Gentlemen and Players.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18631, 4 March 1926, Page 8

Gentlemen and Players.

In the past English Tost match teams have been selected by amateurs. This year the three amateurs already appointed, and the captain, -will have the -assistance of two professional colleagues. The appointment of Hobbs to the committee may be taken for granted, and tho second professional will probably be Rhodes. Few have been greater in their mastery of the game as a whole; still fewer have had their wisdom sharpened by longer experience of Australian and English cricket, or to so 'uncanny a power of detecting weakness and devising means for its overthrow. But it is, after all, comparatively unimportant whether the amateurs are assisted by Hobbs. and or by Hobbs, and another. What is really important is tho fact that professionals, no matter who they are, will be acting as membcrsv of the Selection Committee. "Modern "opinion," says the "Daily Chronicle," wisely rather than grammatically, " favours quite a different statvi3 for "professionals! than .30 years ago." The professionals are now admitted to the control of first-clas3 cricket; there has been a noisy attempt to hustle . Hobbs into the captaincy of the English XI. It may be that a professional will yet lead an English side on to the field; but this year is not likely to see the old tradition broken. In 1921 Armstrong's men were, some of them, surprised to see the professional;; come obscurely on to. tho field through a | little side gate, while the amateurs used another and more prominent one. Collins's men may witness the same invidious distinction. But if they do, they wiH witness it probably for the last time. Even Marylebone cannot mueh longer resist a public opinion which more and more objects to such discrimination. Like Bums's bonny Leslie, democracy may wish " to spread ."its conquests further"—who knows how- far'? Will the profession;'.! cease to address the amateur as "Mr So- " and-So," and tho amateur's unobtrusive "Mr" disappear from the scoring-book? And will the old match " Gentlemen v. Players" be re-titled "Amateurs v. Professionals"? There, at least, it may be hoped that a venerable phrase will survive the distinction it was founded upon. Professionals are professionals, amateurs are amateurs, and in Orieket the distinction is more valid than in most games. If there ever was a reason for making the distinction a socially invidious one. it does not exist now. But those who love cricket for its own sake and not simply because it is "big " crirket will not read with perfect serenity the " Chronicle's " statement that " Erofes-

■'sionals are now the mainstay of "cricket"; nor will they quite believe it. preferring, perhaps, to tbiuk tliat the strength and spirit of English cricket lie in the happy, if loss skilful, enthusiasm of the village green, nuil of the side street or city court, where the gams is a stolen rapture. For the health of cricket is better measured by the inglorious blundering of the thousands who play for love than by tlio superb skill of a handful who play for money as well.