Declaration

Fantasy Bob has noted some coverage in the media of late about the Declaration of Arbroath. As ever, interest piqued by the possibility of a cricketing story, and eager to find out who Arbroath had been playing  and whether their Declaration had set up the possibility of an exciting end to the match, he succumbed to the clickbait.

The Declaration of Arbroath - it didn't set up a run chase

Of course he understood his error immediately. There was not the slightest cricketing interest in what he read - not surprisingly, given that this particular Declaration was made in 1320. The Declaration of Arbroath is a  missive to Pope John, endorsed by 39 of the most powerful Scottish barons and earls, and pleads for the Pope’s support for Robert the Bruce and for help in the continuing wars of independence. Its most famous lines are still stirring even after 700 years. ‘It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom, for
that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.' That is what occupation of the crease is about.  Notwithstanding this rousing sentiment, the Declaration is far from an assertion of democratic ambition. 

Be that as it may, the lack of cricketing interest in the article did not stop FB’s dwindling collection of brain cells from musing on declarations of the cricketing sort. For the declaration is unique to cricket – in no other sport has one side the opportunity to stop what it is successfully doing in order to give the other a go.  It would be absurd for a football team to say, ‘Well, we’ve scored enough goals now, we’re going to let you have the ball and see if you get as many.’

Joe Root in declarative mode

The declaration these days features only in the Test and First Class levels of the game, but many moons ago when FB started playing senior cricket, the declaration was a thing even in the lower leagues. In those days matches were defined by the number of total overs. The side batting first could bat for 50% of those overs plus or minus 5. The side batting second would have the remaining overs. So the side batting first could  have extra overs to bowl the opposition out or they could stoke up their own total and give the opposition a harder chase. In those days, bowling the opposition out was the only way to secure victory.

FB realises that to his younger readers (he wishes) this all sounds positively medieval. Indeed they might be wondering whether there is a connection to the Declaration of Arbroath after all. But that is how it was – it was after all an age of subtlety and refinement. After all this is the era when Shud Uppa Ya Face topped the charts.

FB can remember these were difficult decisions and he had many factors to take into account. How many runs was enough? How was his bowling muscle feeling? His best mate had been on 49 for the last 3 overs – could he justify cutting him off and denying him that half-century? Would the tea urn be hot yet? It was an exacting test of leadership.

Inevitably taking the full 5 overs either way was relatively rare. Instead, skippers would aggressively declare with zillions of runs (well, 200 anyway) on the board and 1 over to go. The authorities, with the adrenaline of intensive modernisation coursing through their veins, abandoned this subtlety and games became limited overs games. As nowadays a side could win by taking no wickets. Life became less rich and interesting.

But at Test and First Class level, the declaration is still one of the possibilities. In fact every match presents 3 possibilities for declarations. FB reports further below on such an instance although outside factors explain the rash of declarations.  It is therefore a very rare occurence. But many matches have 2 declarations usually the indication of immensely benign batting conditions or a match curtailed by the weather. 

The object of the declaration is to maximise a team’s chance of winning and to put the other team under some pressure. Time left in the match must be balanced against the number of runs scored – Test skippers do not generally have to worry about whether the tea urn will be hot enough. Just whether their bowlers will be hot enough to blast through the opposition batsmen. Skippers can be bold – though they are few and far between these days and many declarations do not set a gettable target and the match dribbles into a boring draw. The wish to avoid defeat is the overwhelming priority.

Cricket lore is filled with tales of declarations that went wrong.  Or declarations that didn't happen or happened too late.  FB has room only to relate one.  This is one of the more notorious instances - what seemed like a very sporting decision came to be seen in other lights once the full circumstances were revealed.

Cronje facing the music

In January 2000, South African skipper Hansie Cronje  seemed to embody the best in sportsmanship.  In a rain affected match both sides declared their first innings on 0-0.  In their second innings,  South Africa reached 248-8 in their second, before Cronje called his batsmen in. England chased down the total to record a two-wicket win, with Darren Gough hitting the winning runs. 

Sadly, it became apparent some time later that all was not as it seemed.  Cronje had accepted money (and a leather jacket) from a bookie to ensure there was a result in the match.  Scandal and ignominy ensued.  Cronje met a tragic end; cricket is still fighting the fixers.  Tricky things declarations.