Why no non-Ashes tours to Australia between 1953–54 and 1961–62?

[Julien]

One thing I have long noticed is that, excluding the Ashes tours of 1954–55 and 1958–59, there were no Test tours to Australia in the nine seasons from 1953–54 to 1961–62 inclusive.

Whilst this fact is not new to me, I have wondered what the explanation for there being no non-MCC tours of Australia in this period was. I have considered possibilities like:

1. Financial losses from first-class cricket in Australia due to declining attendances caused by such factors as:
   • an increasing number of rival attraction to cricket being available with the growth of the family car as transport
   • replacement of attacking spin bowling by intimidatory pace or defensive medium-paced seam styles, so that the game was less attractive
2. Nations other than England not being able to afford tours to Australia due to such factors as transport costs and overvalued exchange rates
3. Lack of time to schedule tours whilst fitting in with Australian tours abroad during the local (southern summer) season

That these factors alone can explain the absence of non-Ashes Test tours to Australia during the period from 1954 to 1961, however, is not convincing. This is especially true of the “exchange rate” hypothesis, given that currency overvaluation was far more marked in New Zealand than in Australia, yet a West Indies team did tour New Zealand in 1955–56.

If anybody can elaborate on why non team other than England organised a Test tour to Australia between 1953–54 and 1961–62, I would be most grateful.

 

[the big bambino]

West Indies toured in 60/61 and we went to SA in 57/58 I think so that accounts for two seasons.

 

[morgieb]

West Indies toured in 60/61 and we went to SA in 57/58 I think so that accounts for two seasons.

59/60 Australia toured Pakistan/India too.

 

[Midwinter]

Australia made their first visit to the West Indies in 1955

 

[mr_mister]

White Australia policy

 

[Victor Ian]

... tours TO australia.

 

[Victor Ian]

Has that created an unbeaten at home record for x years? I wonder.

 

[the big bambino]

... tours TO australia.

He asked for reasons. I’m not sure of the dates we toured India and SA. But if the dates coincided with our summer that would be a reason we couldn’t have hosted in those seasons at least.

 

[MartinB]

• Money
• Travel times and travel costs - I think teams still traveled by ships to Australia which was slow and expensive.
• India / Pakistan / South Africa / New Zealand seasons overlap with Australia's Cricket Season. To tour Australia meant missing most of there own Cricket season

English tours of Australia make a lot of sense:

• Its England's off season
• England was a proven money spinner, the others where not.

 

[Victor Ian]

He asked for reasons. I’m not sure of the dates we toured India and SA. But if the dates coincided with our summer that would be a reason we couldn’t have hosted in those seasons at least.

Yep. Makes sense.

 

[fredfertang]

In 1950/51 England just about broke even, and West Indies lost money in 1951/52

 

[Burgey]

Then, as now, not much else really matters tbh.

 

[a massive zebra]

• Travel times and travel costs - I think teams still traveled by ships to Australia which was slow and expensive.

From a book review by Martin:

The first team of English cricketers to tour Australia departed from Liverpool in 1861 aboard the SS Great Britain. The voyage took two months. Almost a century later, in September 1958, the last England team to travel to Australia wholly by sea took 16 days to complete the journey. Four years later in 1962 Ted Dexter’s side flew to Aden, then part of the British Empire but now in Yemen, before sailing on to Australia aboard the SS Canberra. Cricketers touring Australia and New Zealand have, since then, always travelled by air.

 

[AndrewB]

59/60 Australia toured Pakistan/India too.

Also in late 1956.

 

[Julien]

In 1950/51 England just about broke even, and West Indies lost money in 1951/52

Thanks for that – no surprise the West Indies lost money as that tour saw the beginnings of intimidatory fast bowling which the West Indies were themselves to perfect a quarter of a century later.

I would guess that, even with a spinner like Tayfield potentially an attraction eminently worth watching, and less intimidatory bowling, South Africa also lost money in 1952–53?

There are two issues I have related to the break in non-Ashes tours to Australia between 1953–54 and 1961–62:

1. Were the non-Ashes tours of India in 1947–48 and West Indies in 1951–52 (or even South Africa in 1952–53) viewed in any sense as “experimental”?
2. We're any tours to Australia from 1953–54 to 1961–62 planned as of (say) the end of the 1950–51 season but cancelled due to belief they would lose money?
   • I was thinking of a second tour by India, or tours by South Africa, the West Indies or even Pakistan

 

[AndrewB]

Should be “between 1953-4 and 1959-60”, as the big bambino pointed out.

 

[fredfertang]

I would guess that, even with a spinner like Tayfield potentially an attraction eminently worth watching, and less intimidatory bowling, South Africa also lost money in 1952–53?

Actually no - they were at one point going to call the whole thing off but the South Africans decided they'd just take the loss because they thought their cricket was in desperate need of the series even if they picked up a drubbing - as you'll know they did however draw it 2-2 and on one of the days of the final Test there were almost 50,000 in the ground and in the end they took home a profit of £3k - the WIndies had lost £4k