‘ON 99, WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT AND MORE EXPERIENCE, I MIGHT HAVE DONE THINGS DIFFERENTLY, BUT I SUPPOSE ONE IS REMEMBERED MORE FOR GETTING 99 AT LORD’S THAN FOR GETTING 100 THERE!’
Christopher Martin-Jenkins was born in Peterborough on 20 January 1945, and is a cricket journalist, commentator and author. He joined The Cricketer magazine from university and has been cricket correspondent for the BBC in two spells, for the Daily Telegraph for 10 years and for The Times also for 10 years, and where he was most recently chief cricket correspondent until 2008. He has been a member of the BBC’s Test Match Special team since 1973 and has written numerous books, including several best sellers. He was awarded an MBE in 2009 for services to sport and was appointed president of MCC in 2010.
It is the fifth and final day of the Test match at a packed Newlands in Cape Town and a fascinating day’s cricket is in prospect, with every conceivable result possible. Christopher is anchoring the first session of play for the BBC’s Test Match Special programme. I sit quietly in the wings, waiting for him to come off air. The view from the media centre, flanked away to the right byTable Mountain, is simply magnificent. As soon as he is free, we climb a flight of stairs and seat ourselves behind rows of journalists crouched over their laptops, not daring to miss a single delivery as the drama is acted out in front of them.
It is difficult for us not to be distracted at times, particularly when England wickets start to fall, but despite this Christopher talks enthusiastically about his life-long love of the wonderful game. He became interested as a small boy and as is often the case, his father was a big influence. ‘He was a very keen cricketer and as long as I can remember I was passionate about the game. We played in the garden at home and I played as soon as I got to prep school in Eastbourne. As a small boy, I was quite good, I think, which always helps. I played whenever I could because I just loved it. I also had my first opportunity to watch county cricket when I was at prep school because we had a very good master, Reg Lord, who had played for Oxford University. He was an excellent cricket coach who loved the game, and took us at the end of the summer term to watch two Sussex matches, in the Eastbourne week at The Saffrons. It was enormous fun sitting on the edge of the boundary and then getting the chance to go and play with a tennis ball in the intervals.
‘As I say, I was a bit of a star in prep school cricket and, in those days, I was quite a demon bowler. I could bowl until, at about the age of 14, I suddenly shot up and lost the control that had come naturally. I was never really a consistent bowler after that.
‘But I was also a reasonable batsman, capable of going in at first wicket down, until I got in amongst better players. When I went to Marlborough, I should, in normal circumstances, have had three years in the team but in 1961 they had probably the best side they’d ever had. Mike Griffith, for example, was absolutely outstanding as a schoolboy, and I don’t think he ever got better than he was at Marlborough. He did have his odd triumphs, such as the hundred against the Australian touring team at Hove in 1968. So he was still capable of brilliance, but his misfortune was not to keep wicket at Cambridge, because Deryck Murray, the West Indian, went there and then, later on at Sussex, Jim Parks was ’keeper.’
In 1963, Christopher played at Lord’s in what was then an annual two-day school match between Marlborough and Rugby. He remembers it very clearly for an innings that might have had a happier ending than it did. ‘It was one of those very good games of cricket, with Marlborough losing a game we should have won. We needed 200-ish to win the match in the fourth innings, but we lost early wickets and were in trouble at about 20 for three. I hadn’t played for three weeks because of a broken finger that had not healed properly, but another batsman called Tim Halford and I had a stand and we got to a position where we were sailing to victory when he got out. I got close to my dream of making a hundred at Lord’s, which probably temporarily took precedence over winning the match, instead of the other way round. We took a risky single, there was a moment’s hesitation and a throw from cover hit the stumps directly. And then the same thing happened on the other side of the wicket: again a brilliant bit of fielding and another direct hit. Both were feasible singles, but a bit of hesitation, as I say, and two run-outs, with me on 99. Then I got hit on the damaged finger and holed out to mid on! But they bowled very well and we lost a good game of cricket by a handful of runs. On 99, with the benefit of hindsight and more experience, I might have done things differently, but I suppose one is remembered more for getting 99 at Lord’s than for getting 100 there!’
After Marlborough, Christopher went up to Cambridge and the prospect of more opportunities on the cricketing front. ‘I was probably a better cricketer as I grew a bit stronger. I was too much of a beanpole at Cambridge and although I was always there or thereabouts, I never got into the University side. I had one big opportunity in 1965, when I was pushing for a blue and was picked to play for the Quidnuncs [a club for leading Cambridge University players] against the University at Fenners. I think fate was against us because the three-day game started on a Saturday in beautiful weather, and the University made 350 or so and then declared. By close of play, I believe, we had lost Henry Blofeld, who had opened the batting, but must have made close to 70 in reply. There was a rest day on Sunday and then on Monday the weather completely changed. It was foggy, and it was unplayable – it really was. By the time the match was abandoned we were about 75 for 8, Mark Whittaker and Jonathan Harvey had four wickets apiece and I had been bowled for a duck. Peter May had been due to captain the Quidnuncs but wasn’t able to. It was officially a first-class match at the time it was played, but then they had a look at it at an MCC meeting at Christmas and decided it didn’t merit first-class status. So that was the start and finish of my first-class career!’ The only small consolation that I could offer Christopher was that, had the match retained its first-class status, he would not have qualified for inclusion in Cricket Wonderful Cricket. I couldn’t help but feel that he would have been prepared to make that sacrifice!
Over the years, he has made appearances for Surrey second XI at the Oval, in J P Getty’s XI at Wormsley, for Marlborough Blues, the Lord’s Taverners and others, but opportunities have been limited. ‘Once I started working for the BBC in 1970 it became very difficult. Being a cricket journalist inevitably meant working on Saturdays so I was able to play in a few Cricketer Cup matches but not much more than that.’
At Lord’s in May 2010, long after our meeting in Cape Town, it was announced at MCC’s annual general meeting that Christopher had been appointed its next president. He started his term of office in October and quickly identified corruption within the game as an issue that has to be addressed, both as far as spot fixing and even more seriously, match fixing are concerned. ‘The programmes of education, prevention and investigation appear not to have been entirely successful but this is clearly more the fault of the criminals and a few greedy cricketers than it is of the administrators. The corruption, which results from illegal bookmaking on the subcontinent, is more deeply entrenched than cricket itself and I feel that, in the main, it is Asia’s responsibility to try to get rid of this corruption at its very source. In the final analysis, however, gamblers will only succeed if there are players who are prepared to be bought, so there is only one way of tackling this and that is zero tolerance.’
Another of Christopher’s concerns, one that we initially discuss in Cape Town, is fixture congestion and how to deal with it. ‘I think there is just too much professional cricket played, and too much international cricket, and I don’t think it does anybody any good, really. The lack of principles amongst those who run cricket depresses me a bit. They just don’t have any concern, it seems to me, other than making as much money from the game as they can. You just long for them to sit down and say, “OK, let’s have a logical programme that keeps everybody wanting more.” Subsequently, wearing his president’s hat, he tells me, ‘I think it is true to say that there is general agreement that we must have fewer domestic and international fixtures. Twenty20 cricket is in danger of expanding too fast and, hopefully, the need for a more sensible county programme working alongside the right level of international fixtures is in the process of being dealt with.
‘I also want to see what I can do as far as over rates are concerned. I will try, with MCC’s 450-odd matches played around the country and abroad, to persuade the match managers to attempt to get in 16 or 17 overs per hour. I remember when Hubert Doggart was president and I was a match manager in the early 1980s, that he pressed us all to try and bowl 20 overs an hour, because things were already slipping at that stage. That was hard enough, and now they’re down to well below 14 at first-class level. I feel that if MCC can at least set an example at that sort of rate, it can teach the schoolboys how quickly the game can be played if there is not too much of the posing that goes on almost imperceptibly at first-class level. A lot of the problem seems to stem from what they see at matches and on television, and that is why the spirit of the game is so important and why first-class cricketers should observe it.’
Christopher would also like to try to help MCC to reach the right decision regarding the further development of the ground at Lord’s. ‘There is a lot of money at stake if it all goes ahead, and there could be a massive upheaval for very many years. Obviously, there needs to be a lot of careful thought before any move is made and I am sure that will be the case.’
Christopher’s son Robin, the Sussex all-rounder, retired from the game in July 2010, to start a new career in teaching at Hurstpierpoint College. Had Christopher ever found it difficult reporting on a Sussex match in which Robin was playing? Had the family drawn up a set of rules to cover what could be an awkward situation? ‘The only rules as such were self-imposed ones. I got a little less embarrassed about it as he established himself in the Sussex side. In the early days I did almost anything not to mention him at all unless I had to, and I think the first time I did, I referred to him as a “double-barrelled all-rounder”! But as time went on I decided I must treat him just like everyone else – reporting what he did only if I would have reported on it had it been John Smith. I couldn’t say he was worth a place in the England squad, not publicly anyway, but it never brought about any friction, at least not that I’m aware of. He ploughed his own furrow with great determination and I tried not to offer advice unless it was asked for – and it wasn’t often asked for! Of course, once he retired, it ceased to be a problem. He had such a good last season in 2010, and it shows you about the psychology of the game. He relaxed. He knew what his future was. If Sussex had realised his potential, as a one-day batsman in particular, he might have gone a bit further in that form of the game.’
When Christopher came down from university it was to join The Cricketer as assistant editor. E W ‘Jim’ Swanton, who was editorial director of the magazine for more than 20 years, helped him to develop both his writing skills and his knowledge of the game. ‘I knew from a very early age that I wanted to be a sort of Swanton. He was probably the one I read most and he taught me some of the basics. He also made me read cricket history, which I hadn’t done up to that point. He gave me a book by Robertson-Glasgow [R C ‘Crusoe’ Robertson-Glasgow, a cricketer and cricket writer] and wrote in it, “Christopher, in high expectation.” Which was nice of him, because it was almost as soon as I started at The Cricketer. Despite being passionate about contemporary cricket and knowing everything about it, I didn’t know much about the history of the game. A chap rang up in my first week at The Cricketer and said, “I just want to check the spelling of Kortright.” I said, “Do you mean Cartwright?” and he said, “No, no – Kortright. Haven’t you heard of Kortright?” I hadn’t, but I swiftly put that right. In fact, he was one of the fastest bowlers of all time, and played for Cambridge and Essex in the late W G Grace’s time. But I realised then that if I was going to be taken seriously, I needed to brush up on my history.’
Since those early years at The Cricketer, Christopher has watched and written and talked about masses of cricket, but how much has stuck? Does he have a very good memory or does he rely on a wonderful database? ‘Yes, I have quite a good memory for cricket. But not for anything else… What’s your name again?! Increasingly, I find that the more cricket there is, tours fuse into one another. Once upon a time, you remembered years by who was touring in that summer, but not any more. So it is a case of jogging the memory, and even that’s all changed. Once, it was by recourse to Wisden, to check the facts. Now you can do it instantly on the computer, or your telephone, on websites like Cricinfo and so on.
‘Computers have changed it altogether for access of information, and also for speed of communication. When I started at The Cricketer, it was a case of typing out pieces. When someone like Neville Cardus produced something, which he did every month, I would get handwritten stuff which I would have to type out – and jolly tricky handwriting it was, too! Then it would go to the printer and you would get a galley [proof] back and correct it for any literals, and then you would paste it on to the page. Then it would go back to the printer again and you would get a page proof of what it looked like on the page. The whole thing was a very long process. Now they just do it all on a computer. So, from a production point of view, it has all changed.
‘And from a writing point of view, too. Again, I started on typewriters and I suppose you fiddled with your copy much less than you do now. Now you can just rejig what you’ve written and it’s done in no time at all, but you were much less inclined to do that when you had typed it out. It ought to be quicker to do it nowadays but because you’ve got this infinite capacity to make little changes, I’m never quite happy with the way I have phrased it, and have tended to stay rather late in the press box when others have already finished!’
In that context, it is sometimes said that Christopher is not the world’s greatest timekeeper, a suggestion he finds quite amusing. ‘It’s absolutely true, but I do try to squeeze whatever I can into every minute. But I would claim to be last-minute as opposed to late!’
For journalists and commentators, with new technologies have come changes in relationships with and access to the players, who are now media-trained to toe the party line. ‘In my early days of touring I was the same age as the players. We were probably in the same hotel and it was all very friendly and easy. There were no press officers to go through. Although, on one occasion when Geoff Boycott said something controversial – it was deemed that he had criticised Mike Denness’s captaincy – it was blown up into tabloid headlines and Donald Carr, the tour manager, said, “Right, no more interviews with the press.” This made me rather unpopular with the tabloid writers for a while, because it was my interview which had caused this decision. It was rather nice for me, because I didn’t have to put a tape recorder in front of somebody at the end of every day’s play for a while. But now everything seems to be much more controlled, through press conferences and so on, which is boring if you are reasonably independently minded and you have views of your own. I think, even now, the most interesting writers are the ones who don’t feel they have to quote players all the time.’
In 2008, during the Test Match Special coverage of the New Zealand game at Lord’s, Christopher, perhaps ill advisedly, used a fishing analogy: ‘Vettori stays on the bank and keeps his rod down, so to speak.’ The commentary team sniggered and giggled as Christopher battled to regain his composure, and Bill Frindall helpfully and audibly wished him good luck. But he admits it was not the first time that he had ‘corpsed’ during a commentary. ‘There have been one or two others, actually, but in recent times that is the only one that has reduced everyone to giggles. Back in 1979, Brian Johnston and I once had uncontrollable giggles, but no one was listening then, because it was a Prudential Cup match between England and Canada. What set us off on this occasion was the unusual name of a Canadian substitute, Showkat Baksh. I had done a little bit of homework on the Canadian team and actually taken in what this chap looked like, but Johnners hadn’t done any. I pointed to the name on the scorecard, but he just couldn’t believe it and off he went in a fit of giggles, which, of course, was extremely contagious.’
In cricketing circles, it is very apparent that Christopher has a host of admirers, including the cricket-mad lyricist Tim Rice who says, ‘I have always been a great fan and think he is my favourite commentator by quite a distance. I just like his use of the language. He’s witty and he’s obviously passionately committed to cricket. I like his voice, which is probably the kind of voice that’s not very fashionable these days. He is just very good, and writes beautifully as well.’
Although Christopher has passed the role of chief cricket correspondent at The Times to Mike Atherton, he still writes regularly for the paper and elsewhere, and maintains his place securely as a long-term member of the Test Match Special team with as much enthusiasm for writing and broadcasting as ever. ‘Well, perhaps not quite. I still love it but I am relieved not to have to write a piece at the end of every day – I really am. I have become a bit tired. It’s worn me out, to be honest. I think I’ve got the same basic enthusiasm but not the same energy. I still enjoy the travel but inevitably you go to the same places over and over again, so it loses its novelty. There again, I have got wearier of the whole business of airports and hotels. But still I am not sure I can go through a winter without seeing cricket in the sun, somewhere, at some time.’
From playing and watching to writing and commentating, Christopher has been totally immersed in cricket for virtually his whole life. So what has he gained from it all? What has he most valued? ‘Gosh. Infinite pleasure really – especially playing. Cricket people on the whole are nice people, and civilised people. So it is making a lot of friends, and seeing the world, and doing something I love for a profession. A lifetime’s good fortune in doing something that I like doing, which so many people don’t get from their work. I’ve been incredibly lucky, really.’
It is time for Christopher to start his second TMS session of the day, with England four down following the dismissal of night watchman James Anderson. I leave the media centre and head for my seat at the other end of the ground, reflecting on our chat and totally unaware that I am about to witness the climax of one of the most exciting drawn matches ever. The joy of cricket surely comes in many different and wonderful ways.