Jimmy Anderson is one of the lynch pins of English cricket. He has taken over 11,000 first class wickets in his career and, amongst fast bowlers, is the highest Test wicket-taker of all time. In a team of notable players, his has been an extraordinary career.
Ben Stokes, the current captain and Wisden’s leading world cricketer, was born in New Zealand before moving to England aged twelve. He holds the record for the most sixes hit in international cricket. He is a remarkable cricketer.
It is not only for their prowess, however, that Anderson and Stokes stand out in the England team selected to play Australia in the second test at Lords. Notably, they are also the only players in the team not to have attended an independent school.
“Independent schools may argue that cricket would be less competitive without their support for the game.”
This week the Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket delivered its findings after a two-year investigation. One of its conclusions was that a lack of cricket in state schools and a talent pathway structurally aligned to private schools is partly to blame for “elitism and class-based discrimination”.
In defence of independent schools, they may argue that without their support of the game and their financial input in terms of resources, coaching and facilities, cricket would be less competitive at a county and national level. They will also refer to the fact that they have filled a void left by one of the greatest travesties in state education, the selling off of playing fields and the inevitable decline of team sports.
Independent schools are, of course, not altruistic in seeking to recruit the best talent into their teams. Sport is a shop window and a proven way of recruiting and marketing schools and success on the sporting field is important.
“Andrew Flintoff declined scholarships to private schools, but his was an extraordinary talent.”
Many schools have allocated huge resources to promoting cricket. In 2020, Millfield School opened a new £2.6million indoor cricket centre, complementing their pre-existing six pitches and eight lanes of outdoor nets. The indoor centre has five nets – including ones specifically designed to replicate fast wickets in Australia and to imitate turning wickets in Asia – and a speed gun.
Last year, Irish captain Andy Balbirnie said: “It’s an outstanding facility – we have nothing like that in Ireland,” adding “It’s like a different world in some of those schools.”
A report in the Telegraph last year included details of cricket coaches, many former international players, on salaries of over £100k, scholarships for cricketers from abroad (Bede’s school, in Brighton, has a cricket scholarship for players from Barbados), and 110 per cent scholarships to promising players.
“Independent schools need to help promote the game to those who cannot afford it.”
The benefits are considerable and hard to turn down. Last year, Andrew Flintoff was quoted as saying “You’ve got to be lucky or privileged to play men’s cricket”. He was offered scholarships to private schools which he declined, but his was an extraordinary talent.
To widen the game’s appeal, independent schools need to help promote the game to those who cannot afford it, in keeping with their charitable aims. But the facts are stark, and changing attitudes within elites is difficult, as was evidenced from the recent furore about the playing of the annual Eton vs Harrow match at Lords. Playing cricket should not be about luck or privilege. It is a challenge that the ECB – and schools, state and independent – will have to work hard to meet.
Independent schools take pride in producing so many international cricketers and will point to the support they already give to other schools and communities. But the detail of the report may also give some cause for reflection as to how elitist cricket has become and whether they have unwittingly been party to this.
“Playing cricket should not be about luck or privilege.”
Similarly, school governors might well reflect on whether they have done enough to encourage local schools to use their facilities to build their own teams and grow the game in local schools; whether they have been happy building pathways through links with local clubs and associations that exclude those who cannot afford it. They might also consider the ethics of the arms race, of stripping local schools of talent and the role their schools are playing in promoting sport in their locality.
Of course, this is not an issue about cricket alone. Independent schools depend on offering opportunities and advantage and creating pathways with local academies in so many sports as well as with theatres, orchestras and business, is part of their DNA.
“School governors might consider the ethics of the arms race and of stripping local schools of talent.”
And the argument that they are giving other children an opportunity is persuasive – and, after all, many of the finest sporting arenas, theatres and coaches in the country are in their preserve. Yet there is work to do. It is time to make sure that the Jimmy Andersons and Ben Stokes of this world don’t have to walk out at Lords knowing that they are the only ones who have come through without the advantages that exist almost solely within independent schools.