Cricket 1913

M a y 10, 1913. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 181 Cricket Chirps. (B y E. H. D. S e w e ll. ) Judging by some of the gloomy statements which have been made, this year anyone who plays, thinks, or writes cricket ought to be shot for a common nuisance. The game exists no longer, or what there is of it needs such a spring- cleaning as would make it quite unrecognisable, and, paren­ thetically, anything but cricket. Such is the cry of the miscrables who are permitted, when “ copy” is lacking, to sully the pages of the daily press with all kinds of cock-and- bull notions for the cure of imaginary evils, until one really wonders where and how siuch prophets of evil were dragged up. “ Cricket is dead,” say the croakers. 44,717 people paid to see the fifth Test Match at the Oval last August, says Wisden. In the teeth of such evidence, how some of the drivel about “ loss of interest” and “ need for brightening the game ” is kept out of the wastepaper-basket is past all understanding. It cannot be too often or too clearly stated that there is n o t h in g w r o n g w i t h t h e gam e. But there is something wrong with the management thereof in certain places, and it is equally sure that there are very many members of elevens of the first-class counties who have no valid claim to the title of first-class cricketer. Here it is the discerning British Public steps in by stepping out of the county grounds. But this fact does not go very far towards proving to us that cricket is dead, or to justify asking our legislators to alter certain fundamental laws of the game. Indeed, it is from over-legislation the game has suffered for years. And the very best thing that could happen now would be a declaration from St. John’s Wood to the effect that, for a decade at least, no alteration to any law of the game will receive even the consideration of the M.C.C. Properly played—which, by some of the aforesaid third-class cricketers it is not—the first-class game is still good enough and attractive enough. As we see annually when elevens made up mostly of first-class players are in opposition. ; have year after year failed to attract the public to see them play. The public has said emphatically: “ Don’t want them 1 ” And if they are retained the result will be to drive the public still further away. I confess I cannot follow the logic which demands their retention. They used to have to pay sixpence—when a sixpenny-bit was worth sixpence—to see “ W. G .” bat and bowl and field. Today they are asked to pay sixpence—when a sixpenny-bit is worth only fivepence ha’penny and a bit—to see —•— a n d ----- and ------- (the task of filling up the blanks I ’d rather leave to you!) walk about in white flannels; and, simply, they won’t do it. Especially that of Northants! One day they come out with a scheme for the cure of all the ills of first-class cricket. The next, they publish their year’s figures, which show that in spite of having run a rare good race for the Champion­ ship, their own county people won’t go to see them play. On what grounds do Northants base the prophecy that if their public won’t watch them play three-day cricket, with reasonable hours of play per diem, the same public will (lock to see them play two-day cricket, with far too many hours’ play per diem? So many, in fact, that after a few matches the members of all county teams would be heartily sick of the game, no matter how keen they were. If, further, the book proves that the good folk of North­ amptonshire won’t go to see their own men play, even when the latter are winning, in what way is that fact an induce­ ment to distant counties such as Kent, Lancashire, Somerset, or Essex to arrange matches with them? Surely, if Northants is not attractive enough for Northants, it is dull, or worse, for Lancashire or Sussex? Why should the Senior Counties lose an annual hundred pounds or so to play Northants? If it is not all too clear now that the time has come once and for ever to drop the counties which have been labelled by the British Public “ Not wanted on voyage," then it never will be. What is at least one important object for the arrange­ ment of matches between two county clubs? To further the interests of the game in both? Very well, that much granted, what good does Surrey v. Northants do to the game in either county? It leaves Surrey with, roughly, £ 150 annual loss, which they can barely afford, and Northants with a much less annual loss, which only adds to their already ample balance on the wrong side of the ledger. On these grounds it seems that Northants are working on the lines of the man who is stupid enough to back horses, and who, having backed losers all Monday and Tuesday, throws good money after bad for the rest of the week; then on payday complains that the rules of the game need alteration ! With regard to the discussion which arose after the meeting of the Advisory Board in February, I must say I approve strongly of the suggested reduction in number of the first-class counties, and hope that those who have been told rather flatly that they are not wanted will do what is always done by anyone not unduly thick-skinned who finds he is de trop. There has been a lot of indignant talk about hole-and-corner meetings and so on; but the Senior Counties have surely stood the racket long enough, and it is high time something decisive was done. Drastic ailments need drastic treatment, and it is not unfair to recall the fact that some of those who lately have shouted loudest, themselves a few years ago held a secret meeting, the object °f which was to compel some of the Senior Counties to do something they did not want to do ! Two blacks do not make a white, one knows, but these same cannot grumble 'f the Senior Counties have played them at their own game ■—and won. For there is nothing more certain than that they will win in the end. I have referred to Northants all this time because they have, rather rashly as many of us think, spoken too soon. Had they won the Championship last year and had a spank­ ing good balance to show for their labours in the cause of first-class cricket, their proposals would have carried much more weight. As it is, the first-class counties are, to put it mildly, rather bored, and I have only attempted to suggest some of the reasons which may have afforded foundation for that boredom. Surely it is illogical to doubt this? In one breath the 'dvisory Board is asked to brighten cricket, to do all sorts of weird things to wean back the public (which has NF-VER l e f t first-class cricket), and in the next it is asked to do something, viz., to retain counties whose elevens While we all admire the pertinacity of Northants in stating that they intend to fight to the death, the awkward fact has to be faced that the Senior Counties may say :— “ In future we will arrange matches only with the counties we do not play at a loss, or, with whom we choose— and let the Championship go hang I ” What then ? There can be no question that the Senior Counties have won and can hold the position. They have all the trumps. Let such counties as may elect to do so start an opposition Championship or League (the only alternative), it would not affect the Seniors a penny piece. Rather would it enrich them. Such matches as Yorkshire v. Lancashire at places in those two counties which have never seen the Yorks, or Lancs, elevens, as the case may b e; or Surrey v. I Zingari or Free Foresters, or Middlesex v. M.C.C., p'aying strictly representative sides, would amply suffice for lovers of cricket. That game never was made for, never was watched by, the