WILLOW THE KING.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20496, 22 February 1930, Page 1 (Supplement)

WILLOW THE KING.

PROFIT IN HIS SERVICE.

BY 3IAIANG.V

Andrew Lang claimed that cricket, is a liberal education. To foreigners, perhaps to some among ourselves, that may seem extravagant; but no one who has come beneath the sway of Willow the King will doubt it for a moment. It is well for us that Eden Park becomes for days the rendezvous of athletic minds, drawn by such an interest. " .Ail work and no P' a y—" We can do with a little heyday in the blood. Without it, wq should get cramped and stiff in thought, the corded muscles of our life knotted into useless rigidity. Even to onlookers, know thev never so little of its laws and chances, cricket can impart a thrilling vim, and for the players there is bliss unspeakable. Xot for nothing does ic appeal to British minds. What is wrapped up in that fact is more than the joy of the game: it tells of more than a love of the open and a zest for personal athletic achievement. It betokens the spirit that has made the British people renowned as the possessors of a genius for government. In its ringing "How's that?" is uttered the comradeship of the law-abiding. It, is an appeal, not to an umpire merely, but to ti standard, a principle, a constituted authority.

As the sharp cry is flung out, there passes before the mind's eye—so quick is thought—the long procession of human life through many generations. Primitive man, lawless in large measure, tirst emerges, taking by right of might what he desires. Then follow on his heels the companies to which the rabble gives gradual place, united at first under the iron will of conquering chiefs, until at last a share in government is taken by tiie governed and cohesion becomes cooperation. Still authority is acknowledged —there can be no cohesion without it—but it becomes an inward as contrasted with an external authority, accepted rather than imposed. The might of right displaces the right of might. And in the familiar condemnation of what is " not cricket" in human behaviour you can hear the assent to deeply urgent ethical demands. A liberal education, indeed ! Under a Cloud. Good is it that this game is pedestalled wherever English traditions rule. Dean Swift, if he were writing to-day to John Buil, would still be constrained to tell him that, for all his serious air, he "could not help discovering some remains of his nature when he happened to meet with a football or a match at cricket." Pope, too, would yet have cause to note that " senators at cricket urge the ball." Long may it be so.

There were days—they lie happily over the far horizon that shuts off the early years of the eighteenth century—when the game was under a cloud. Gamblers did it much evil. Some of its followers made it a mere pretest for getting rich at each other's expense. Says Soanie Jenvng of thoso days: England, -vheu once oi peace and wealth

possessed. Began to think frugality a jest. So grew polile: hencts a!! her well-bred iiein Gamesters and iockeys turned, and cricketplayers. In the revulsion that followed there was a crusade against sport of all kinds; and a reviewing chronicler utters his lament: '" Xo more trials of strength and speed; no more feats of dexterity and daring, smiled on and encouraged by the little great ones of the parish; that was all past, and all the mirth was hole-and-corner mirth, low, blackguard, and barbarous.'' A Good Fairy. But it was the dark hour before another dawn. When all was black, "cricket suddenly came," this same witness tells, "like the good fairy in a pantomime, to save the nation from a slough of sottisii despondency. Quite abruptly, knights, nobles and gentlemen doffed their embroidered. coats, flung aside their absurd three-cornei'ed hats, and fell to batting and bowling as if for life and death. The game was taken up on all sides. It was one equally adapted tor poor and rich: better still, it was one in which rich and poor could share. All over the land the old game, never very popular before, came into vogue and reigned supreme."

That was a wholesome renascence. What it meant for the Old Land you can read nto much sober history of the time. .\s

a same " in which rich and poor could share," "Cricket has performed excellent service in promoting fellowship among diverse classes of the community, without which we could not be a virile nation, and really not be a nation at all. A priggish writer in the 4 *British Champion of an issue of 1743 expresses his disgust at

" lords and gentlemen, clergymen and lawyers, associating themselves with butchers anil cobblers in pursuit of their diversions," and he -.condemns cricket accordingly. But the traditions of the game havn been too strong for such puny souls as his. Fellowship. Occasionally there have been very select elevens, as when Lord Lytfelton. with his two brothers and eight sons, heat by ten j wickets a school team of Bromsgrove at Hagley in 1367, and celebrated the victory in verses beginning: Sing the sorer of Hagiey cricket. When the peer and ail bis clan Grasped the bnt to guard the wicket As no other household can. But such exclusively composed teams have been the exception, in spite of the survival of such quaint terms as " .gentlemen versus players" and the controversy about separate ground entrances for am.rears and professionals. Distinctions of this order are bound to fall before the. spirit of the game. It has been found* difficult to forget distinctions, and one can understand the diffidence of a domestic servant of a noble house who wiis acting in old days as umpire. His master was baiting, and was palpably out l.b.w. This umpire felt eonstrained to soften his decision by replying, " I'm afraid I'll have to say ' Not at home,' m'lord." In earlier days there was j an attempt to make ack of j the station of titled players, but if, failed hopelessly. The Duke of Dorset had a narrow escape from being bowled by an off-break delivered by Lambert, " the Little Farmer " of the once famous Ilambledou Club, and a roar of happy laughter uprose »!roni players and onlookers when '• the Little Farmer," in good Hampshire dialect, 'Tied: "Ah! it, was tedious near you, sir!" The spirit of the game was in Lambert's ease of address. In those days

" Lumpy," a Surrey bowler, of quite plebeian origin, lived with Lord Tankerville, and they played cricket together ardently.

All the difficulties have not yet been overcome. Tljey will be. Even better will be the game's growing service as a partner in the Empire as a going concern. Such tours as that of the M.O.C. men stir enthusiasm afresh, set new standards of play, and serve a missionary end in what to many a clean-blooded Englishman is not merely a pastime, but a part of his religion.