EW Swanton: Sri Lanka's marvellous success is worthy of salute (2 Sep 1998)

2 September 1998

Sri Lanka's marvellous success is worthy of salute

By E.W.Swanton

THE subject that is imperative today is the warmest congratulations to Sri Lanka for as conclusive a victory as could be imagined, the details of which to English eyes and ears hold sad, salutary lessons. Our opponents confirmed at the Oval that the uninhibited freedom of their batting, which brought them victory in the World Cup, expresses their enjoyment of the game as naturally at Test level as at any other.

In these sophisticated, deeply-analytical days of "counselling" and over-emphasis on physical fitness their attitude was refreshing to a degree. Nor was it any surprise to those of us who were struck by the great zest for the game at all ages when, during our journeys by sea to Australia, we stopped off for a one-day match at Colombo. As the West Indies and Pakistan have enlarged the Test scene since the war, so now have Sri Lanka to the great benefit of cricket.

As for the performance of Muralitharan, one could only marvel and admire as perfect an exhibition of the art of slow bowling as has ever been seen in this country. Shane Warne is a master of back-of-the-hand wrist-spin. This Sri Lankan uses an extraordinarily flexible wrist to baffle from a model length with constant changes of flight and degree of spin.

The one proper regret English supporters can have is that the pitch produced was almost guaranteed to be of the least benefit to Stewart's fast and fast-medium attack. They have, however, another self-inflicted wound to stomach in the surly comments of coach David Lloyd which once again in defeat have caught him completely off balance.

Let me add one thought for future enlargement in the light of the utter paucity of English slow bowling as emphasised in the winter tour selections. Sir Alec Bedser tells me that when he asked two eminent Australians, Arthur Morris and Neil Harvey, what should be done to improve English cricket they answered emphatically: "Take the covers off the pitches."

NONE of cricket's perennial problems, important though several are, is so crucial as the threat by TV coverage to the authority of the umpire. A week ago Ted Dexter declared in these columns that the job of umpiring Test cricket with honour and dignity has become impossible. The views of a great cricketer still close to the modern game demand all respect and his comment reflects a general depression among followers. But the umpire's function must not be made impossible, for the conduct of the game can only be regulated by the umpires, supported by the captains, and with the ultimate arbitration of the referee.

Cannot the International Cricket Council bring umpires more closely into the scheme of things? They could do so with higher remuneration and full security, with continued National Grid sponsorship if available. The maintenance of their status is essential to preserve discipline on the field, in collaboration with the referee. Let the third umpire continue to decide on camera evidence, close run-out cases, disputed catches and the comparatively minor matter of stops on the boundary. These are measurable matters. Where I believe the bowler's umpire must continue to make up his own mind is on the matter of lbw; as one reader put it, the only camera that matters is the retina in the umpire's eye. Here, surely, his eye and instinct must prevail, the batsman, of course, getting the benefit of the doubt.

If any amateur theorist is sufficiently interested, anyone bowling towards three parallel strings stretched end to end from the stumps may be surprised, for instance, by the fact that a good length ball, delivered from the middle of the bowling crease which pitches on the off stump and pursues a straight course will only hit middle-end-leg. If it swings or turns in it will almost certainly miss leg stump. By contrast, any bias from leg to off has the angle in its favour. It is a matter of geometry.

After which diversion let me add that the ICC must ensure that the list of Test umpires, most of all for series-deciders, is confined to those few who have earned the confidence of players and referees. Such a criticism would have precluded the appointment of Javed Akhtar.

OPINION is sharply divided on the decision of the MCC Committee to seek a third vote and the second within six months on the admission of women to membership. Having voted in favour in February, though my inclination was certainly to allow the dust to settle until the millennium, I naturally hope the resolution goes through. Tony Wreford and his working party have produced a thorough presentation, the important difference this time being the emphasis on the prospect held out of women cricketers playing under the colours of MCC against girls' and women's schools, universities and clubs. MCC's admirable new ground at Shenley in Hertfordshire would be ideal for this purpose. The stimulus to women's cricket would be reflected in an increase in the number of games-minded teachers to coach in mixed schools both public and state.

The volley of critical letters in last Thursday's Daily Telegraph surely emphasised the deep and powerful instinct against political correctness. By contrast, the word from Lord's is that early membership indications seem to be favourable. We shall see.

Need I say that MCC Members and all who know how much the club does for cricket will take for what it is worth the unadulterated insult voiced by a 'fellow' columnist on these pages on Monday.

I write as a long-standing supporter of women's cricket, an admirer of the stately captain, Molly Hide, and one who saw poor Betty Snowball at the Oval against Australia run out for 99. There is a pleasing grace among the best players, and their manners might be a good example to - well, you name them.

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