Famous Cricketers No 68 - Fred Tate

His figures for the first two months of the season are worth quoting – May: 44 wickets at 14.68, June: 63 at 8.69 and yet no less an authority than H.S.Altham, writing of the 1902 season, described him as “steady but by no means deadly”! There is and was a perfectly valid case for Tate’s selection for England. When he took the field at Old Trafford on a damp July 24 (his 35th birthday) his record was 128 wickets at 13.57. Of his England colleagues, Rhodes had at this stage of the season the same number of wickets at 12.55; Braund 100 at 18.75. Among those not selected Barnes 72 at 19.09, Haigh 91 at 11.27, Hirst 62 at 18.12, J.T.Hearne 72 at 17.38. Barnes had a suspect knee and, by his own account had not been able to “put everything into my bowling” in the second innings of the previous Test match at Bramall Lane. According to his biographer Leslie Duckworth, Barnes did not feel his knee was strong enough for selection at Old Trafford. Whether he told the selectors is unclear. The choice of Haigh had, as we have seen, apparently been vetoed by Lord Hawke. The most common line among the critics is that Hirst should have played in place of Tate. Possibly; Hirst was of course a truly great all-rounder, but after a good start to the season he had taken only eleven wickets at 45.72 since the end of June. The Australians had played him easily in the Bramall Lane Test match where his figures were 0-99 from 25 overs. He was considered by some to have temporarily “lost his swerve” and, like Lockwood, he would have had difficulty with the footholds on the first morning. This would have reduced the pre-lunch bowling options to Rhodes, Jackson and Braund. When Tate came on as first change Trumper and Duff were already on the rampage. The former had twice hit Rhodes into the practice ground. Like the rest of the attack – except Lockwood who was not used because of the wet run ups – Tate appears to have been instructed to bowl short outside the off stump. The plan was to contain the batsmen until the wicket dried and became sticky. It was not one of Maclaren’s better ‘cunning plans’. At lunch Australia were 173-1, Trumper 103*. After lunch the footholds dried and Lockwood (6-48) came into his own. Tate’s involvement was confined to a good regulation slip catch. According to at least one modern author Tate’s bowling was “carted all over the field”. In fact, Lockwood apart, he was the most economical. Much has been written of Tate’s dismissal four runs short of victory on the final day but his contribution in England’s first innings is totally overlooked. Batting number eleven, he helped Jackson (128) add 27, the second highest partnership of the innings. When Australia batted again Tate was not given a chance until after his fateful missed catch. When he did get on and was allowed to bowl at the wicket in his accustomed style, he dismissed Gregory (second top scorer with 24) and Trumble, both lbw. He also caught Hopkins at slip off Lockwood’s bowling. As to why Tate found himself in the unaccustomed position of deep square leg there are several versions. One has it that when the right handed Gregory hit a single from the fifth ball of Braund’s over giving the strike to left-hander Darling, Maclaren refused the bowler’s request to move Palairet - now on the off side - to deep square for one ball and instead removed Tate from the slips. This may be so, but with Hill at number three and Darling four there had been a left-hander at the wicket since Trumper was first out with the total 7. It was now 16-3 so if there was a problem it can hardly have just arisen. Another version has Maclaren sending Tate to the boundary rather than move Palairet from short leg. Maclaren himself in a letter to The Times in 1919 asserts that (a) Braund did not have a slip (odd considering he bowled leg breaks) and (b) originally Palairet was at deep fine leg with Tate on the boundary in front of square and that it was at Braund’s request they were changed over. In any event, Darling hit with the spin and Tate missed a skyer as have many before and since. Aside from the Test match, Tate’s relative lack of success against the Australians continued until the final match of the season when, bowling unchanged through both innings, his 2-61 and 6-48 included Darling, Trumper, Duff, Gregory and Armstrong. For his county against the tourists he failed to take a wicket but batted usefully remaining undefeated for 22 and helping to add 40 for the last two wickets. At Lord’s he dismissed Middlesex twice in a day, taking 7-28 and 8-40, bowling unchanged from start of play to 4.45 while three bowlers alternated at the other end. He was unchanged again for all but one over at Trent Bridge where his return of 12-76 was arguably his best of the season given the strength of the opposition. He also took 13-117 against Leicestershire including 9-73 in the first innings as well as 12-135 v Somerset, 11-101 v Hampshire, ten wickets twice, nine twice and eight four times. 38