Lives in Cricket No 39 - Alec Watson

74 it is perhaps not surprising that Watson’s action, if indeed he followed Buchanan’s precepts closely, was subject to suspicion. In The Cricket Field interview Watson remarked that he bowled the ‘off ball’ only now and then, relying rather more on the straight ball to defeat the batsman. The percentage of victims that he took bowled or lbw would seem to confirm that. Was that surprisingly sparing use in response to suspicions about his ‘off ball’ expressed to him, or was its only occasional use the reason why suspicion was not expressed more openly? Also, in an appendix to Watson’s obituary in the Manchester Guardian on 28 October, 1920, ‘Cricketer’ mentions Alec’s ‘shooter’. He writes that there was a ‘myth’ that Watson could bowl a shooter ‘at will’. While Alec no doubt did bowl shooters from time to time, ‘Cricketer’, probably rightly, attributes that to the roughness of the pitches, particularly during the early part of his career. Even on today’s more placid pitches the occasional shooter causes consternation. Note also from above that Buchanan’s ‘bias’ ball, while apparently coming more quickly off the pitch, also had a tendency to shoot along it; the whole arm being involved in the action. However, I suspect that, although Alec may have produced shooters slightly more often than others, any wilfulness was unlikely. Such would have produced a truly formidable bowler. Even so, this whole ‘myth’ may have contributed further to suspicion about Watson’s bowling action. As I tried to make clear in my description of Watson’s playing career, year after year Wisden and others reported on Watson’s progress in the previous season. Generally these reports recorded success for Alec, but, while they may not have been excessively glowing, they were not critical either. Also it must be remarked that Wisden tended to have a great deal to say about batsmen, particularly amateur ones, but, following the ethos of the time, had relatively little to say about the ‘poor bloody infantry’, the professional bowler. Of course that is a simplification, but it might explain the relatively brief and less than fulsome reports on a successful bowler. Be that as it may, it must be emphasised that there was no overt criticism of Watson’s bowling action in these reports, so one must look elsewhere for clues of concern. The cricket press, including Wisden , were given considerable opportunity to have their say on unfair bowling as it concerned the Nash and Crossland issue, touched on earlier. George Nash was a slow left-arm bowler, while John Crossland was right-arm fast, sometimes very fast. Neither had been born in Lancashire, Chucker?