Yes indeed. It’s only a small point but the use of helmets has made batters more difficult to identify with. I’m not arguing against their use, safety is paramount of course. Having said that with no helmets, you could see their faces and expressions, interactions with their batting partners etc. more clearly. In the more modern era some players chose not to use helmets. Botham (only against the fastest bowlers) and Viv Richards (virtually never in England I don’t think. Good enough batsmen to do it! Also I remember David Fulton coming out to bat in a One-Day final in the 1990s in a white bucket hat or sun hat, a real hark back to the old days, like Fredericks and Greenidge batting in bucket hats on sunny days! The comments on TMS were along the lines of ‘what is he thinking of?!’ The bowler (West Indian quick I think) would be irked and encouraged to bowl even faster!
…not forgetting/overlooking the impact of Packer and WSC in 1977+, and the legal bunfights with the TCCB and others, over player contracts. Obviously, one legacy of WSC was to redefine limited-overs international cricket – as well as redefining rewards for many cricket professionals.
As you say, back then the CC was very much a weekly treadmill (punctuated by often connected JPL games/the B&H and Gillette comp’s), with many pro’s having other winter jobs, assuming they weren’t good enough to play in Australia/SA.
I thoroughly enjoyed the Test Match this weekend. Great performance by England. Batring was consistent. Bowling was superb with 3 fast bowlers and Robinson’s performance was exceptional. 16 wickets in two test matches and 99 test wickets at an average of under 20 each.
We have a good bowling attack and some new team members under new but old captaincy of Joe Root. Hopefully we will rise to new strengths. In perspective, the Pakistan team is weak and it’s early days.
On the county thing, it was so informal back in the day. I remember being at a county game at the Oval and Malcolm Marshall chatting to me and my friend over the boundary between balls.A man with a good claim to be the greatest quick bowler of all time and he was having a laugh with two young blokes who shared his love of cricket.
This year I saw one of the England team take time to sign a couple of autographs between balls at the Oval Test for kids, but it’s not the same casualness for older fans (understandably).
Of course, at one time, there was a code between teams not to bowl bumpers and short stuff at each other involving the less able batsmen (say 10/11), although I’m not sure how this squared with Jardine and the bodyline stuff many years before, and the Aussies and WI obviously rewrote the fast bowling playbook in the early/mid-70’s. You may remember (?) the danger to players came in to sharp focus with the Peter Lever/Ewen Chatfield incident during England’s tour of NZ '74/5, when the latter (batting 11 I think) was hit on the temple (off his bat) from a bouncer, and had to be resuscitated on the field.
Talking of Greenidge & Fredericks I had a quick look at the scorecard from the 1976 Test at The Oval. Just over 1500 runs from 423 overs, helped by the both of them smashing England for 182/0d in the 2nd innings, from just 32 overs. And, I suspect, connected to @Eoink 's point, in legacy days the boundaries were often a rope laid just inside the advertising boards/or it was the 'boards, and The Oval was had a much bigger playing surface (pre OCS stand and other ingressions). The days of ‘one on the arm’!
Yes, very interesting points well made. I do remember the Peter Lever incident with Ewan Chatfield. Lever was understandably terribly upset and never wanted to bowl a ball again at one stage I think. The rule book was rewritten in the mid 1970s. I remember Richie Benaud mentioning the ‘fast bowlers union being in operation’ during his TV commentary on the 1972 tour so Snow wouldn’t get a bumper from Lillee or whoever. Seemed to have gone by 1974-5 and certainly by 1976 where there was a picture in the papers of Derek Underwood or may have been Pat Pocock fending off an horrendous bouncer from the West Indies quicks with no helmet, cap, nothing. I wondered how ‘old school’ tailenders, in some cases probably on the level of club batsmen (?) coped with bowling of that pace. I know Brian Close was a recognised batsman but that famous clip of him just getting his head out of the way of an express ball from Michael Holding during that notorious evening session at Old Trafford in 1976 when Edrich and Close faced a barrage sticks in the mind. I remember the Oval Tests in 1975 and 1976 on TV, the huge parched ground with the rope right up to the fence and the old Vauxhall End!
IIRC, I think it may have been The Sun that contained a photo of Brian Close’s naked torso, with bruises galore. I found it interesting that when England were getting pummelled (literally at times!) by Lillee and Thomson in The Ashes down-under, England recalled elder-statesman Cowdrey (IIRC), and effectively did the same with Close. The videos of BC facing ‘whispering death’ Holding at The Oval are available on You Tube and, as you outline, are pretty scary viewing! IIRC, the umpire Bill Alley (?) had a word with Holding, but I’m not sure he paid much attention.
Back to the modern-day, it’ll be interesting how the ICC rate the latest Lord’s Test strip which, I understand from a media report, had different preparation than for the debacle strip against NZ this year. One might think the latest rating won’t be kind given the movement & variability evident.
No knee jerk then!!
Particularly as it is Lord’s. Every visiting team understandably wishes to play a Test there, so it would be difficult to give Lord’s time to sort the pitch out.
Not sure how the reaction by Pakistan will improve things? One would have thought they would have their best team in place from the start? 1996 feels a long time ago. A shame, a series against the mercurial Pakistan was to be savoured. Always classy, controversial etc..
I think there was a mention about drop in pitches in the future.
I thought I had heard that. At Lord’s. Wow, nothing stands still I suppose.
Without descending into politics - why have a politician as head of the cricket board?
Then again why would you send the coach and 7 players home just over halfway through a series?
In my view it’s time the senior members of the ICC got to grips with the situation (but they are enthralled by the need for money from the sub continent).
Rant over …
Might be ‘resting’ or a clearing of the decks for the forthcoming white-ball games out in Pakistan, noting England have 3 x T20s and 3 x ODI’s against Sr Lanka scheduled for 15th Sep onwards – hope they have Pluvius insurance!
It’s sad to see Pakistan in such disarray.
After the NZ match at Lord’s it was suggested the issues with the square would take years to fix (assuming the ECB/MCC could work out a deal), although drop-ins would appear to offer a temporary solution(?), noting it took several years for the square at The Rose Bowl to settle and become Test quality.
I heard this description from a pundit the other day, to paraphrase: the Lord’s is 25 years old, which is akin to a well loved mattress that has been slept in and abused by various people over the same length of time, namely tired, lumpy, with the odd spring poking out.
It’s a shame that the ECB can’t do without the income whilst a new square is laid and allowed to be bedded in over a couple of years.
I think the MCC are the largest stakeholder in all this, noting Middlesex appear to have been looking for alternative grounds, as the costs of playing at Lord’s are relatively high.
And the quality of the square has been in question for several years. Great ground, lottery of a strip! And there are plenty of other Test quality grounds, as we all know 
Let’s hope it doesn’t develop in to the farrago the ground redevelopment/expansion did.
Really??? Gawd.
The best I can come up with which is polite is ‘strange, but true’. I cannot remember who the England Test captain was who said the writing was on the wall for a tour when there was more ‘management’ than players on the trip.
Not often that words fail me …
What could possibly go wrong …?
Quite.