Lives in Cricket No 25 - Tom Richardson

26 Groundsman Walker ruefully survived the wreckage: two tons of water have I put on it, but had I been told about that young fast bowler from Surrey, I fancy I would have given it another ten. 51 It was in this match that accusations of throwing first emerged. ICC’s fifteen-degree regulation was more than a century away and at a time when the distinction between bowling and throwing and the relative roles of the wrist and the elbow in the bowling action were less well defined, Richardson was one of several bowlers whose actions were deemed to be suspect and led two years later to the establishment of a Doubtful Delivery Sub-Committee. Among suspects were Arthur Mold of Lancashire and C.B.Fry. Earlier there had been John Crossland and George Nash, also of Lancashire and later, the Australian, Ernest Jones. Rev R.S.Holmes, however, had few doubts. If I were selecting the teamto do battle for England just now, Flowers and Richardson would have to be reckoned with. Mention should be made of sundry adverse comments passed at Trent Bridge on Richardson’s delivery especially when he sent down his fast yorker. “A throw,” said the Notts cricketers; a throw said most of the representatives of the Fourth Estate. “What is a throw?” asked I of one of them in return and not one of them could give me any satisfactory answer. I watched the Surrey bowler with a terrier-like scrutiny and Richard Daft did the same. Would it be credited that neither of us suspected his delivery before hearing this outcry, and that subsequently we could discover no grounds for the charge? I feel it to be my duty most emphatically to protest against this clamour; is it fair to a young bowler thus to affix a black mark to him? If anyone can throw and keep a stiff elbow then bowling may be throwing and vice versa; but a throw is quite impossible by any movement of the wrist alone and Richardson simply gives a flick of the wrist when he puts down his express. 52 Neither the Nottinghamshire batsmen nor Wisden were as convinced: The victory was brought about by the amazingly effective fast bowling of Richardson, who took in all fourteen wickets for 145 runs. This was an extraordinary performance, but we are bound to add that several of the Notts players – not, we think, without good reason – questioned the fairness of the very fast ball with which he obtained most of his wickets. 53 and again: Into the question of his delivery we do not feel called upon to enter at any great length. We are certainly of opinion that the Notts players had ample reason to take exception to the fairness of his very fast ball in the match at Trent Bridge on Whit Monday, and we happen to know that, though he escaped no-balling, one of the umpires was strongly of opinion that on occasion he threw. In subsequent matches, when 51 Cricket 1 June 1893 52 Cricket 1 June 1893 53 1894 p 109 1892-94 Surrey...and England