Gentleman Players

[Rebecca]

or has there always been unsporting moments and matches not played in the spirit of the game?

Without a doubt there was many controversial games and situations way back in the deep and distant past.

Its not a new development. The history of intimidatory bowling, illegal actions, match fixing etc is alive with examples during the 19th Century and after.

Please, please please give me some of those examples.

 

[Langeveldt]

Please, please please give me some of those examples.

WG Grace? The time when he was given out LBW by an umpire, and told him "The crowd are here to see me bat, not you umpire" and carried on with his innings

 

[Rebecca]

WG Grace? The time when he was given out LBW by an umpire, and told him "The crowd are here to see me bat, not you umpire" and carried on with his innings

Yes, I know about that one.
He simply put the bails back on, didn't he!

More please?

 

[The Baconator]

Well I can imagine a great many instances where even the closest of friends could easily take that sort of thing the wrong way in circumstances as taut as that (we're talking about a finish as close as just about any in cricket history), but I guess we can fairly safely assume Lee took it well, and no harm was done.

But I'm truly amazed Flintoff really would go there.

Cynic in me wonders whether he actually said that, or was just saying it there to get a laugh.

 

[Richard]

WG Grace? The time when he was given out LBW by an umpire, and told him "The crowd are here to see me bat, not you umpire" and carried on with his innings

Which was in a festival game of no consequence.

And it was bowled, and he said it to bowler not Umpire TBH.

 

[Richard]

Cynic in me wonders whether he actually said that, or was just saying it there to get a laugh.

Oh, heck, yeah, me too. Would have taken quite some brass neck. That's why I was so surprised. Could easily be apocryphal and\or in jest.

 

[Rebecca]

Cynic in me wonders whether he actually said that, or was just saying it there to get a laugh.

No, of course he didn't.
Freddy just has a good sense of humour and is probably sick of recounting that story.

 

[Goughy]

Please, please please give me some of those examples.

There are literally countless hundreds. Some examples

Grace physically beating a young player for using nets he didnt think were ready

Armstrong timewasting and making Woolley wait 18 mins from the time he got to the crease to the time he faced his first ever ball in Test cricket in order to make him more nervous.

'Walking' is considered by some a post-war ideal that grew. Players previously seldom walked.

In 1896, Lohmann and other professional 'rebels' refused to play Tests unless their wages increased

The great 'throwing' incidents of the late 1890s/early 1900s where a 'chucker' was seen lurking behind every tree and politics and arguments were common place.

There really are countless other examples. Cricket never was the 'nice' game it has been made out to be.

The 1950s were closest but even then there were issues.

 

[Rebecca]

Thanks Goughy, just the stuff I need!

 

[neville cardus]

Oh, heck, yeah, me too. Would have taken quite some brass neck. That's why I was so surprised. Could easily be apocryphal and\or in jest.

It was, I think, confirmed in TWC (SA edition) that Freddie was only taking the piss there. Viewing the moment in question, and seeing the sincerity on Flintoff's face, it is difficult to envisage a statement like that leaving his mouth. It was, to my mind, exactly what it appeared to be -- a beautiful, rare and touching instance of sportsmanship at its truest. 'Twould be nice to see some of that from our eternally-victimised Indians and their boorishly arrogant Australian counterparts.

 

[neville cardus]

WG Grace? The time when he was given out LBW by an umpire, and told him "The crowd are here to see me bat, not you umpire" and carried on with his innings

Oh, FFS.

 

[neville cardus]

Yes, I know about that one.
He simply put the bails back on, didn't he!
More please?

Oh, FFS.

 

[neville cardus]

Which was in a festival game of no consequence.

And it was bowled, and he said it to bowler not Umpire TBH.

Oh, FFS. Not you, too.

 

[neville cardus]

Grace physically beating a young player for using nets he didnt think were ready

That was kept hidden from the public for ages. Kudos must go to the historian who uncovered it.

WG was a master at cover-ups. Certainly, if this cricketing Goliath told you to keep mum, you unquestioningly did so. The disappearance of his cousin, caught thieving in a dressing-room and sent off to the States, sits unexplained in every contemporary publication. It serves to illustrate just how powerful and influential Grace was.

Armstrong timewasting and making Woolley wait 18 mins from the time he got to the crease to the time he faced his first ever ball in Test cricket in order to make him more nervous.

That was diabolical. Several of these "trial balls" rolled out all the way to the boundary, unimpeded by the languid Aussie fielders.

'Walking' is considered by some a post-war ideal that grew. Players previously seldom walked.

Lord Harris was one who always held his ground and left the decision in the hands of the umpire.

In 1896, Lohmann and other professional 'rebels' refused to play Tests unless their wages increased

Quite rightly so, in light of the shamateurism of such money-grabbing fiends as WG, but how does this fulfill the OP's criteria?

The great 'throwing' incidents of the late 1890s/early 1900s where a 'chucker' was seen lurking behind every tree and politics and arguments were common place.

Harris always felt that the major reason for the chucking problem of the early 1880s was the irresolute stance of the on-field adjudicators. "When are you umpires going to do something about this?" he demanded of Bob Thoms.

"My Lord," came the icy reply, "we are going to do nothing. It is you gentlemen who have got to do it."

In the 1884 Roses match at Old Trafford, Ted Peate watched in outrage as George Wootton allowed Crossland (a "pure throw", apparently) to launch his crooked monstrosities without question. When the Yorkshire spinner himself bowled later in the match, he went up to Wootton and dared him to take action when he chucked it. Needless to say, the timid official did nothing, so Peate rounded on him disgust: "There! That shows what you oompires are orl worth!"

The 1950s were closest but even then there were issues.

Lockie's chucking England to the 1953 Ashes, along with the controversy-laden 1954 MCC visit to the islands, spring to mind.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Do you think there ever really was a time of Gentleman Players; panama hats, deck chairs and Pimms...., or has there always been unsporting moments and matches not played in the spirit of the game?

I think there have always been unsporting moments...we hear about them more now of course.

 

[bond21]

stop dreaming.

if you think people expect players to play like gentlemen, youre in dream land.

Its professional sport.

 

[Perm]

Cynic in me wonders whether he actually said that, or was just saying it there to get a laugh.

Spot on son.

I'm pretty sure that Flintoff has neither the attitude, nor wit, to have made such a comment at the time. Far more respectful than that I imagine.

 

[neville cardus]

stop dreaming.
if you think people expect players to play like gentlemen, youre in dream land.
Its professional sport.

Oh, do be quiet, you asinine twit. Why not read the OP's views properly before squealing at them like a pig at the abattoir's and making yourself look a dunce*? I think it a very good question, and one which affords us great scope for debate. That that scope is beyond the bounds of your historical acumen should be ample reason for you to stay out of it.

* Looks are rarely deceptive.

 

[Richard]

Oh, FFS. Not you, too.

What was incorrect there?

 

[neville cardus]

You are treating legend as fact. If I never hear that story again, it won't be too soon.