The ECB are behaving like Mafia bosses making offers that the players and public cannot refuse. Points to note are

1. There is more money in English cricket than there ever has been. That is a big weapon to use to keep English cricket carrying on supporting First Class cricket.
2. Would cricketers really be willing to constantly go away from their families (or uproot their families) for months on end to different parts of the world.
3 . How long can careers last playing white ball cricket only which requires a high degree of all round physical fitness?
4. White ball cricket generally and especially T20 is is one dimensional . That leaves it very vulnerable to a serious decline in public interest .

RH

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 3:21:22 AM UTC+10, anywh...@gmail.com wrote:
> The ECB are behaving like Mafia bosses making offers that the players and public cannot refuse. Points to note are
>
> 1. There is more money in English cricket than there ever has been. That is a big weapon to use to keep English cricket carrying on supporting First Class cricket.

An effective weapon. CC isn't financially viable by itself.

> 2. Would cricketers really be willing to constantly go away from their families (or uproot their families) for months on end to different parts of the world.

Haven't top level cricketers always done this?

> 3 . How long can careers last playing white ball cricket only which requires a high degree of all round physical fitness?

You sure about that? Many cricketers retire from Tests but continue playing white-ball cricket because the latter is physically easier.
As someone who once opened the batting, batted all day, and had to field the next day... I'll always be in awe of the physical demands of Test cricket.

> 4. White ball cricket generally and especially T20 is is one dimensional . That leaves it very vulnerable to a serious decline in public interest .

Define serious decline. Have Tests suffered from "serious decline"? What about CC?

On Wednesday, September 7, 2022 at 9:18:32 PM UTC+1, jzfre...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 3:21:22 AM UTC+10, anywh...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The ECB are behaving like Mafia bosses making offers that the players and public cannot refuse. Points to note are
> >
> > 1. There is more money in English cricket than there ever has been. That is a big weapon to use to keep English cricket carrying on supporting First Class cricket.
> An effective weapon. CC isn't financially viable by itself.

Irrelevant in practice because it is the counties who vote for how money id raised and spent... RH

> > 2. Would cricketers really be willing to constantly go away from their families (or uproot their families) for months on end to different parts of the world.
> Haven't top level cricketers always done this?

It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before 1970 were not full strength England teams - this was largely due to amateurs refusing to tour but swome counties kicked up about their best professionals, eg, Hirst and Rhodes , being refused permission to tour.,

As for individual English players, very few have played in the domestic. first class competitions of other Test p-laying countries including the present day . RH

> > 3 . How long can careers last playing white ball cricket only which requires a high degree of all round physical fitness?
> You sure about that? Many cricketers retire from Tests but continue playing white-ball cricket because the latter is physically easier.
> As someone who once opened the batting, batted all day, and had to field the next day... I'll always be in awe of the physical demands of Test cricket.

AS white balls cricket becomes a more dominant the pressure on athleticism will surely grow. RH
> > 4. White ball cricket generally and especially T20 is is one dimensional . That leaves it very vulnerable to a serious decline in public interest ..

> Define serious decline. Have Tests suffered from "serious decline"?

The Hundred this year has suffered a 20% decline in viewing figures., RH

What about CC?

Not yet but the danger for Test cricket and first class cricket generally is that it will be lost because of the pressure to play white ball cricket. RH

In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7-9107-8e3e06f28262n@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
<snip>
>It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before 1970
>were not full strength

Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours as ell.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Thu, 8 Sep 2022 16:28:24 +0100, John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7-9107-8e3e06f28262n@googlegroups.com>,
>Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
><snip>
>>It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before 1970
>>were not full strength
>
>Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
>20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours as ell.

No. It was a lie, as usual.

Cheers,

Mike

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> <snip>
> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before 1970
> >were not full strength
> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours as ell.
> --
> John Hall
> "Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
> But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
> Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK k Smith (Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG), David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)

In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the 1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David Allen and Tony Lock

That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.

Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to make a political career.

RH

In message <9afad7bf-8692-4329-bd7e-0e1d4937a8fcn@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
>On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
>> <snip>
>> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before 1970
>> >were not full strength
>> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
>> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours as ell.
>
>No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished
>until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set
>sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs
>who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS
>Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and
>did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission
>to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and
>the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case
>in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK
>(Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff
>Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John
>Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch
>White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG),
>David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)
>
>In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to
>England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the
>1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
>Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David
>Allen and Tony Lock
>
>That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.
>
>Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had
>been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent
>eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to
>make a political career.
>
>RH
>

You said "ALL England tours before 1970 were not full strength" - my
emphasis. All your examples are either from pre-WW1 or from tours to
India and Pakistan, which were the least popular places for reasons of
comfort and (as far as fast bowlers were concerned) pitches. How many
players can you name who turned down the chance to tour Australia
post-WW2?
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 8:19:42 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <9afad7bf-8692-4329...@googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> >> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >> <snip>
> >> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before 1970
> >> >were not full strength
> >> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
> >> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours as ell.
> >
> >No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished
> >until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set
> >sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs
> >who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS
> >Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and
> >did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission
> >to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and
> >the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case
> >in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK
> >(Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff
> >Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John
> >Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch
> >White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG),
> >David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)
> >
> >In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to
> >England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the
> >1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
> >Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David
> >Allen and Tony Lock
> >
> >That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.
> >
> >Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had
> >been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent
> >eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to
> >make a political career.
> >
> >RH
> >
> You said "ALL England tours before 1970 were not full strength" - my
> emphasis. All your examples are either from pre-WW1 or from tours to
> India and Pakistan, which were the least popular places for reasons of
> comfort and (as far as fast bowlers were concerned) pitches. How many
> players can you name who turned down the chance to tour Australia
> post-WW2?
> --
> John Hall
> "Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
> But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
> Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

John at full wriggle... RH

In message <3c0fa371-e99c-463d-a9f8-edcedce15076n@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
>On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 8:19:42 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <9afad7bf-8692-4329...@googlegroups.com>,
>> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
>> >On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
>> >> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
>> >> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
>> >> <snip>
>> >> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before 1970
>> >> >were not full strength
>> >> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
>> >> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours as ell.
>> >
>> >No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished
>> >until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set
>> >sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs
>> >who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS
>> >Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and
>> >did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission
>> >to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and
>> >the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case
>> >in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK
>> >(Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff
>> >Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John
>> >Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch
>> >White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG),
>> >David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)
>> >
>> >In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to
>> >England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the
>> >1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
>> >Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David
>> >Allen and Tony Lock
>> >
>> >That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.
>> >
>> >Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had
>> >been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent
>> >eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to
>> >make a political career.
>> >
>> >RH
>> >
>> You said "ALL England tours before 1970 were not full strength" - my
>> emphasis. All your examples are either from pre-WW1 or from tours to
>> India and Pakistan, which were the least popular places for reasons of
>> comfort and (as far as fast bowlers were concerned) pitches. How many
>> players can you name who turned down the chance to tour Australia
>> post-WW2?
>
>John at full wriggle... RH

It's you who is wriggling. If you had said "some" rather than "all" I'd
have had no problem, but saying "all" was ridiculous.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2022 09:54:07 +0100, John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <3c0fa371-e99c-463d-a9f8-edcedce15076n@googlegroups.com>,
>Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes

>>John at full wriggle... RH
>
>It's you who is wriggling. If you had said "some" rather than "all" I'd
>have had no problem, but saying "all" was ridiculous.

He's not wriggling, he's lying. There is no point in being polite
about it. He exists simply to tell lies.

Cheers,

Mike

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 9:56:51 AM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <3c0fa371-e99c-463d...@googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 8:19:42 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> >> In message <9afad7bf-8692-4329...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >> >On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> >> >> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> >> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >> >> <snip>
> >> >> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before 1970
> >> >> >were not full strength
> >> >> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
> >> >> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours as ell.
> >> >
> >> >No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished
> >> >until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set
> >> >sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs
> >> >who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS
> >> >Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and
> >> >did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission
> >> >to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and
> >> >the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case
> >> >in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK
> >> >(Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff
> >> >Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John
> >> >Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch
> >> >White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG),
> >> >David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)
> >> >
> >> >In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to
> >> >England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the
> >> >1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
> >> >Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David
> >> >Allen and Tony Lock
> >> >
> >> >That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.
> >> >
> >> >Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had
> >> >been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent
> >> >eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to
> >> >make a political career.
> >> >
> >> >RH
> >> >
> >> You said "ALL England tours before 1970 were not full strength" - my
> >> emphasis. All your examples are either from pre-WW1 or from tours to
> >> India and Pakistan, which were the least popular places for reasons of
> >> comfort and (as far as fast bowlers were concerned) pitches. How many
> >> players can you name who turned down the chance to tour Australia
> >> post-WW2?
> >
> >John at full wriggle... RH
> It's you who is wriggling. If you had said "some" rather than "all" I'd
> have had no problem, but saying "all" was ridiculous.
> --
> John Hall
> "Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
> But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
> Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

OK, give me an England Test tour before 1970 which did not lack players who would have strengthened the tour party . RH

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 10:17:53 AM UTC+1, Mike Holmans wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Sep 2022 09:54:07 +0100, John Hall <john_...@jhall.co.uk>
> wrote:
> >In message <3c0fa371-e99c-463d...@googlegroups.com>,
> >Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >>John at full wriggle... RH
> >
> >It's you who is wriggling. If you had said "some" rather than "all" I'd
> >have had no problem, but saying "all" was ridiculous.
> He's not wriggling, he's lying. There is no point in being polite
> about it. He exists simply to tell lies.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike

No, I leave that to you... RH

In message <b38f6344-ad32-42de-8052-5d3670d2c668n@googlegroups.com>,
Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
>OK, give me an England Test tour before 1970 which did not lack players
>who would have strengthened the tour party . RH

How about what I think was the last tour before your cut-off date: that
of WI in 1968-9. As far as I can recall, there were no players who said
they were unavailable. You may think that the selectors failed to pick
one or two players who would have strengthened the party, but that is a
matter of opinion and a separate issue.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Fri, 9 Sep 2022 16:37:53 +0100, John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk>
wrote:

>In message <b38f6344-ad32-42de-8052-5d3670d2c668n@googlegroups.com>,
>Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
>>OK, give me an England Test tour before 1970 which did not lack players
>>who would have strengthened the tour party . RH
>
>How about what I think was the last tour before your cut-off date: that
>of WI in 1968-9. As far as I can recall, there were no players who said
>they were unavailable. You may think that the selectors failed to pick
>one or two players who would have strengthened the party, but that is a
>matter of opinion and a separate issue.

Who made themselves unavailable for the 64-5 tour of RSA? I can agree
that it was not the strongest side one might have picked, but which of
the players who might well have been picked refused to be considered?

That is not the same as the selectors deciding that certain players
would not be picked because they needed the winter to rest. Nowadays,
of course, players are so much fitter that they don't need that much
recovery time. Back then, those left home to rest were essentially
injured and therefore unavailable to strengthen the squad.

Cheers,

Mike

On 09/09/2022 09:54, John Hall wrote:
> In message <3c0fa371-e99c-463d-a9f8-edcedce15076n@googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
>> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 8:19:42 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
>>> In message <9afad7bf-8692-4329...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
>>> >On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
>>> >> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
>>> >> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
>>> >> <snip>
>>> >> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours before
>>> 1970
>>> >> >were not full strength
>>> >> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
>>> >> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours as
>>> ell.
>>> >
>>> >No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished
>>> >until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set
>>> >sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs
>>> >who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS
>>> >Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and
>>> >did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission
>>> >to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and
>>> >the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case
>>> >in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK
>>> >(Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff
>>> >Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John
>>> >Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch
>>> >White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG),
>>> >David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)
>>> >
>>> >In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to
>>> >England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the
>>> >1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
>>> >Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David
>>> >Allen and Tony Lock
>>> >
>>> >That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.
>>> >
>>> >Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had
>>> >been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent
>>> >eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to
>>> >make a political career.
>>> >
>>> >RH
>>> >
>>> You said "ALL England tours before 1970 were not full strength" - my
>>> emphasis. All your examples are either from pre-WW1 or from tours to
>>> India and Pakistan, which were the least popular places for reasons of
>>> comfort and (as far as fast bowlers were concerned) pitches. How many
>>> players can you name who turned down the chance to tour Australia
>>> post-WW2?
>>
>> John at full wriggle... RH
>
> It's you who is wriggling. If you had said "some" rather than "all" I'd
> have had no problem, but saying "all" was ridiculous.

ISTM that Robert's statement was somewhat ambiguous (c.f. "All that
glisters is not gold").

--
David North

In message <3h0nhhp78kup99k73pmrhahcutra8vgmdn@4ax.com>, Mike Holmans
<spam@jackalope.uk> writes
>On Fri, 9 Sep 2022 16:37:53 +0100, John Hall <john_nospam@jhall.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <b38f6344-ad32-42de-8052-5d3670d2c668n@googlegroups.com>,
>>Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
>>>OK, give me an England Test tour before 1970 which did not lack players
>>>who would have strengthened the tour party . RH
>>
>>How about what I think was the last tour before your cut-off date: that
>>of WI in 1968-9.

I had a lapse of memory. That tour was in 1967-8.

>> As far as I can recall, there were no players who said
>>they were unavailable. You may think that the selectors failed to pick
>>one or two players who would have strengthened the party, but that is a
>>matter of opinion and a separate issue.
>
>Who made themselves unavailable for the 64-5 tour of RSA? I can agree
>that it was not the strongest side one might have picked, but which of
>the players who might well have been picked refused to be considered?
>
>That is not the same as the selectors deciding that certain players
>would not be picked because they needed the winter to rest. Nowadays,
>of course, players are so much fitter that they don't need that much
>recovery time. Back then, those left home to rest were essentially
>injured and therefore unavailable to strengthen the squad.

Yep.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

In message <jo1jmaFl78kU1@mid.individual.net>, David North
<nospam@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk> writes
>On 09/09/2022 09:54, John Hall wrote:
>> In message <3c0fa371-e99c-463d-a9f8-edcedce15076n@googlegroups.com>,
>>Robert Henderson <anywhere156@gmail.com> writes
>>> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 8:19:42 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
>>>> In message <9afad7bf-8692-4329...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
>>>> >On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
>>>> >> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> >> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
>>>> >> <snip>
>>>> >> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours
>>>> >> >
>>>> 1970
>>>> >> >were not full strength
>>>> >> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
>>>> >> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours
>>>> >>
>>>> ell.
>>>> >
>>>> >No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished
>>>> >until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set
>>>> >sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs
>>>> >who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS
>>>> >Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and
>>>> >did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission
>>>> >to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and
>>>> >the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case
>>>> >in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK
>>>> >(Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff
>>>> >Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John
>>>> >Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch
>>>> >White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG),
>>>> >David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)
>>>> >
>>>> >In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to
>>>> >England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the
>>>> >1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
>>>> >Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David
>>>> >Allen and Tony Lock
>>>> >
>>>> >That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.
>>>> >
>>>> >Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had
>>>> >been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent
>>>> >eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to
>>>> >make a political career.
>>>> >
>>>> >RH
>>>> >
>>>> You said "ALL England tours before 1970 were not full strength" - my
>>>> emphasis. All your examples are either from pre-WW1 or from tours to
>>>> India and Pakistan, which were the least popular places for reasons of
>>>> comfort and (as far as fast bowlers were concerned) pitches. How many
>>>> players can you name who turned down the chance to tour Australia
>>>> post-WW2?
>>>
>>> John at full wriggle... RH
>> It's you who is wriggling. If you had said "some" rather than "all"
>>I'd have had no problem, but saying "all" was ridiculous.
>
>ISTM that Robert's statement was somewhat ambiguous (c.f. "All that
>glisters is not gold").
>

Ah, you think he meant "not all England tours before 1970 were full
strength"? Yes, on reflection that does seem likely. If that's what he
meant, I'd have no quarrel with it.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 4:47:19 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <b38f6344-ad32-42de...@googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >OK, give me an England Test tour before 1970 which did not lack players
> >who would have strengthened the tour party . RH
> How about what I think was the last tour before your cut-off date: that
> of WI in 1968-9. As far as I can recall, there were no players who said
> they were unavailable. You may think that the selectors failed to pick
> one or two players who would have strengthened the party, but that is a
> matter of opinion and a separate issue.
> --
> John Hall
> "Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
> But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
> Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

https://www.espncricinfo.com/wisdenalmanack/content/story/155168.html

The Board of Control selectors made public the fact that they wanted Close as captain, although he had been censured for his conduct of the Yorkshire team in their match against Warwickshire. The M.C.C. Committee overruled them and decided that the offence, for which he was censured, barred him from the tour captaincy. At this time M.J.K. Smith announced his immediate retirement from first-class cricket.

Cowdrey in fact was third choice, psychologically handicapped by the vote of no-confidence, which was implied when Insole, chairman of the Board of Control selectors, announced that they had opposed his selection.

RH

On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 5:49:33 AM UTC+10, nos...@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk wrote:
> ISTM that Robert's statement was somewhat ambiguous (c.f. "All that
> glisters is not gold").

It seems to me that it was just flippant. Nothing more. Nothing less.
Hardly worth discussion.

On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 8:59:43 AM UTC+1, jzfre...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 5:49:33 AM UTC+10, nos...@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk wrote:
> > ISTM that Robert's statement was somewhat ambiguous (c.f. "All that
> > glisters is not gold").
> It seems to me that it was just flippant. Nothing more. Nothing less.
> Hardly worth discussion.

Wrong yet again. The claim that all England tour parties up to 1962 lacked players who would not tour is true because of the amateur status . The search for an amateur captain was a constant pain for selectors from around 1890 . That alone would take out many amateurs who on merit should have gone on England tours on merit. .

Nor did Hutton''s captaincy in two victorious Ashes series change matters - May took over the captaincy and much and in the 5 years following the abolition of amateur status Dexter followed May. .
RH

On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 7:09:12 PM UTC+10, anywh...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 8:59:43 AM UTC+1, jzfre...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 5:49:33 AM UTC+10, nos...@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk wrote:
> > > ISTM that Robert's statement was somewhat ambiguous (c.f. "All that
> > > glisters is not gold").
> > It seems to me that it was just flippant. Nothing more. Nothing less.
> > Hardly worth discussion.
> Wrong yet again.

Oh dear.
Proceed as you were, gentlemen.

On Friday, 9 September 2022 at 21:07:28 UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> In message <jo1jma...@mid.individual.net>, David North
> <nos...@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk> writes
> >On 09/09/2022 09:54, John Hall wrote:
> >> In message <3c0fa371-e99c-463d...@googlegroups.com>,
> >>Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >>> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 8:19:42 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> >>>> In message <9afad7bf-8692-4329...@googlegroups.com>,
> >>>> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >>>> >On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> >>>> >> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
> >>>> >> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> >>>> >> <snip>
> >>>> >> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours
> >>>> >> >
> >>>> 1970
> >>>> >> >were not full strength
> >>>> >> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
> >>>> >> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours
> >>>> >>
> >>>> ell.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished
> >>>> >until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set
> >>>> >sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs
> >>>> >who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS
> >>>> >Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and
> >>>> >did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission
> >>>> >to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and
> >>>> >the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case
> >>>> >in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK
> >>>> >(Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff
> >>>> >Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John
> >>>> >Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch
> >>>> >White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG),
> >>>> >David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)
> >>>> >
> >>>> >In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to
> >>>> >England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the
> >>>> >1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
> >>>> >Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David
> >>>> >Allen and Tony Lock
> >>>> >
> >>>> >That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had
> >>>> >been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent
> >>>> >eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to
> >>>> >make a political career.
> >>>> >
> >>>> >RH
> >>>> >
> >>>> You said "ALL England tours before 1970 were not full strength" - my
> >>>> emphasis. All your examples are either from pre-WW1 or from tours to
> >>>> India and Pakistan, which were the least popular places for reasons of
> >>>> comfort and (as far as fast bowlers were concerned) pitches. How many
> >>>> players can you name who turned down the chance to tour Australia
> >>>> post-WW2?
> >>>
> >>> John at full wriggle... RH
> >> It's you who is wriggling. If you had said "some" rather than "all"
> >>I'd have had no problem, but saying "all" was ridiculous.
> >
> >ISTM that Robert's statement was somewhat ambiguous (c.f. "All that
> >glisters is not gold").
> >
> Ah, you think he meant "not all England tours before 1970 were full
> strength"?

That's what I initially assumed he meant, but now he seems to be arguing for your interpretation, although I see he has moved the goalpost by 8 years.

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 1:49:33 PM UTC+1, nos...@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk wrote:
> On Friday, 9 September 2022 at 21:07:28 UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> > In message <jo1jma...@mid.individual.net>, David North
> > <nos...@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk> writes
> > >On 09/09/2022 09:54, John Hall wrote:
> > >> In message <3c0fa371-e99c-463d...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >>Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> > >>> On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 8:19:42 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> > >>>> In message <9afad7bf-8692-4329...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >>>> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> > >>>> >On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 4:29:36 PM UTC+1, John Hall wrote:
> > >>>> >> In message <cb5668a2-19c6-47a7...@googlegroups.com>,
> > >>>> >> Robert Henderson <anywh...@gmail.com> writes
> > >>>> >> <snip>
> > >>>> >> >It is a matter of numbers. For example, all England tours
> > >>>> >> >
> > >>>> 1970
> > >>>> >> >were not full strength
> > >>>> >> Was that date a typo? England were at full strength for most of their
> > >>>> >> 20th century tours to Australia and for quite a few other tours
> > >>>> >>
> > >>>> ell.
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >No not a typo. The amateur/professional distinction was not abolished
> > >>>> >until 1962 which meant that Ashes touring parties frequently set
> > >>>> >sail (always by ship until the 1962/3 series) without several amateurs
> > >>>> >who would have v been first choice if they were available , eg FS
> > >>>> >Jackson never toured abroad. As for professionals, counties could and
> > >>>> >did -Rhodes, Hirst - refuse professionals on their books permission
> > >>>> >to tour. Often the pros refused to tour, eg Trueman and Statham and
> > >>>> >the 1961/2 India and Pakistan tour. That tour is an interesting case
> > >>>> >in point The tour party consisted Dexter, (RFM Sussex) Cowdrey, MJK
> > >>>> >(Warks) Ken Barrington, (Surrey) Peter Richardson (Kent) , Geoff
> > >>>> >Pullar (Lancs) , Peter Parfitt (MDDX) , Geoff Millman (wk), John
> > >>>> >Murray (wk) Barry Knight (Essex RFM) Alan Brown (RF Kent), Butch
> > >>>> >White (RF Hants) , D R Smith (RFM Gloucs) , Bob Barber (Lancs LBG),
> > >>>> >David Allen (Gloucs ROB), Tony Lock (Surrey SLA)
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >In the same year as this tour went the 1961 Ashes tour came to
> > >>>> >England. The only players who payed in that series and went om the
> > >>>> >1961/2 subcontinental tour were as follows:
> > >>>> >Ted Dexter, MJK Smith , Barrington, Geoff Pullar,, John Murray, David
> > >>>> >Allen and Tony Lock
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >That is just 7 from a touring party of 17.
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >Even after after the Amateur distinction was abolished those who had
> > >>>> >been amateurs refused to tour places particularly the subcontinent
> > >>>> >eg Cowdrey, May, while Dexter, retired at the age of 30 to try to
> > >>>> >make a political career.
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> >RH
> > >>>> >
> > >>>> You said "ALL England tours before 1970 were not full strength" - my
> > >>>> emphasis. All your examples are either from pre-WW1 or from tours to
> > >>>> India and Pakistan, which were the least popular places for reasons of
> > >>>> comfort and (as far as fast bowlers were concerned) pitches. How many
> > >>>> players can you name who turned down the chance to tour Australia
> > >>>> post-WW2?
> > >>>
> > >>> John at full wriggle... RH
> > >> It's you who is wriggling. If you had said "some" rather than "all"
> > >>I'd have had no problem, but saying "all" was ridiculous.
> > >
> > >ISTM that Robert's statement was somewhat ambiguous (c.f. "All that
> > >glisters is not gold").
> > >
> > Ah, you think he meant "not all England tours before 1970 were full
> > strength"?
> That's what I initially assumed he meant, but now he seems to be arguing for your interpretation, although I see he has moved the goalpost by 8 years.

I have not altered my position. It is a simple fact that while the amateur status existed there were many amateurs who refused to go abroad regardless of the opposition. This carried on right up to the abolition of the amateur status in 1962 and beyond because some amateurs effectively carried on the status but did not wish to tour. David Sheppard would have been a regular Test opener in the 1950s and 1960s, May and Dexter need not have retired so early, if they were not amateurs by instinct, Richard Hutton and Ossie Wheatley were in and out of FC cricket for ten years or more.

RH

On Monday, September 12, 2022 at 11:58:37 PM UTC+10, anywh...@gmail.com wrote:
> I have not altered my position. It is a simple fact that while the amateur status existed there were many amateurs who refused to go abroad regardless of the opposition.

No, your position is for every single tour where at least 1 amateur was offered a spot, at least 1 of them said "no".