"Anyone but Little England"

[Scaly piscine]

Ashley Cole? Or is he a de facto foreigner 'cos he plays for us?!

Probably, bit of brainwashing as well being surrounded by the likes of Ljungberg and the chief poseur's patented knock the ball miles ahead and dive over the keeper maneuver.

 

[viktor]

There is this article on cricinfo which talks about the lack of black cricketers for england. Mentions racism from the establishment, a glass ceiling as one of the reasons.
http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/wisdencricketer/content/story/134939.html
****
Piper cuts to the chase. "Racism goes on. We have to be aware of it. One reason black players aren't progressing as fast as Asians is that we haven't learned how to not be like these people, haven't found a way to act in front of them."

Two wounds left deep scars. On the eve of the 1995 series against West Indies DeFreitas finally "responded" to racial provocation, when Wisden Cricket Monthly published an article headed "Is it in the blood?". DeFreitas, Malcolm et al, the writer Robert Henderson opined, were not "unequivocal Englishmen". (In 1990, shortly after bowling England to their first Test win in the Caribbean in 16 years, Small and Malcolm had been similarly typecast by Norman Tebbit.) DeFreitas and Malcolm, then Derbyshire confreres, sued and settled out of court. Malcolm's justly gotten gains made his cricket school in Sheffield a reality. "He suggested [we] were interlopers," recollects DeFreitas, perpetrator's name forgotten more efficiently than the fury he provoked. "That was so out of order, so wrong."
***

 

[Richard]

I remember that 1995 article very well, and the stink it quite rightly caused.

 

[social]

Does the crack-down on racism in football apply to crowds, players or both?

 

[marc71178]

Supposedly to both, but it does still go on unfortunately.

 

[wpdavid]

I remember that 1995 article very well, and the stink it quite rightly caused.

The guy who wrote it is a thoroughly unpleasant piece of work. More recently, his nonacceptance of players has extended to Mark Butcher, despite MB being born & bred in England with a dad (Alan) who played test cricket for England in the 70's.

Nowadays, he can only get his more obnoxious views published in far-right publications that welcome that sort of drivel and struggle to find people who can string more than a couple of sentences together. However, he does occasionally get letters in the Telegraph, although he uses a pen-name (Ian Phillip). Whether he still needs to do that 11 years after his moment of infamy is debatable, but there you go.

 

[Richard]

Is the full text still available anywhere (online)?
I did read it about 5 years ago, but I'd not mind having another look.

 

[wpdavid]

Is the full text still available anywhere (online)?
I did read it about 5 years ago, but I'd not mind having another look.

I couldn't find it. However, if you manage to find the chatgroup uk.sport.cricket, Henderson frequently hangs out there and he'll happily send a copy to anyone who's interested.

 

[Richard]

Can't say I'd be enthusiastic to converse with him.

 

[wpdavid]

Can't say I'd be enthusiastic to converse with him.

Wise man (you, not Henderson).

 

[Langeveldt]

There is this article on cricinfo which talks about the lack of black cricketers for england. Mentions racism from the establishment, a glass ceiling as one of the reasons.
http://content-usa.cricinfo.com/wisdencricketer/content/story/134939.html
****
Piper cuts to the chase. "Racism goes on. We have to be aware of it. One reason black players aren't progressing as fast as Asians is that we haven't learned how to not be like these people, haven't found a way to act in front of them."

Two wounds left deep scars. On the eve of the 1995 series against West Indies DeFreitas finally "responded" to racial provocation, when Wisden Cricket Monthly published an article headed "Is it in the blood?". DeFreitas, Malcolm et al, the writer Robert Henderson opined, were not "unequivocal Englishmen". (In 1990, shortly after bowling England to their first Test win in the Caribbean in 16 years, Small and Malcolm had been similarly typecast by Norman Tebbit.) DeFreitas and Malcolm, then Derbyshire confreres, sued and settled out of court. Malcolm's justly gotten gains made his cricket school in Sheffield a reality. "He suggested [we] were interlopers," recollects DeFreitas, perpetrator's name forgotten more efficiently than the fury he provoked. "That was so out of order, so wrong."
***

One reason there aren't so many black cricketers is because there is more of a football culture among black people (Take a look at the English Football league).. Exactly the same exists in South Africa which is why it baffles me that they are trying to redress a balance that has never existed.. Although I am surprised England had five black cricketers in the late eighties

 

[wpdavid]

One reason there aren't so many black cricketers is because there is more of a football culture among black people (Take a look at the English Football league).. Exactly the same exists in South Africa which is why it baffles me that they are trying to redress a balance that has never existed.. Although I am surprised England had five black cricketers in the late eighties

We didn't. In the late 80's, either Small or DeFreitas occasionally played, and prior to them Cowans, but that was about it. Things briefly changed in the early 90's after Dilley, Foster et al had cleared off the take the rand. For a short while, we often saw various combinations of Malcolm, DeFeitas, Small & Lewis, but it didn't last very long.
There were more black players in the CC then. Presumably part of the reason was the supremacy of the great WI side as role models plus their parents would all have been cricket nuts as 1st generation immigrants from the Caribbean. Nowadays, as you say, things are different. SA, of course, is different again, but you probably know that really.

 

[Richard]

When I started watching DeFreitas and Lewis were both often regarded as fixtures in the side. Malcolm, of course, was always in everyone's thoughts ever since the West Indies series in 1990 until about 1997.
It's a shame, really, that DeFreitas didn't play more than he did, although that can be said of many players in the late 1980s, in the chaos that often embraced selection, before Gooch and Stewart brought some stability.

 

[wpdavid]

When I started watching DeFreitas and Lewis were both often regarded as fixtures in the side. Malcolm, of course, was always in everyone's thoughts ever since the West Indies series in 1990 until about 1997.
It's a shame, really, that DeFreitas didn't play more than he did, although that can be said of many players in the late 1980s, in the chaos that often embraced selection, before Gooch and Stewart brought some stability.

Yes, selection was a muddle for years, and the treatment of Daffy & Malcolm was typical of what happened to a whole number of players. As I've said before, Malcolm must reckon he was born about 10 years too soon when he sees the patience shown towards Harmison. Lewis is not generally highly thought of, but his record is far better than other allrounders of that era and, in truth, rather better than Fred's after the same number of tests.

 

[Richard]

Lewis, like Blackwell and (earlier) Flintoff, inevitably had the "not working hard enough" label placed on him, I suppose.
In my estimation players' talent is often overrated and their work-rate under.

 

[wpdavid]

Lewis, like Blackwell and (earlier) Flintoff, inevitably had the "not working hard enough" label placed on him, I suppose.
In my estimation players' talent is often overrated and their work-rate under.

Lewis was viewed as being "difficult". He was certainly a frustrating player, and he was absolutely pilloried for his daft dismissal when stumped off May at Lord's in 1993 (imagine Ramps vs Warne in 2001, but even worse ...). Truth is, the game was almost over & done with by the time of his dismissal, so it was actually irrelevant. Of course, his detractors will then discount his 100 in India for the same reason, so there has sometimes been a certain amount of double standards. But he could play and, under the current set up, would probably have done much better. But he's not alone there.

 

[Richard]

As I've said before, Malcolm must reckon he was born about 10 years too soon when he sees the patience shown towards Harmison.

As I've said before, the current case shows amply well that you can show as much patience in a player as you want, you still won't turn him from a bad one into a good one. Harmison is only a bit better than Malcolm in my estimation. I don't think Malcolm would've done much better than he did in the end under Duncan and co. We would, though, not have the excuses we had with Malcolm, where his failure could be blamed on things like clashes with Illingworth instead of on the fact that, when push came to shove, he wasn't really good enough to do the job other than in the odd match.
Harmison seems to have his failings blamed more on the Lewis\Blackwell style - "not committed enough" \ "doesn't want it enough" etc. rather than the simple truth - "not good enough".

 

[Richard]

Lewis was viewed as being "difficult". He was certainly a frustrating player, and he was absolutely pilloried for his daft dismissal when stumped off May at Lord's in 1993 (imagine Ramps vs Warne in 2001, but even worse ...). Truth is, the game was almost over & done with by the time of his dismissal, so it was actually irrelevant. Of course, his detractors will then discount his 100 in India for the same reason, so there has sometimes been a certain amount of double standards.

There always is. People will always pillory batsmen for getting out, whatever the circumstances.
Very few can accept that strengths and weaknesses are often a similar thing, and it's totally impossible to completely separate them.
Example: Neil pillories Strauss for playing a "daft" shot at the end of day two at Newlands - if it comes-off he's praised for the typical team thingy of being positive at all times, if not he gets this.

 

[Neil Pickup]

Um....

My posts at stumps on Day 2 at Newlands:

"Stop over-reacting, for crying out loud... It's like having your own portable News of the World, reading this site sometimes."

"Right, people, heads, on.

What we now need to do is to dig in and grind out at least two sessions of play tomorrow, which should eclipse the follow-on target. With luck, either Fred or Geraint will still be there at that point and then should be able to accelerate us to 300-350 before we make a couple of strikes with the new ball before stumps.

We can then chase around 350, with luck."

 

[Richard]

No, no, remember our MSN conversation at the time?
Probably not.
If so, I'll remind you (remember I didn't see that post, I only rarely read *Official* threads, usually at the start when they're not yet flying by at the speed of sound):
You said "why play that shot, andrew, why?"
I said "because it was a wideish ball and he's had success playing shots at those"
You said "xxx... (can't remember what it was) remaining, 3 wickets down, large deficit", and basically just lambasted him for not leaving the ball alone.
I can't remember the exact words, but I do remember feeling that you were expecting everything of Strauss (and indeed any other player in the situation).