Cricket’s Class Conundrum: Has Elitism in Cricket Run Its Course?

Cricket has a class problem. With the help of those on the ground, Oliver Lawrie assesses where elitism fits into a game that is increasingly defined by class divisions.

Ask yourself a question: what exactly is the purpose of cricket?

Is it to separate winners from losers, ensuring those courageous enough have a shot at glory, the most elusive of sporting commodities. In other words, to ensure the crème de la crème of the cricketing world rises to the top, in so doing placing elitism at the heart of the game.

Or is the answer more fundamental than that – more vital to the cricketing world than any individual moment of sporting glory could hope to be? That is to say, the true value of cricket lies in its ability to transform the lives of the everyday cricket lover – for whom the pursuit of sporting glory remains nothing but a pipe dream.

Cricket has many grave questions that still need answering. How does the game meaningfully and sustainably come to terms with the institutionally racist foundations on which it was built? In a man’s world, and after years of discrimination, how does it make sure the women’s game is finally treated with the fairness it deserves?

Without undermining the importance of these questions, I’d like to suggest that there is a third debate we must add to the continuing discourse around justice and equality in the cricketing world.

Namely, where does elitism fit into a cricketing world that is – slowly but surely – rejecting the discrimination that has come with its historic classist structures?

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it

It cannot be overlooked that elitism is an intrinsic part cricket’s DNA.

The earliest definitive reference to cricket being played comes from a 1597 court case, which outlined that boys at the ‘ffree schoole of Guldeford’ would play ‘creckette’. In today’s money, boys would play cricket at Royal Grammar School, Guildford.

It is clear, then, that even at its genesis, wealth and opportunity were fundamental to your cricketing chances. This is a trend which would only continue.

In the 725 years of cricket’s confirmed existence, it appears that, in terms of elitism defining the game, not much has changed.

It still has a vice-like grip on the cricket – consider the privilege and opportunity you need to succeed in the game, even at its grassroots level.

Take a look at a Sky Sports subscription fee. Try stocking a kitbag with the latest gear, or the costs incurred for joining a club.

And yet, the game brings in billions upon billions of dollars with every passing year. Is it then time  for cricket to realign its values, and finally recognise the value of pluralism at the expense of its elitist tendencies?

With simple questions come complex answers

The fairest way of approaching this debate is to ask those on the frontline who profit from, and suffer at the hands of, elitism within cricket.

Enter Matthew Crookes. He works as a community programme coordinator for the Yorkshire Cricket Foundation (YCF), working to bring cricket to some of the most underprivileged communities in England.

Thanks to an illustrious, and ongoing, coaching career, Mark Garaway represents the converse. Without making a value judgement, from his time in the England coaching setup, and now as director of cricket at Millfield, he has lived and breathed the elite side of the English game for many years.

Between them both sits Sam Pimm, a Marylebone Cricket Club Foundation (MCCF) Hub Manager in charge of a centre which provides free-to-access cricket coaching to under-privileged children, but gets its funding from the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), one of the most elite sporting clubs in the world.

And yet, after just minutes of conversation with all three, it became clear that this cannot be reduced to a binary issue.

With choreographed uniformity, Crookes, Garaway and Pimm highlighted the fundamental importance of grassroots cricket in their own development.

‘Everyone deserves any opportunity to reap the benefits sport can give. I don’t know where I’d be without sport’. Crookes went on to attribute every opportunity he’s had to his involvement with grassroots sports as a child.

Garaway, too, reminisced fondly about the grassroots entry he profited from at a young age:

“My love of cricket was very club orientated. […] I remember sitting on the boundary at Burton Cricket Club in Wiltshire, watching my Dad play when I was just 5 or 6”.

Pimm, likewise, attributed more than just his love of cricket the grassroots game:

“Strangely its everything but the cricket I now value from my time playing village cricket as a kid – it was about being healthy, challenging myself away from school and making new friends.”

And yet, simultaneously, there was a readiness to accept the role elitism plays in any healthy cricketing structure, and the inspiration having truly elite performance can offer society at large.

Put simply, the answer isn’t to eliminate elitism and prioritise pluralism, but rather to emphasise that any elite game can help the game flourish on all levels, on the proviso that it is accessible for all.

When pressed on this, Garaway recognised the importance of mobility between the grassroot and elite game:

“The things that are transformational are the bursaries – there have been some unbelievable stories of when lives have been transformed through bursary and scholarship. Just one example of that is when the Maynard Trust funded two years of a cricket scholarship for Lewis Goldsworthy, who now plays for Somerset. His family weren’t even considering sending him to an independent school, and that move really did change his life. I’m not saying he wouldn’t have made that transition, but it definitely made it a lot easier”.

Likewise, Crookes praised the value that visiting professional players, who are only achieve stardom due to the elite game, have had in the deprived communities he works in:

“We had a meet the stars event. Shadabh Khan and Haris Rauf, who are two world-wide cricketing superstars, came down to Bradford to meet the local community I work with, and the response was simply amazing. [Community visits] are something that should always be written into professional players’ contracts.”

Pimm acknowledged the difficult situation in which he finds himself; he earns a living by pluralising cricket, but that is only made possible by the financial generosity of the cricket elite:

“There has to be a balance. These structures already exist, so for me the question is how we make positive change in the situation we’re in, and we can’t achieve that by going all in on one or the other.”

In all three instances, there was a recognition that, whatever your background, cricket needs to be a game for everyone. Crookes saw value in ensuring the YCF and Yorkshire County Cricket Club worked as closely together on these issues as possible. As he put it, ‘it would not go unappreciated if [their work] publicised a bit more across all areas of the club.’

Garaway, too, is able to actively contribute to improvements in the structures of the game, for he himself gladly finds the time to work with local community cricket projects, and Pimm confessed his reservations about the archaic nature of his parent organization.

But, regardless of the finer details of the interviewees’ experiences, one thing remained crystal clear – elitism and pluralism exist in a cricketing symbiosis: without one, the other could never hope to flourish.

All they need do is pick up bat and ball

There is work to be done. As we have seen with other sports, it’s all-too easy for the balance to shift wildly in favour of one side, almost always those on the elite end of the spectrum.

With lucrative franchise tournaments becoming ten a penny, with broadcast deals reaching values of cosmic proportions, and with profit rapidly becoming the sole driving force behind the game that we know and love, we will do well to exercise caution.

But, for now at least, we must recognise that, in any pursuit of making cricket a game for all, eliminating elitism alone simply isn’t the answer.

Instead, the challenge lies in channeling elitism, acknowledging that the game must serve everyone’s interests, regardless of who they are.

In the hope that, if someone wants to thrive in cricket, all they need do is pick up bat and ball.