Lives in Cricket No 5 - Rockley Wilson

Aftermath While a present-day reader would not find the reports of Rockley Wilson and Percy Fender particularly controversial or one-sided – Wilson had roundly criticised the “sloppy fielding” of the England side in the First Test, for example – in the context of the time the strictures of The Times are understandable. MCC certainly thought some action was needed and so Wilson, Fender and the captain, J.W.H.T. Douglas, were in due course called to Lord’s to be interviewed by the President and Treasurer. Although the President reported that the “explanations given by these cricketers was satisfactory,” a critical motion was put down in the name of Sir Charles Bright 83 for discussion at the Annual General Meeting arranged for 4 May, 1921. It read “That the reporting for the Press on matches by those who take part in them is not in the best interests of Cricket, and that all possible steps should be taken to discourage the practice.” According to Wisden , the motion was carried, but it appears that the MCC Committee pre-empted any debate on the matter by referring it to the Board of Control for Test Matches. The Board took the firm line advocated by The Times . Its minutes of 19 April, 1921 record: “The Board of Control accepted a suggestion from the MCC Committee, and have advised the Selection Committee that when inviting anyone to play for England, it shall be on the condition that the player does not contribute a report or a statement of any kind to the Press, until the end of the season, as regards any Test Match for which he is selected and in which he plays.” 84 Tour contracts since then have endeavoured to control the practice: for example, the Conditions of Employment of today’s contracted England players include detailed rules governing any public statements, and any written or broadcast comments, on matches or on matters of “general cricket interest.” As it was MCC policy that required the captain to be an amateur and other amateurs to be included in the touring party, it could be argued that it was incumbent upon MCC to recognise the financial difficulties faced by some touring amateur players, perhaps by permitting more generous payment of their expenses. For a player Australia and After 87 83 Sir Charles Bright (1863-1937), whether by coincidence or not, an authority on submarine telegraphy, played minor matches for MCC and was an enthusiastic supporter of Essex. 84 There is apparently no reference to the Sir Charles Bright motion in the minutes of the A.G.M. The writer is grateful to Ms Glenys Williams, MCC Archivist and Historian, for this and other information on MCC’s actions.