that over the 60 years of my membership MCC has never been in such good shape as it is today. A collection of men of high ability and distinction - to mention names would be invidious - have been in office in recent years and, if annual general meetings, dinners and the mood at great matches are true guides, their commitment is reflected in the membership generally. As to the ground itself, we may surely be thankful that the rebuilding of so much of the accommodation has not changed its character. Lord`s is still a cricket ground, not a stadium.

Since the devolution of authority in 1968 the relationship between Marylebone and the TCCB, of which is it a constituent member, has not until recently been as harmonious as it might, indeed should have been. Thankfully the difficult days are over and I hope and trust that the men who are shaping the future Board appreciate the experience and co-operation which the Club is able and anxious to provide. I rate as highly auspicious in this and all respects the key appointments recently made of Lord McLaurin as Chairman and Tim Lamb as Chief Executive.

It is the truest of axioms about cricket that the game is as good as those who play it, to which should be added surely those who guide and administer it. Those who play it respond to positive leadership: the captain must be the clear boss, responsible for the spirit and attitude of his team, from the England eleven downwards. Behind the scenes I would suggest the time is ripe for some fresh blood: such names as Acfield, Barclay, Lloyd, Graveney, Nicholas occur to me as being men of sound instinct and ideas. If the traditional game is to be preserved and to flourish it is the forties generation who must see to it. Good luck to them!

Source :: Electronic Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk)