Changing face of Lord's and a nasty Long Room

During the Test, however, not everything was normal for Lord’s. Actually, far from it because the home of cricket experienced extraordinary turbulence. Ahead of the game, it got slammed by the Equity Commission, caught in the firing line for not being in step with contemporary values. Lord’s was shown the mirror, hauled over the coals for discriminating against women and supporting centuries-old elitist tradition (Eton vs Harrow, Oxford vs Cambridge matches) that has no place in modern Britain.

What followed Jonny Bairstow’s unfortunate wander down Lord’s famous slope was far worse. The members got riled and expressed their feelings freely, the whole thing became ugly leading to an official Aussie complaint. A contrite MCC quickly issued an apology and suspended members. But damage control and fire-fighting won’t remove the taint from cricket’s iconic, and much respected, venue.

Spectators getting nasty with players is nothing new. It happens all the time, in Australia it becomes racist, as happened with Siraj not long ago. In India, players can get engaged in a boundary chat, in rich Punjabi, and not all conversation is friendly or pleasant.

But Lord’s prides itself on its high standards, and it is considered special because it sets the bar and (as MCC) makes the rules. For it to find that privileged members (that too in the Long Room, wearing its gold and red colours!) behaved like drunken football louts in a pub is the ultimate sin.

Perhaps the storm will blow over with the understanding that times have changed and that cricket is played and followed by those other than gentlemen. Sport now is competitive and professional and spectators are emotionally invested participants in the proceedings, not just the sober neutral types who applaud a flowing cover drive to the Mound Stand.

While the Long Room flare up was an accidental acquaintance with common reality, Lord’s has been actively shedding its image of stiff exclusivity, of remaining aloof and distant. Lately, it projects a new face, welcoming diversity, and is more inclusive, reflecting a multi-racial, multi-cultural Britain. This shift is not a clever image makeover, more a general desire to move with the times. Evidence to support this was the food served to the media on day 5 — lunch consisted entirely of Indian dishes (down to raita and chaat) even when only two journalists out of 150 present were Indians.

Looking at the broader context, cricket in England throws up contradictory trends. Unlike rugby and football which are massy, cricket is a ‘posh’ sport, not favoured by the youth. But it still resonates with a certain section, to an extent that Harrow (elitist school with 800 students, established 1572) has Mark Ramprakash as its director-cricket. Mark was a county cricket colossus who scored 114 first-class hundreds in 25 seasons playing for Middlesex and Surrey, the two London County sides. He was also England batting coach for an extended period.

With the Ashes on (both for men and women), interest in cricket has spiked and match tickets are traded briskly in black. The women played a 5-day Ashes Test and their T20 games are sold out. Same with key Vitality Blast T20 games; Middlesex defeated Surrey, which had five international bowlers (including Sam Curran, Chris Jordan and Sunil Narine) before a full house, in a game where 500 runs were scored.

With cricket embracing change, Test cricket adapting T20’s exciting methods and women’s cricket on an upwards trajectory, this is English cricket’s big chance to catch the imagination of fans. But to seize the moment, they must win and somehow find a way to best ‘those bloody Aussies’.