G&C 259
GOOGLIES & CHINAMEN
An Occasional Cricketing Journal
Edition 259
July 2024
Spot the Ball
Modern Cricket Introductions
It was a bold move by the ICC to spread the hosting of the recent T20 WC from the Caribbean onto mainline USA. As usual with the Americans, they added their own twist to proceedings which included locating snipers at the ground in New York to deal with any miscreants present.
This seems an excellent development in the modern game and could sensibly be added to matches held in the UK. The snipers could be instructed to take pot shots at any or all of the following:
Anyone dressed up in parties of four or more as vicars
Anyone seen holding a snake of plastic beer mugs
Anyone who starts singing Sweet Caroline
Anyone in the Hollies Stand at Edgbaston
Anyone in the West Stand at Headingley
All persons participating in a Conga
Anyone old enough to think that it is still cool to start a Mexican Wave
Out & About with the Professor
OK, so we all know about T20, don’t we? Bish, Bash, Bosh, and the ball disappears into the stands, or over them; some synthetically excited commentator shouts “Maximum!”; fireworks go off; ear-splitting music erupts; and the “Go-Go” dancers, well, Go-Go.
But not this time, not in this World Cup, or, at least, not that often. The huge totals, regularly reported in this journal by our Editor, scored in the IPL and similar competitions, have hardly been in evidence and those staggering run-rates only achieved by teams (like England against Oman…run rate of 16.1) who knocked off small totals in very few balls.
Why? Well the pitches and the weather must play some part, the artificiality, perhaps, of some of those scores (shirt-front tracks and short boundaries) but also, the bowlers. This has been a bowlers World Cup…and none the worse for that.
Some pitches were very poor, of course, especially that in New York State, and a number of games were affected by the weather: delayed, interrupted or washed out completely. I read, before England’s semi-final, that June was the wettest month in Guyana. So why play there? The answer appeared to be that India wanted to, and that seems to constitute a decisive argument in world cricket these days.
But what of the cricket? I doubt that many Googlies’ readers saw all the games but I guess we all saw a few and the impression, perhaps in the early games, was a little underwhelming, moreover the two semi-finals were very one-sided affairs. But the final was a cracking game, wasn’t it - just the sort of match that T20 was made for - with the possibilities of victory going from one side to the other on several occasions. It is often said (not least by me in these pages) that Test cricket permits this kind of ebb and flow but the immediate nature of T20 doesn’t. Not so…at least in this match. Finals are often a disappointment, but this one wasn’t and, I think most would agree, the best side won.
I recall, many years’ ago, when twenty over competitions were getting started, that the demise of leg break bowling was announced. No team would have a leggie in such a match - they would just be slogged out of sight. Could the “pundits” have been more wrong? Wrist spin has played a crucial role in T20 for years now and in this World Cup, England, Australia, and Afghanistan, amongst others, have looked to their wrist spin bowler not just to take wickets but to slow the run-rate down. On slow pitches the quicker bowlers seemed easier to score from while those of slightly less pace, and considerably more variation (like Southee, Kami and Bolt) were more successful. The standout exception was, of course, Bumrah, whose 15 wickets @ 8.3 with an economy of 4.17 seemed, if anything, to understate his impact on India’s success. He played in eight games and bowled beautifully in the later stages against (obviously) more challenging opposition. The pitches were helpful, of course, but to watch great bowling is (or one might suggest, should be) as interesting as watching the ball flying out of the ground.
I suppose, in the end, that some abiding memories of this competition (apart from the upsets of Afghanistan v Australian and USA v Pakistan) will be in the field. There have been some spectacular catches, not least that of Yadav in the final, and the two run outs by wicket keepers, throwing down the stumps at the bowler’s end were quite stunning.
So, in the end, a successful, if a little muted, World Cup, and a fair result.
This & That
After the magnificent batting and high scoring of the IPL the T20WC was in direct contrast with bowlers dominating in the main and scores decidedly on the low side. There were fourteen hundreds scored in the 2024 IPL (in admittedly more matches) whilst no one reached three figures in the recent T20WC. The highest individual score was Nicholas Pooran’s 98 for the West Indies against Afghanistan. He hit eight sixes in this innings which included three in the fourth over of the innings which conceded 36 in total, a record total for an over in T20WC cricket.
But this hitting was relatively rare and in the early stages the minnow nations were generally bundled out for low scores, particularly in the US based fixtures. For New Zealand against Papua & New Guinea, Lockie Ferguson took three wickets in his four overs without conceding a run.
There were three hat tricks performed in the later stages of the competition, two by Pat Cummins and the other by the evergreen, thirty-six-year-old, Chris Jordan. All three were performed in the closing stages of the innings although in differing styles. Jordan bowled fast and straight whilst Cummins had most of his victims caught in the deep whilst slogging at “off pace”, into the pitch deliveries. I couldn’t help thinking that it was reminiscent of Stephen Finn’s hat trick in New Zealand when nobody realised it was for a while as the ball was being slogged to all parts.
India were worthy winners and did it with an interestingly constructed side which didn’t feature many of the new or old faces we were expecting to see included. The side included three spinners (Jadeja, Axar and Kuldeep) and three seamers (Bumrah, Arshdeep and Hardik). This was made possible by Hardik also being a mainline batter who batted at six. There was no room for Ashwin, Shami, Siraj, Chahar etc.
Kohli was moved up to open with Rohit. This excluded Shubman Gill, Jaiswal, Ishan Kishan, KL Rahul and Gaikwad. In the event this may have been an error since almost any of these would have probably scored more than Kohli. The wicket keeper, Pant was moved up to three, followed by Suryakumar Yadav (Sky) and Shivam Dube. This middle order excluded Sanju Samson, Rinku Singh, Rahane, Shreyas Iyer and no doubt others who thought that they were in the running.
We should probably be paying more attention to Jasprit Bumrah who is already one of the great bowlers in international cricket. He is only 30 years old and has a skill set to rival Jimmy. He turns it on in all forms of the game and is respected, if not feared by the top batsmen. He also has to perform at home on modern Indian wickets which are more batsman friendly than formerly. Don’t be put off by his weird approach to the wicket, each delivery is a crafted gem.
Anyone who watched Rohit or Sky bat was treated to something special. In India’s game against Australia Rohit scored a 19 ball 50 out of 52 for 1. After ten overs he had scored 89 out of 114 for 2. He was finally dismissed for 92 from 41 balls. Sky is perhaps the sweetest timer of a ball in modern cricket and he selects where he is going to hit the ball before it is delivered. For example, if he locates a gap at long leg but the bowler bowls it full, a yard outside the off stump he stretches across and sweeps it on the full to the gap he has identified. Both of these two are selfless and invariably perish in pursuit of their team’s objectives.
Both Rohit and Kohli have announced their retirement from international T20 cricket. Rohit, even at 37, probably still had plenty of runs in him. Kohli at 35 seems to struggle to have the impact of his former self. But he will still be around to turn out for RCB next season.
T R-J must have been reading Googlies. When the second round of first class matches started Middlesex hosted Derbyshire at Lord’s and after winning the toss he elected to bat! Thanks to another big hundred from Higgins they accumulated a large first innings total which was enough to carry them through to victory. Higgins returned to Middlesex as a bowling all rounder but has turned himself into a batting all-rounder. He is top of the First-Class averages and already has four centuries to his name.
There continues to be plenty of runs around in the County Championship. At Chelmsford Durham racked up 587 with Ollie Robinson (the keeper not the out of favour England bowler) scoring 198. Meanwhile at Hove, Sussex set Leicestershire 464 to win in their second innings. Leicester slumped to 144 for 6 before Louis Kimber came to the crease. He proceeded to score 243 from just 127 balls in an innings which included 21 sixes and 20 fours. When he was last out his side needed just 19 more runs to win.
Kimber’s feat was even more exceptional in that he has no history of big hitting and has not been a regular member of the side. During his innings Ollie Robinson (the England fast bowler, not the Durham wicket Keeper) conceded 43 runs in one over, which included three no-balls, 2 sixes and 6 fours. This is the most conceded in an over in a first-class match in England and probably the most in first class cricket anywhere, particularly if declaration bowling is discounted.
During Kimber’s innings he also scored the fastest Championship double hundred from balls faced (100), which beat Aneurin Donald's 123-ball mark for Glamorgan against Derbyshire in 2016. His 21 sixes broke Ben Stokes’ Championship record of 17 set for Durham against Worcestershire in 2022.
Meanwhile in the T20 Blast Leicestershire opener Rishi Patel scored a 41-ball century but still ended up on the losing side against Northants.
International umpires seem to have lost all confidence in their ability to judge run outs. They invariably go to the television umpire if there has been a direct hit in a run out attempt even if there is no appeal and the players have gone back to their places in the field. We then have to wait and then watch as the batsman is past the stumps when the throw hits the wicket. The reverse is true when everyone knows the guy is out and he is eventually shown to be miles short or not even in the frame. These umpires are generally so good with LBW decisions I for one would welcome their raising their finger on run outs or saying not out and return some dignity to their role.
England’s selections for the two match test series against West Indies is as puzzling as usual and made the harder by the fact that very few of the players have been playing. Surrey believe that Ben Foulkes is their best keeper, but England have selected his colleague, Jamie Smith, ahead of him. Somerset pick Jack Leach in their side and have had Bashir out on loan but England have selected the loanee. Ollie Robinson is on the shit list for some reason but Woakes (remember him?) is included. The West Indies will be out of practice too and so there will be the normal excuses for poor performances in the first test match of the summer.
Thompson Matters
Hidden in last month’s edition of Googlie’s the Editor posed a question which may or may not have been rhetorical: when you captained a side did you ever put the opposition in when you won the toss?
My recollection of playing under the Editor in the 70s and 80s was that rarely if ever did he do anything other than bat if he won the toss. Given the plethora of outstanding spin bowlers in his sides that was perhaps inevitable.
For me probably the most memorable example of not inserting when the captain apparently should have done relates back to my first probationary match for MCC in 1978 against Hornsey at Tivoli Road.
The night before the game the MCC captain, Tony Colbeck, rang me and asked if I had seen that night’s edition of the Evening Standard; I hadn’t.
‘In which case, old boy, you won’t have seen who you are opening the batting with tomorrow.......Boycott.’
‘Seriously?’
‘Yes, he wants some batting practice and Yorkshire twos don’t have a game, so get an early night.’
This was another turbulent period for the White Rose and Boycott was recovering from a broken finger. In his absence John Hampshire had temporarily taken over the captaincy a move which would serve to emphasise to the rest of the club that he would be a better leader than Geoffrey whose fate as captain was sealed by the end of that season.
Several of the MCC side were at the ground early as were most of the Hornsey team who by now had also read the Standard. Those unfamiliar with the ground in those days will recall parking on the other side of the ground from the pavilion and lugging coffins and kit bags across the outfield to what were then effectively shared dressing rooms. Driving across the outfield was frowned upon more especially when it was damp as overnight rain had cause it to be that morning.
As introductions to unfamiliar team mates were being made by our captain a mysterious vehicle appeared at the far side of the ground and proceeded to drive quite brazenly across the outfield to the pavilion. As it neared the unmistakable profile of our last-minute selection could be seen in discussion with his female driver. Stopping outside the pavilion Geoffrey stepped out and gave the lady driver some assistance with his bag and bats. Tony introduced him to the rest of the side - it was all slightly surreal at first but once we were in the changing rooms some sense of normality resumed.
Tony left with the Hornsey captain to toss-up. I cannot remember who it was that day, possibly Colin Nash but whoever it was would certainly have been aware of the dubious etiquette that states MCC always bat first. Hornsey won the toss.
On his return Tony broke the news. ‘I don’t know how to say this Geoffrey, but we’re in the field old boy.’ The proverbial pin didn’t so much drop as explode.
‘Thar’s got to be joking captain. Does tha not knaw I’ve come alt way darn ‘ere to bat?
Tony’s embarrassment was partially hidden by the developing laughter coming from the Hornsey half of the rooms.
It was a cloudy, murky day and the forecast wasn’t good, but the umpire called ‘Play’ bang on 11.30. Tony had set an attacking field with only one fielder in front of square on the offside and only just in front of point; yes, you’ve guessed it.
The first ball was pushed firmly to the vacant extra cover’s would be right hand. There was only one fielder who under normal circumstances would have given chase. He didn’t and once it became obvious he wasn’t it was up to gulley to prevent an all-run four.
After two or three overs the murk turned to drizzle and by the time we were bowling the fifth or sixth the first drops could be felt. Before you could say, ‘Geoffrey is in the pavilion with his feet up and a cup of tea’, he was. The umpires very quickly took the hint.
An early lunch and an opportunity to hear about the on drive off Chappell at Headingly the previous Summer and, somewhat ironically, that he was on the field for the entire duration of that Test. The rain set in, and as early afternoon became mid-afternoon it was clear we would not be going out again and if we did we’d be fielding with ten!
A few months later Botham famously, probably deliberately, ran Boycott out in a faltering run chase in New Zealand - that could have been me months earlier. To have done so in my first probationary match might have threatened my qualification but it would have been one to tell the grandchildren. “I once opened the batting with Boycott and ran him out.” Ah, but for the toss of a coin.
Nomenclature Matters
Of the eighteen sides that participate in the Vitality T20 Blast in the UK ten have adopted amusing or locally appropriate names to add to the attraction of their activities. For example, if you go to Canterbury, you could watch the Kent Spitfires playing against the Sussex Sharks or alternatively when you visit Taunton it would simply be a match between Somerset and Surrey.
In 2023 Middlesex ended up bottom of the South section in this competition having won only 3 of their 14 matches which everyone can agree was a lamentable performance. However, at the conclusion of the first segment of the 2024 matches they had won only one of their eight matches and are well on track to beat their previous dismal performance. I think that it is high time they adopted the epithet, The Middlesex Losers, when playing in this competition. Alternatively, they could become the Middlesex Tossers…
Modern Euphemisms
Ottneil Baartman was recalled to bowl the seventeenth over for South Africa in their low scoring knock out match against England. He is, apparently, a specialist close-out bowler who is renowned for his Yorkers. It was a little odd since the bowling units (I am catching up with modern parlance) had worked out that the best approach on that particular wicket was to bowl short of a length with pace off.
However, Baartman came thundering in and bowled five consecutive thigh high full tosses which were despatched all around the park by Brook and Livingstone and took England to the brink of victory. At the end of the over the commentator instead of saying that he had bowled rank full tosses claimed that he had “just missed his Yorkers”. Apparently, the allowable margin of error is now six feet and upwards for bowling a Yorker.
Such inaccuracy is catching as the eighteenth over proved. It was bowled by Rabada who started off with two more full bungers, having “just missed his yorker”, the second of which Livingstone obligingly hit straight down long leg’s throat. For the record South Africa held their nerve and went on to win the game.
The Adams-Miller Debate
The Professor advised me regarding the last issue that he had intended to provoke a reaction from Douglas Miller. In the event I received a note from Douglas:
I usually read my Googlies looking for a good reason to disagree with my good friend the Professor. This time I am struggling. As a left-hand bat I used to reckon my value to a team was the greater for accumulating more leg-byes than the rest. I suppose they were shabbily earned. It may surprise the Professor to learn that he echoes the views of Gubby Allen and Dickie Bird, I believe. Moreover,Sir Donald Bradman, no less, did not support the notion that merely playing a shot to ball pitched outside the off stump should protect a batsman (as he might have called them) from dismissal.
I forwarded this to the Prof who replied:
I wrote to Douglas to express my disappointment that he had agreed with me about the leg byes. Where's the fun in that?
I reminded him of an issue about which we did disagree: the Mankading of the backing up batsman.
As you can see, our recollection of the disagreement differed a little. He also raises the question of the "concussion protocol".
The Prof to Douglas:
"I thought we disagreed about the backing up issue. I recall saying that I had warned batters about leaving the crease before I had let go of the ball, with a threat to Mankad them if they carried on. I think you said that that would not be the action of a gentleman…or somesuch.
Being a proletarian, of course, I would happily embrace the epithet. I recall, on one occasion, (which I think we discussed) not releasing the ball and the backing up batter went charging down the pitch. When he realised the ball had not been bowled, he turned round (mid sprint) and fell over. He is now flat on the floor some ten yards out of his ground. Would it be ungentlemanly to have run the bugger out? Or should I have just done what I did - laughed. (Also not, perhaps, an entirely worthy reaction.)
So more agreement Douglas!
What is the problem re concussion? An excessive caution on the part of umpires? If they didn’t call on the medics and something happened subsequently their careers would, I imagine, be over. Difficult."
Douglas replied to the Prof:
Our disagreement was rather different: it was about the moment when it was too late for the bowler to take the necessary action. Since the time when we were first arguing the key moment has moved in your direction as it is now later - when ‘the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball’; previously it had been when the bowler entered his/her delivery stride. What appalled me was the running out of Charlie Dean at Lord’s. This was quite cynically planned. I was talking only last week to one of the umpires, Anna Harris, who confided to me that I am one of her mother’s favourite umpires with whom to stand. (Marks off for irrelevance and name dropping.) The reason they consulted with the third umpire was to establish where the bowler was in her delivery action. To add to the drama Martin Saggers’ intercom with the third umpire wasn’t working.
I have said that, if it is not so ignoble to achieve a run out in this manner, why should it not be enshrined in the coaching manuals? ‘Lull the batter by giving no sign of your intent through the early balls of the over then, around the fifth, pause in your delivery stride and whip the bails off. Caveat: should the batter not have left his/her crease you, the bowler, should be aware that you will no balled for breaking the wicket in the course of delivery.’ Isn’t this a bit OTT? One major potential difficulty is that there is no law saying how wide of the pitch the non-striker may run. Sometimes it will be a couple of pitches away to accommodate a fielder standing at silly mid-on. What price the umpire then being able to see the exact position of the batter? In any case it is more than slightly likely to catch the umpire off guard and with his/her eyes, having taken in the position of the bowler’s feet, now focussed on where the ball is expected to pitch.
Leaving the crease early is not illegal, only risky. There is no power given to umpires to stop it; it lies entirely within the power of the bowler. If the laws were to add a simple sentence to say that it was wrong, then an offender could be warned by an umpire and possibly become at risk of a five-run penalty. An alternative power that the umpire could be given could be to rule one short if he/she notices it. A further possible provision would be to formalise the requirement to give a warning. A lot of the trouble stems from the belief that backing up too far is cheating when it is not. I think it should be so classified in the laws. In all this there will always be the objection that the non-striker’s precise position is not a matter on which the umpire can reasonably judge: but blatant abuse is relatively easy to spot.
I think MCC should be ashamed of what happened at Lord’s, but they weren’t.
The concussion protocol in recreational cricket requires that as soon as the ball makes any contact with the helmet dead ball must be called and a responsible person – NOT the umpire - check that the batter is OK. If the ball continued its journey to bowl the batter or as a valid catch, the dismissal would have been overruled by the call of dead ball, though, in my opinion, the call of no ball, if appropriate, would not. The dead ball call on its own would not lead to a further ball being bowled. This is fairly similar in its potential implication to the manner in which Bangladesh lost four leg-byes after a batter had been incorrectly given out lbw today. Once a batter is given out the ball has to become dead and no-one has come up with a valid way of compensating for the apparently lost runs. Gavaskar has revealed quite amazing ignorance by suggesting that international players should be on the MCC laws committee to find a solution to such matters. It is, of course, nothing whatsoever to do with MCC and totally a function of tournament regulations.
I trust I could recruit you to my campaign for a minor change to the laws – simply making it wrong to leave the crease early.
--
Old Danes Gathering
The Next Old Danes Gathering will be held at Shepherds Bush CC on Friday 26 July. The event will be held during the afternoon and all Old Danes, their wives and friends will be welcome.
Googlies Website
All the back editions of Googlies can be found on the G&C website. There are also many photographs most of which have never appeared in Googlies.
www.googliesandchinamen.com
Googlies and Chinamen
is produced by
James Sharp
Broad Lee House
Combs
High Peak
SK23 9XA
[email protected]
An Occasional Cricketing Journal
Edition 259
July 2024
Spot the Ball
Modern Cricket Introductions
It was a bold move by the ICC to spread the hosting of the recent T20 WC from the Caribbean onto mainline USA. As usual with the Americans, they added their own twist to proceedings which included locating snipers at the ground in New York to deal with any miscreants present.
This seems an excellent development in the modern game and could sensibly be added to matches held in the UK. The snipers could be instructed to take pot shots at any or all of the following:
Anyone dressed up in parties of four or more as vicars
Anyone seen holding a snake of plastic beer mugs
Anyone who starts singing Sweet Caroline
Anyone in the Hollies Stand at Edgbaston
Anyone in the West Stand at Headingley
All persons participating in a Conga
Anyone old enough to think that it is still cool to start a Mexican Wave
Out & About with the Professor
OK, so we all know about T20, don’t we? Bish, Bash, Bosh, and the ball disappears into the stands, or over them; some synthetically excited commentator shouts “Maximum!”; fireworks go off; ear-splitting music erupts; and the “Go-Go” dancers, well, Go-Go.
But not this time, not in this World Cup, or, at least, not that often. The huge totals, regularly reported in this journal by our Editor, scored in the IPL and similar competitions, have hardly been in evidence and those staggering run-rates only achieved by teams (like England against Oman…run rate of 16.1) who knocked off small totals in very few balls.
Why? Well the pitches and the weather must play some part, the artificiality, perhaps, of some of those scores (shirt-front tracks and short boundaries) but also, the bowlers. This has been a bowlers World Cup…and none the worse for that.
Some pitches were very poor, of course, especially that in New York State, and a number of games were affected by the weather: delayed, interrupted or washed out completely. I read, before England’s semi-final, that June was the wettest month in Guyana. So why play there? The answer appeared to be that India wanted to, and that seems to constitute a decisive argument in world cricket these days.
But what of the cricket? I doubt that many Googlies’ readers saw all the games but I guess we all saw a few and the impression, perhaps in the early games, was a little underwhelming, moreover the two semi-finals were very one-sided affairs. But the final was a cracking game, wasn’t it - just the sort of match that T20 was made for - with the possibilities of victory going from one side to the other on several occasions. It is often said (not least by me in these pages) that Test cricket permits this kind of ebb and flow but the immediate nature of T20 doesn’t. Not so…at least in this match. Finals are often a disappointment, but this one wasn’t and, I think most would agree, the best side won.
I recall, many years’ ago, when twenty over competitions were getting started, that the demise of leg break bowling was announced. No team would have a leggie in such a match - they would just be slogged out of sight. Could the “pundits” have been more wrong? Wrist spin has played a crucial role in T20 for years now and in this World Cup, England, Australia, and Afghanistan, amongst others, have looked to their wrist spin bowler not just to take wickets but to slow the run-rate down. On slow pitches the quicker bowlers seemed easier to score from while those of slightly less pace, and considerably more variation (like Southee, Kami and Bolt) were more successful. The standout exception was, of course, Bumrah, whose 15 wickets @ 8.3 with an economy of 4.17 seemed, if anything, to understate his impact on India’s success. He played in eight games and bowled beautifully in the later stages against (obviously) more challenging opposition. The pitches were helpful, of course, but to watch great bowling is (or one might suggest, should be) as interesting as watching the ball flying out of the ground.
I suppose, in the end, that some abiding memories of this competition (apart from the upsets of Afghanistan v Australian and USA v Pakistan) will be in the field. There have been some spectacular catches, not least that of Yadav in the final, and the two run outs by wicket keepers, throwing down the stumps at the bowler’s end were quite stunning.
So, in the end, a successful, if a little muted, World Cup, and a fair result.
This & That
After the magnificent batting and high scoring of the IPL the T20WC was in direct contrast with bowlers dominating in the main and scores decidedly on the low side. There were fourteen hundreds scored in the 2024 IPL (in admittedly more matches) whilst no one reached three figures in the recent T20WC. The highest individual score was Nicholas Pooran’s 98 for the West Indies against Afghanistan. He hit eight sixes in this innings which included three in the fourth over of the innings which conceded 36 in total, a record total for an over in T20WC cricket.
But this hitting was relatively rare and in the early stages the minnow nations were generally bundled out for low scores, particularly in the US based fixtures. For New Zealand against Papua & New Guinea, Lockie Ferguson took three wickets in his four overs without conceding a run.
There were three hat tricks performed in the later stages of the competition, two by Pat Cummins and the other by the evergreen, thirty-six-year-old, Chris Jordan. All three were performed in the closing stages of the innings although in differing styles. Jordan bowled fast and straight whilst Cummins had most of his victims caught in the deep whilst slogging at “off pace”, into the pitch deliveries. I couldn’t help thinking that it was reminiscent of Stephen Finn’s hat trick in New Zealand when nobody realised it was for a while as the ball was being slogged to all parts.
India were worthy winners and did it with an interestingly constructed side which didn’t feature many of the new or old faces we were expecting to see included. The side included three spinners (Jadeja, Axar and Kuldeep) and three seamers (Bumrah, Arshdeep and Hardik). This was made possible by Hardik also being a mainline batter who batted at six. There was no room for Ashwin, Shami, Siraj, Chahar etc.
Kohli was moved up to open with Rohit. This excluded Shubman Gill, Jaiswal, Ishan Kishan, KL Rahul and Gaikwad. In the event this may have been an error since almost any of these would have probably scored more than Kohli. The wicket keeper, Pant was moved up to three, followed by Suryakumar Yadav (Sky) and Shivam Dube. This middle order excluded Sanju Samson, Rinku Singh, Rahane, Shreyas Iyer and no doubt others who thought that they were in the running.
We should probably be paying more attention to Jasprit Bumrah who is already one of the great bowlers in international cricket. He is only 30 years old and has a skill set to rival Jimmy. He turns it on in all forms of the game and is respected, if not feared by the top batsmen. He also has to perform at home on modern Indian wickets which are more batsman friendly than formerly. Don’t be put off by his weird approach to the wicket, each delivery is a crafted gem.
Anyone who watched Rohit or Sky bat was treated to something special. In India’s game against Australia Rohit scored a 19 ball 50 out of 52 for 1. After ten overs he had scored 89 out of 114 for 2. He was finally dismissed for 92 from 41 balls. Sky is perhaps the sweetest timer of a ball in modern cricket and he selects where he is going to hit the ball before it is delivered. For example, if he locates a gap at long leg but the bowler bowls it full, a yard outside the off stump he stretches across and sweeps it on the full to the gap he has identified. Both of these two are selfless and invariably perish in pursuit of their team’s objectives.
Both Rohit and Kohli have announced their retirement from international T20 cricket. Rohit, even at 37, probably still had plenty of runs in him. Kohli at 35 seems to struggle to have the impact of his former self. But he will still be around to turn out for RCB next season.
T R-J must have been reading Googlies. When the second round of first class matches started Middlesex hosted Derbyshire at Lord’s and after winning the toss he elected to bat! Thanks to another big hundred from Higgins they accumulated a large first innings total which was enough to carry them through to victory. Higgins returned to Middlesex as a bowling all rounder but has turned himself into a batting all-rounder. He is top of the First-Class averages and already has four centuries to his name.
There continues to be plenty of runs around in the County Championship. At Chelmsford Durham racked up 587 with Ollie Robinson (the keeper not the out of favour England bowler) scoring 198. Meanwhile at Hove, Sussex set Leicestershire 464 to win in their second innings. Leicester slumped to 144 for 6 before Louis Kimber came to the crease. He proceeded to score 243 from just 127 balls in an innings which included 21 sixes and 20 fours. When he was last out his side needed just 19 more runs to win.
Kimber’s feat was even more exceptional in that he has no history of big hitting and has not been a regular member of the side. During his innings Ollie Robinson (the England fast bowler, not the Durham wicket Keeper) conceded 43 runs in one over, which included three no-balls, 2 sixes and 6 fours. This is the most conceded in an over in a first-class match in England and probably the most in first class cricket anywhere, particularly if declaration bowling is discounted.
During Kimber’s innings he also scored the fastest Championship double hundred from balls faced (100), which beat Aneurin Donald's 123-ball mark for Glamorgan against Derbyshire in 2016. His 21 sixes broke Ben Stokes’ Championship record of 17 set for Durham against Worcestershire in 2022.
Meanwhile in the T20 Blast Leicestershire opener Rishi Patel scored a 41-ball century but still ended up on the losing side against Northants.
International umpires seem to have lost all confidence in their ability to judge run outs. They invariably go to the television umpire if there has been a direct hit in a run out attempt even if there is no appeal and the players have gone back to their places in the field. We then have to wait and then watch as the batsman is past the stumps when the throw hits the wicket. The reverse is true when everyone knows the guy is out and he is eventually shown to be miles short or not even in the frame. These umpires are generally so good with LBW decisions I for one would welcome their raising their finger on run outs or saying not out and return some dignity to their role.
England’s selections for the two match test series against West Indies is as puzzling as usual and made the harder by the fact that very few of the players have been playing. Surrey believe that Ben Foulkes is their best keeper, but England have selected his colleague, Jamie Smith, ahead of him. Somerset pick Jack Leach in their side and have had Bashir out on loan but England have selected the loanee. Ollie Robinson is on the shit list for some reason but Woakes (remember him?) is included. The West Indies will be out of practice too and so there will be the normal excuses for poor performances in the first test match of the summer.
Thompson Matters
Hidden in last month’s edition of Googlie’s the Editor posed a question which may or may not have been rhetorical: when you captained a side did you ever put the opposition in when you won the toss?
My recollection of playing under the Editor in the 70s and 80s was that rarely if ever did he do anything other than bat if he won the toss. Given the plethora of outstanding spin bowlers in his sides that was perhaps inevitable.
For me probably the most memorable example of not inserting when the captain apparently should have done relates back to my first probationary match for MCC in 1978 against Hornsey at Tivoli Road.
The night before the game the MCC captain, Tony Colbeck, rang me and asked if I had seen that night’s edition of the Evening Standard; I hadn’t.
‘In which case, old boy, you won’t have seen who you are opening the batting with tomorrow.......Boycott.’
‘Seriously?’
‘Yes, he wants some batting practice and Yorkshire twos don’t have a game, so get an early night.’
This was another turbulent period for the White Rose and Boycott was recovering from a broken finger. In his absence John Hampshire had temporarily taken over the captaincy a move which would serve to emphasise to the rest of the club that he would be a better leader than Geoffrey whose fate as captain was sealed by the end of that season.
Several of the MCC side were at the ground early as were most of the Hornsey team who by now had also read the Standard. Those unfamiliar with the ground in those days will recall parking on the other side of the ground from the pavilion and lugging coffins and kit bags across the outfield to what were then effectively shared dressing rooms. Driving across the outfield was frowned upon more especially when it was damp as overnight rain had cause it to be that morning.
As introductions to unfamiliar team mates were being made by our captain a mysterious vehicle appeared at the far side of the ground and proceeded to drive quite brazenly across the outfield to the pavilion. As it neared the unmistakable profile of our last-minute selection could be seen in discussion with his female driver. Stopping outside the pavilion Geoffrey stepped out and gave the lady driver some assistance with his bag and bats. Tony introduced him to the rest of the side - it was all slightly surreal at first but once we were in the changing rooms some sense of normality resumed.
Tony left with the Hornsey captain to toss-up. I cannot remember who it was that day, possibly Colin Nash but whoever it was would certainly have been aware of the dubious etiquette that states MCC always bat first. Hornsey won the toss.
On his return Tony broke the news. ‘I don’t know how to say this Geoffrey, but we’re in the field old boy.’ The proverbial pin didn’t so much drop as explode.
‘Thar’s got to be joking captain. Does tha not knaw I’ve come alt way darn ‘ere to bat?
Tony’s embarrassment was partially hidden by the developing laughter coming from the Hornsey half of the rooms.
It was a cloudy, murky day and the forecast wasn’t good, but the umpire called ‘Play’ bang on 11.30. Tony had set an attacking field with only one fielder in front of square on the offside and only just in front of point; yes, you’ve guessed it.
The first ball was pushed firmly to the vacant extra cover’s would be right hand. There was only one fielder who under normal circumstances would have given chase. He didn’t and once it became obvious he wasn’t it was up to gulley to prevent an all-run four.
After two or three overs the murk turned to drizzle and by the time we were bowling the fifth or sixth the first drops could be felt. Before you could say, ‘Geoffrey is in the pavilion with his feet up and a cup of tea’, he was. The umpires very quickly took the hint.
An early lunch and an opportunity to hear about the on drive off Chappell at Headingly the previous Summer and, somewhat ironically, that he was on the field for the entire duration of that Test. The rain set in, and as early afternoon became mid-afternoon it was clear we would not be going out again and if we did we’d be fielding with ten!
A few months later Botham famously, probably deliberately, ran Boycott out in a faltering run chase in New Zealand - that could have been me months earlier. To have done so in my first probationary match might have threatened my qualification but it would have been one to tell the grandchildren. “I once opened the batting with Boycott and ran him out.” Ah, but for the toss of a coin.
Nomenclature Matters
Of the eighteen sides that participate in the Vitality T20 Blast in the UK ten have adopted amusing or locally appropriate names to add to the attraction of their activities. For example, if you go to Canterbury, you could watch the Kent Spitfires playing against the Sussex Sharks or alternatively when you visit Taunton it would simply be a match between Somerset and Surrey.
In 2023 Middlesex ended up bottom of the South section in this competition having won only 3 of their 14 matches which everyone can agree was a lamentable performance. However, at the conclusion of the first segment of the 2024 matches they had won only one of their eight matches and are well on track to beat their previous dismal performance. I think that it is high time they adopted the epithet, The Middlesex Losers, when playing in this competition. Alternatively, they could become the Middlesex Tossers…
Modern Euphemisms
Ottneil Baartman was recalled to bowl the seventeenth over for South Africa in their low scoring knock out match against England. He is, apparently, a specialist close-out bowler who is renowned for his Yorkers. It was a little odd since the bowling units (I am catching up with modern parlance) had worked out that the best approach on that particular wicket was to bowl short of a length with pace off.
However, Baartman came thundering in and bowled five consecutive thigh high full tosses which were despatched all around the park by Brook and Livingstone and took England to the brink of victory. At the end of the over the commentator instead of saying that he had bowled rank full tosses claimed that he had “just missed his Yorkers”. Apparently, the allowable margin of error is now six feet and upwards for bowling a Yorker.
Such inaccuracy is catching as the eighteenth over proved. It was bowled by Rabada who started off with two more full bungers, having “just missed his yorker”, the second of which Livingstone obligingly hit straight down long leg’s throat. For the record South Africa held their nerve and went on to win the game.
The Adams-Miller Debate
The Professor advised me regarding the last issue that he had intended to provoke a reaction from Douglas Miller. In the event I received a note from Douglas:
I usually read my Googlies looking for a good reason to disagree with my good friend the Professor. This time I am struggling. As a left-hand bat I used to reckon my value to a team was the greater for accumulating more leg-byes than the rest. I suppose they were shabbily earned. It may surprise the Professor to learn that he echoes the views of Gubby Allen and Dickie Bird, I believe. Moreover,Sir Donald Bradman, no less, did not support the notion that merely playing a shot to ball pitched outside the off stump should protect a batsman (as he might have called them) from dismissal.
I forwarded this to the Prof who replied:
I wrote to Douglas to express my disappointment that he had agreed with me about the leg byes. Where's the fun in that?
I reminded him of an issue about which we did disagree: the Mankading of the backing up batsman.
As you can see, our recollection of the disagreement differed a little. He also raises the question of the "concussion protocol".
The Prof to Douglas:
"I thought we disagreed about the backing up issue. I recall saying that I had warned batters about leaving the crease before I had let go of the ball, with a threat to Mankad them if they carried on. I think you said that that would not be the action of a gentleman…or somesuch.
Being a proletarian, of course, I would happily embrace the epithet. I recall, on one occasion, (which I think we discussed) not releasing the ball and the backing up batter went charging down the pitch. When he realised the ball had not been bowled, he turned round (mid sprint) and fell over. He is now flat on the floor some ten yards out of his ground. Would it be ungentlemanly to have run the bugger out? Or should I have just done what I did - laughed. (Also not, perhaps, an entirely worthy reaction.)
So more agreement Douglas!
What is the problem re concussion? An excessive caution on the part of umpires? If they didn’t call on the medics and something happened subsequently their careers would, I imagine, be over. Difficult."
Douglas replied to the Prof:
Our disagreement was rather different: it was about the moment when it was too late for the bowler to take the necessary action. Since the time when we were first arguing the key moment has moved in your direction as it is now later - when ‘the bowler would normally have been expected to release the ball’; previously it had been when the bowler entered his/her delivery stride. What appalled me was the running out of Charlie Dean at Lord’s. This was quite cynically planned. I was talking only last week to one of the umpires, Anna Harris, who confided to me that I am one of her mother’s favourite umpires with whom to stand. (Marks off for irrelevance and name dropping.) The reason they consulted with the third umpire was to establish where the bowler was in her delivery action. To add to the drama Martin Saggers’ intercom with the third umpire wasn’t working.
I have said that, if it is not so ignoble to achieve a run out in this manner, why should it not be enshrined in the coaching manuals? ‘Lull the batter by giving no sign of your intent through the early balls of the over then, around the fifth, pause in your delivery stride and whip the bails off. Caveat: should the batter not have left his/her crease you, the bowler, should be aware that you will no balled for breaking the wicket in the course of delivery.’ Isn’t this a bit OTT? One major potential difficulty is that there is no law saying how wide of the pitch the non-striker may run. Sometimes it will be a couple of pitches away to accommodate a fielder standing at silly mid-on. What price the umpire then being able to see the exact position of the batter? In any case it is more than slightly likely to catch the umpire off guard and with his/her eyes, having taken in the position of the bowler’s feet, now focussed on where the ball is expected to pitch.
Leaving the crease early is not illegal, only risky. There is no power given to umpires to stop it; it lies entirely within the power of the bowler. If the laws were to add a simple sentence to say that it was wrong, then an offender could be warned by an umpire and possibly become at risk of a five-run penalty. An alternative power that the umpire could be given could be to rule one short if he/she notices it. A further possible provision would be to formalise the requirement to give a warning. A lot of the trouble stems from the belief that backing up too far is cheating when it is not. I think it should be so classified in the laws. In all this there will always be the objection that the non-striker’s precise position is not a matter on which the umpire can reasonably judge: but blatant abuse is relatively easy to spot.
I think MCC should be ashamed of what happened at Lord’s, but they weren’t.
The concussion protocol in recreational cricket requires that as soon as the ball makes any contact with the helmet dead ball must be called and a responsible person – NOT the umpire - check that the batter is OK. If the ball continued its journey to bowl the batter or as a valid catch, the dismissal would have been overruled by the call of dead ball, though, in my opinion, the call of no ball, if appropriate, would not. The dead ball call on its own would not lead to a further ball being bowled. This is fairly similar in its potential implication to the manner in which Bangladesh lost four leg-byes after a batter had been incorrectly given out lbw today. Once a batter is given out the ball has to become dead and no-one has come up with a valid way of compensating for the apparently lost runs. Gavaskar has revealed quite amazing ignorance by suggesting that international players should be on the MCC laws committee to find a solution to such matters. It is, of course, nothing whatsoever to do with MCC and totally a function of tournament regulations.
I trust I could recruit you to my campaign for a minor change to the laws – simply making it wrong to leave the crease early.
--
Old Danes Gathering
The Next Old Danes Gathering will be held at Shepherds Bush CC on Friday 26 July. The event will be held during the afternoon and all Old Danes, their wives and friends will be welcome.
Googlies Website
All the back editions of Googlies can be found on the G&C website. There are also many photographs most of which have never appeared in Googlies.
www.googliesandchinamen.com
Googlies and Chinamen
is produced by
James Sharp
Broad Lee House
Combs
High Peak
SK23 9XA
[email protected]