Lives in Cricket No 34 - Frank Mitchell

109 A column in ‘The Cricketer’ the benefit of spectators have even more merit. He disliked the lottery of the benefit match when the rain might wash away a cricketer’s hopes of future security. He took as his example Andrew Sandham’s benefit at The Oval when rain fell for nearly two days before any gate money could be taken. He proposed that counties instead should keep back a proportion of a cricketer’s wages each year, and add in some of their own money to provide a firmer financial base. Then he was a great advocate for umpires, a role which he perhaps took on after he had himself starting umpiring in minor matches in London and Kent and when he could learn for himself the need for constant alertness ball after ball, over after over. He wanted umpires to be paid as if they were still professional cricketers. Four letters from him to The Times urging better arrangements and in particular better pay and travelling expenses for umpires were to be published from 1930 to 1934. Again he was on this issue a man well ahead of his generation, though his suggestion that the pay of professional players be reduced to enable that of umpires to be increased would not have been well received. Amateurism On the virtues of amateurs he initially took the Lord Hawke approach. Writing in the Spring Annual of The Cricketer 1928 he wrote ‘ For some reason the amateur class in Yorkshire cricket is now of selling plate and not classic form as was the case in 1900.Then eight amateurs were available who would be welcome in any team. Now recourse is had to what may be called figureheads.’ On professionals he said ‘There is not a word to be said against the professional of today, but the position is such that it is difficult for him to sit in judgement on fellow players.’ But sitting in the Lord’s pavilion he was not correct to say ‘There are no more charming relations in the world than those that obtain between amateur and professional cricketers. The little differences in the treatment of each body are of no account. I am convinced that both sides are content to have things as they are.’ By September 1930 he was maybe forecasting the possibility of the end for both Gentlemen and Players: ‘The amateur is going to the wall......High taxation and the cost of living are causing those to work who otherwise might have been able to give a few years to the game. Surely some young men might well consider the advisability of taking up cricket as a profession instead of going into other situations not so well paid. The Australians are receiving £600 each for the trip plus all expenses. Theirs is an enviable position compared to many thousands of amateurs who struggle on for £250 or so working long hours in offices. Times have so changed that there is no stigma whatever attached to the cricket professional so that it might well be worthwhile for some of those who possess real cricket ability stepping out into the open and turning their talents to account.’ Was he wistfully looking back to the 1901 season when he had been so successful and yet turned away from regular involvement in the game to live and work in South Africa? Was he also considering some of the circumstances of his own bankruptcy?