Cricket under the spotloght

[mids2019]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/66021884

Maybe not entirely related to education but what are your thoughts on the below? I was a little shocked at first and the examples of discrimination are vile but is it right to wrap in elitism into the criticism and recommend changing the nature of traditional cricket features?

What do you mean by “changing the nature of traditional cricket features”?

I’m just stunned it took them two years to state the obvious - cricket is for posh children at the moment. I live in a leafy London suburb and all the (beautiful and green) cricket grounds are full of white-clad private school boys. Whilst a few hundred metres away far less privileged kids are lucky to get space on a decrepit basketball court. This is so obvious to everyone surely? The game is not currently accessible to most people. I guess they needed the time to gather incontrovertible evidence as there would likely be a backlash otherwise if folks feel they need to shove over and make space for others.

@YellowBrickRoadWithPotholes

I can really relate to getting rid of racism and sexism but challenging the elitist nature of the sport may be more challenging. I think it may have been more worthwhile focusing on horrible instances of discrimination rather than suggesting that the Oxbridge cricket match is not played at Lord's as this gives an excuse for those that are 'anti-woke' to dismiss the report as being 'bitter class war' and throwing away historical elements of the game

I think a challenge is that cricket grounds are large and costly to maintain so how do we get more access for the school state sector? I know there has been moves to modernise the game's image (e.gT20) but maybe we should look to games like baseball to add to o the summer sports mix?

But why does the Oxbridge match need to be at Lords?

@YellowBrickRoadWithPotholes

I suppose tradition like the boat race is held on the Thames? I thought that changing the event venue wouldn't necessarily tackle the route problems.

I think it’s the very visible message it gives - i.e. people from these places/institutions belong here. Meanwhile women, people from more deprived backgrounds, and black people don't. In short, it is the tradition itself which is part of the problem and must be changed. Or else access (to Lords in this case) opened up to other groups.

The Eton /Harrow match is a more egregious example. They protested vigorously about being removed from the Lord's roster. And, lo, they got their venue back.

There is a big problem at grassroots and in talent development which often rely on coaching , scouting and spotting in private schools.My own two talented DSs felt rather excluded and ostracised at a local cricket club - not part of the boys' club. In fact this is where and how DS1 developed anxiety and an eating disorder, sadly. I have watched cricket and followed DH from match to match. The working class village cricket of 'good old boys' are now in their 50s and above. The Caribbean clubs have vanished.

The original BBC article pointed out that there are more black golfers and tennis players, hardly known for their historical diversity as sports, than black cricketers. There weren't even enough black cricketers to produce a viable sample for their surveys. This a is a big change in cricket since the 80s.

Cricket is actually relatively cheap and accessible. What it is is a long day, quite exclusive seeming and riddled with dinosaur attitudes at strategic board level . Cricket is embraced in many Asian communities but the report shows that Asian heritage cricketers at more senior levels are routinely discriminated against so the representation of Asian communities at senior club levels and at county and country level is very poor.

It's a sorry sorry state of affairs.

Tests and one day internationals are still well attended. Below these levels, attendance is falling off a cliff.

Do you think part of the problem is that international cricket was born out of colonisiam and it's hay day was in a much less diverse era?

Interesting points above. Do you feel some of the working class squad members are a result of tokenism. I suppose ultimately there is a disproportionate number of public school players

No, it's absolutely not tokenism.

You'd have to ask DS about the colonialism. It's his area of study!

Girls cricket, like girls football has not been developed as well as it could have been although there are pockets of good - Didcit girls school (state comprehensive), is in the top schools for cricket for girls.

The current England men's captain is state educated- but his Dad was a two-sport coach, so the family made huge time sacrifices for attending training (across the Country as Cumbrua is not a top county cricket team).

I've only skimmed the report so far but as far as elitism goes I personally feel it's more about location than class. I live semi rurally and within a ten mile radius of my house I know of 9 separate village/ town teams. I don't have to travel much further to access another dozen easily. Many village teams are still active and flourishing, and are inclusive. This isn't however reflected in larger towns and cities where open space is at a premium, and yes in these areas I do think elitism comes into play as private schools etc are going to have the facilities available whereas state schools maybe not so much. There is definitely a lack of women's teams and facilities at grassroots level and that does need to be addressed.

Imho football was always the working class game (though much more universal now) and rugby/cricket the middle class game. The exception would be in Asian families where to here is wide based social support.

I wonder if some of the behaviour in the report is some sort of 'protectionism' by white middle class cricketers to demotivate inclusion?

No, this isn't so.in Yorkshire, Lancashire, and in village cricket, the sport was not traditionally posh.

There were until recently loads of Caribbean teams in towns and cities. The sport is on its knees in the West Indies so lack of role models may be tied up in this.

Kids cricket, however, is very dominated by fee paying schools despite some grass roots work. Part of the issue is PE teachers not liking cricket.

But lots of it as the enquiry shows is top level institutional racism.

Sadly, I can't say I'm surprised.

Interesting. Loads of our village teams have folded, merged or are stuffed with 55 year olds.

Hate to say it but the fun elements of cricket, much of which revolved around drinking ( and eating!)have diminished so the lads team spirit has gone. This may be good in many ways but its not as fun and the community hub is vanishing , too.

I wouldn't say the crowds at eg Headingley are at all posh!

The big question is whether any of these talented Asian kids can crack England squads or even county teams. And this is where the institutional racism and direct discrimination kicks in.

We have been taking our sons to a local cricket club (in a very leafy London suburb) but will be leaving after finding it very uncomfortable. The club seems to be run as if it’s part of the local private schools. It even turned out their parents had a private WhatsApp group with the coaches to make sure their boys got first dibs on matches. At a recent match, the boys were divided into an A team of private school kids and B for state, without regard for their actual ability! Never mind expecting the kids to buy £70 of new kit each season… the whole thing seemed designed to put you off unless you were wealthy and your kids privately educated. I was shocked by it all and very put off.

None of that surprises me.

The Freddie Flintoff programme was really interesting.

Ds also experienced private school cliquism in local cricket club. Also some in other sports which are a rare place where private and state school mix. Sports that require expensive kit and quite abit of travel more and more parents won't be able manage..
The point of all sports is to distract the masses from rebelling against their leaders. Football has a big problem with racism as has formula one. Cricket seems superficially surprising as it's so polite. It's just a reflection of people getting used to our changing population.

There was a report 24 years ago about racism in cricket. They've done absolutely nothing since, apart from oversee a sport that has become significantly more elitist than it used to be. And there's no good reason why it should be elite. It's not really very expensive to play, it caters well to a range of sporting abilities, most towns and villages have or could have cricket pitches. You could easily build more of a family culture around kids teams, and the weather for watching is a lot better than winter rugby or football.

All that us true, apart from the fact that quite a lot of factory cricket pitches have had houses built on them and school playing fields have been sold off.

I know two village clubs well and they've both got thriving youth sides, heavily dominated by state school kids. There's also a brilliant girls side. It's a leafy, affluent village area though, so maybe that makes a difference. Cricket is also a big sport in the local schools, but they are grammars. So the class issue probably still persists.

I assume you realise you area is the exception to the rule?