Bat and ball / Frank Gregan / 07 October 2008 /

Frank Gregan's drinking circle is split on the big Stanford Challenge match. Here's why Frank is very much in favour of it and how some of the respected "Old Guard" have harmed the game more than a 40-over slog ever will.

Sport is great for a pub debate. There is always someone prepared to play devil's advocate and ensure a frank exchange of opinions. Nothing much surprises me these days when the guys who I share a drink with after the working day chew the fat on sporting topics. There is always someone who thinks that Titus Bramble is worthy of an England call up or that Andy Murray will be Wimbledon Champion next year. Both are highly unlikely to happen but hearing the different viewpoints passes a couple of pints and allows the mind to unwind.

I was very disappointed with the reaction that the Stanford Challenge has received from the quorum that I socialise with. It is split into two camps, one train of thought is that it is going to be a fantastic spectacle and the prize money on offer will produce pressure the like of which has never been seen before on a cricket field. The other side, (those that are clearly wrong because they disagree with me) are against the concept of the Stanford Challenge and refuse to even discuss it. They consider it to be a non-event and I quote "likely to harm the good name of the game."

What good name is that then? Is it the good name steeped in the tradition of that great cricketing icon WG Grace? The same WG who refused to leave the crease when given out by the umpire instead choosing to tell the official, "They've (the crowd) come to see me bat not you umpire!" Dr Grace has the gates at Lords named in his honour, this is the same man who coaxed an Australian batsman out of his crease during a test match on the pretence of wishing to chat with him and then threw down his stumps affecting probably the most unsporting run out of all time!

WG Grace is not alone when it comes to not exactly applying the spirit of the game. The 1932-33 Ashes touring side became infamous for its bodyline bowling strategy. The ruse was simple and effective. Set up a leg side field and dig the ball in short into the batsman's ribs. The outcry from the cricketing media and public was ferocious. Even to this day whenever you meet anyone in a pub in Earl's Court called Bruce or Sheila all they want to moan about is bodyline. So when the dust settled and relations between England and the land of vegemite were restored was bodyline bowling banned? Of course not, in fact on the contrary, it has become part and parcel of the game and one of the most used weapons in a fast bowler's armoury.

Bodyline bowling is a more sporting option than the fayre served up by those all round good guys from down under, the Chappell brothers. In 1981 needing a six off the last ball to tie an ODI, New Zealand batsman Brian McKechnie was served up an underarm delivery making it impossible to get the bat under the ball and get any elevation rendering a six impossible. Greg Chappell was the captain that day and the bowler who he ordered to take the unsporting action was his brother Trevor. That M'lud, was harmful to the good name of the game!

The three incidents highlighted show that cricket's good name has survived far worse than a businessman's dream to make a short, exciting version of the game with a life changing sum of money for the winners.

The prize money on offer will ensure that everyone will be given their all and I still consider it to be a toss of a coin. Anything in excess of [2.0] on either side represents value and I stick with my earlier recommendation to take the odds of [2.4] which should be available on the Stanford Superstars.

'.$sign_up['title'].'

'; } } ?>

:

:

:

?

: