Mark Ramprakash raised valid points about the connection between cricket and the unequal society it is a part of. However, his observations also highlighted the challenges that prevent cricket from becoming an egalitarian sport. As someone who has succeeded in cricket against all odds, I can attest to the fact that without adequate resources, such as playing fields, groundskeepers, minibuses, and funding, cricket will remain out of reach for many children, especially those attending inner-city state schools.
In addition to these material barriers, there are other human factors that serve as obstacles to high-level sports participation. When my 13-year-old daughter was selected for county netball last year, the girls were divided into three groups and assigned to different sports centers. Unfortunately, my daughter was placed in the group farthest away from our home, without any consideration given to whether we could provide transportation. The training sessions began at 6pm every Monday and required an hour’s drive from our house. Interestingly, one of the other groups practiced only 15 minutes away from us. Surprisingly, no one encouraged carpooling or bothered to inquire about the parents’ ability to facilitate these sessions.
As an NHS worker, I had to adjust my work schedule to ensure my daughter could attend and return from these training sessions on time every Monday. Thankfully, my employer was accommodating, but not every parent would have had the flexibility or means to meet these demands. Similarly, when we consider the sport of cricket, how many working parents can spare the time required to transport their children to leisurely games?
It is evident from CLR James’s influential work, “Beyond a Boundary,” that cricket both reflects and perpetuates existing societal inequalities. The recent Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket (ICEC) report, which holds English cricket accountable for its racism, sexism, and elitism, further emphasizes the urgent need for change. To address these issues, the England and Wales Cricket Board must adopt transparent social inclusion criteria based on class, race, gender, and disability when allocating funding to counties, leagues, and junior cricket. Additionally, a robust monitoring system should be established to ensure these criteria are effectively implemented.
Perhaps James’s thought-provoking quote, “What do they know of cricket who only cricket know?”, should be prominently displayed wherever cricket is administered, watched, and played, serving as a reminder of the broader social implications of the sport.
The ICEC report serves as a wake-up call for radical change, starting with the role of the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC). The MCC’s exclusivity as a members-only club, where recommendations from existing members are necessary for membership, contradicts the principles of accessibility. The privileged position held by the MCC within the game must either be eliminated or opened up to all. As someone who has experienced the discomfort of being a guest in the MCC members’ areas, even as a white, middle-aged, middle-class man, I shudder to think of the experience for others who may not meet the club’s narrow criteria.
The disappearance of cricket from free-to-air TV may not be the sole reason for the decline of our national summer sport over the past 18 years, which has seen only around 5% of children participating. However, it has undoubtedly had a devastating impact. Expecting people to pay nearly triple the cost of a TV licence to watch a game they may not already be invested in is a significant hindrance. Without a substantial increase in popular interest, cricket in England is at risk of becoming a niche sport, with only privately educated individuals earning a living through international “franchise” leagues while Test match cricket fades away.
While cricket often appears inaccessible due to its class associations, there have been instances where these barriers have been breached. During my time at a state grammar school in the early 1960s, the headmaster proudly announced that three former pupils were playing regularly in the England Test team. Thirty years later, three alumni from the same school simultaneously served as bishops in the Church of England. This achievement, only surpassed by Eton College, is notable because our school lacked both a cricket ground and a chapel.
Reflecting on the need for change, it is encouraging to see Ben Stokes calling for reform in English cricket. The exclusion of Basil D’Oliveira from the 1968 England team, which was set to tour South Africa, remains a poignant reminder that individuals within the cricketing community should not be politically unconscious, as eloquently stated by John Arlott.
If you would like to share your views on any articles you have read in The Guardian, please email us your letter, and we will consider it for publication in our letters section.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
