Cricket Witness No 4 - Women at the WIcket

127 exhibition of technical skill’, ‘miraculous’ catches, and ‘brilliancy in every department of the game’. For many commentators, the novelty status of the sport had now evaporated entirely, leading to detailed analysis of play and unadulterated appreciation of their sporting talent. 10 In fact, The Oval was the epicentre for women’s spectator sport that year, as four months earlier 9,000 hockey fans watched England beat Germany. The WCA’s emphasis on maintaining traditional feminine attire proved tactful. Those who did comment on dress or ‘traditional’ female qualities praised players’ ‘feminine grace’ and ‘genial splendour’, but also acknowledge long-standing falsehoods concerning women’s bodily capabilities. ‘The normal spectator no doubt approached the ground with the impression that he would be granted no more than a curious experience of ladies attempting to achieve something beyond their physical power’, one Times journalist remarked, but instead lauded the ‘technical efficiency’ of the players, which ‘made the thought of a [men’s] county match seem humdrum.’ It was common for reporters to express surprise that women could even throw a ball, dispelling an ‘age-long legend’. Male spectators frequently noted how they had expected to ‘scoff’ at the game – anticipating a humorous imitation of the real thing – but stayed to cheer as complete converts. 11 So confident were players in their ability to change opinions through their performance that future England captain Molly Hide asked one reporter, ‘I wonder how many of those who say they don’t like it have seen it?’ The tour proved a complete success for English women’s cricket, regardless of the one-all draw. Over 5,000 spectators (mainly older men) had attended the first test at Northampton and about 4,000 at the second in Blackpool – figures that rival international matches in the 21st century. 12 Following its completion the MCC, the sport’s governing body, donated £25 to the Association – the first financial assistance it gave to organised women’s cricket. The recently knighted ‘Grand Old Man’ of cricket, the former England captain Sir Pelham Warner, wrote to the WCA expressing his confidence in the game’s future following the tour’s ‘happy result.’ Support was also issued from other leading authorities in the sport. Neville Cardus, English cricket’s leading journalist in the interwar years, paid tribute to their skilful play in the Manchester Guardian, arguing they ‘must have convinced the most stubborn die-hards that women cricketers can be as skilful and as natural as tennis or hockey players.’ 13 The significance of cricket now appearing ‘natural’ for women was, of course, in stark contrast to their early detractors who had painted the game as uncivilised and physically damaging. Cardus had called overarm bowling for woman a ‘wonder’ just one year previously. High Society magazines like The Queen , which rarely features team sports, declared the prejudice and stigma associated with the game now permanently expelled. Many journalists made favourable comparisons to leading men’s players. Joan Davis was named ‘Woolley of the Wicket’ after English all-rounder Frank Woolley, and Australia’s spinner Peggy Antonio was labelled ‘Girl Grimmett’ after leg-spinner Clarrie Grimmett. The game became so ‘The idea a girl cannot play cricket has proved to be rubbish’