Kmflett's Blog

While a tweet describing Geoffrey Boycott as ‘white,male,straight,Tory,knows about cricket’ might be thought to be a criticism in fact he agreed with it and RTd it before deleting it.

It seems a like a decent, if partial, description, but the official explanation for his departure as a regular feature on Test Match Special is that given his age and health is not sensible to use him this year (except for possible appearances as a summariser) and that is probably that. Boycott is 79 while Henry Blofeld was 77 when he bowed out.

Writing in the Sunday Times (7.6) Simon Wilde makes two relevant points. Firstly that Boycott is not really part of the cricket Establishment. When Blofled departed he did it with a lap of Lords. That’s not currently possible but even so the departure of the former player from a Yorkshire pit village is more of a whimper than a bang.

Secondly Wilde notes that across cricketing commentating there are few now that played before the late 1980s and there are fortunately more women.

That begs the question of whether a Boycott replacement is required. Of course a simply a replacement is not available,as whatever view one takes of him Boycott is a one-off.

But the wider point is whether the TMS box needs someone who was on the ‘player’ side of the classic Gentlemen v Players divide. Actually Michael Vaughan already at least partly fits that (he didnt go to public school) but its not something he plays up to in ‘my day’ style.

As a listener to TMS since the 1960s I still think it needs distinctive characters to attract a wider audience though. Whether it was Brian Johnston (well known outside of cricket commentary), Fred Trueman or John Arlott there was hinterland.

Is that what an audience in 2020 wants? I’m hardly the one to judge being 63 but it remains I think a relevant question. I’d hope Jimmy Anderson can be persauded into a permanent broadcasting role once he eventually retires from playing.