Recognition required for the heroes of 1965

Derbyshire don't drop many balls these days, their dealings on and off the field usually being both timely and professional.

That being the case, I hope that they don't allow this summer to end without formal recognition of an outstanding feat from fifty years ago that will, in all likelihood, never be replicated.

In that summer, Derbyshire finished exactly half way in the table, ninth out of, at that time, seventeen first-class counties. Seven games were won, the same number lost, with fourteen being drawn. Nothing spectacular in that, but the feats of our opening bowlers made it a summer to go down in the annals of the county's history.

Harold Rhodes was first in the national bowling averages, with 119 wickets at just eleven runs each, while his opening partner Brian Jackson was second, with 120 wickets at 12.42...

Yes, conditions favoured seam bowling for much of the year, as evidenced by the fact that below them in the averages were the likes of Fred Trueman, Tom Cartwright, Brian Statham, Derek Shackleton and Jack Flavell, seamers to a man. Yet that should not take away from the fact that the Derbyshire pair outbowled the lot of them.

Harold was then in his pomp. His form that year suggested - no, INSISTED - that he should have gone on the winter tour to Australia, but the ceremonial calling of his action by umpire Sid Buller, in the match against the South African touring side at Chesterfield, put paid to that. The many contemporary Derbyshire players I have spoken to are convinced that Buller was set up by the cricket authorities as the fall guy, to ensure that Rhodes bowling was not going to earn him an England tour place, despite repeated calls for his inclusion by the media and by other players.

There was nothing wrong with Harold's action, as was eventually, far too late, proven. He had a physiological abnormality called a hyperflexion of the elbow joint, which saw that joint go past a straight arm as it came through and become straight at the point of delivery. That it was well within the regulations is undeniable. In the defence of the small handful of umpires who called him over the years, it created an optical illusion and they were allowed, as the law stood at the time, to call someone whose action was felt to be different.

Yet he was filmed from so many angles, sometimes with his arm in a splint and it made no difference to his bowling. Besides which, his action was a classical, side-on thing of beauty and anyone with any knowledge of cricket should have known that you cannot throw from that position. He was also remorselessly accurate in the finest Derbyshire tradition, something that the average chucker could never be.

The bottom line is that Harold Rhodes became a victim of the MCC's desire to clean up a raft of quick bowlers in other countries who did throw, They didn't want to be seen to insist on others getting their house in order and do nothing themselves, so they used an outstanding, legitimate bowler as the pawn in their game.

How Harold maintained his dignity through several years of accusations is remarkable, yet the irony was that the accusations over his action only resurfaced, after a gap of several years, in 1965, when he bowled no differently, but with greater success, than he had done in previous, injury-hit seasons. That the umpire who called him had watched him bowl on numerous occasions in that period is both telling and galling, as is the fact that the calling came at the point when the press clamour became almost deafening.

The bottom line is that Harold Rhodes was a great bowler, using that word well within the constraints of its accepted meaning. Brian Jackson was a very good one, a time-served league professional who came late to the county game but took to it like the proverbial duck to water. He wasn't especially quick, but was lively enough to beat the hesitant defensive shot and to trouble those who decided to take him on. In the words of one of his team mates to me, he gave a good few batsmen sore thighs, as he jagged the ball in quickly off a length, as well as taking their wickets with the one that went the other way.

Edwin Smith told me that the speed at which Harold Rhodes went through, when he was fielding at short leg, 'made me whistle, as it did a few batsmen'. Brian wasn't that quick, but was an admirable foil whose six years in the first-class game brought him 457 wickets at just eighteen runs each. Harold took 993 wickets in our colours at the same average, retiring early and not bothered about the other seven wickets that would have got him into a very exclusive club with a membership of just seven men.

We will not see their like again, but it is a pleasure to record that both men are still with us, Brian now 81 and Harold 79. I hope that the club does the right thing and formally acknowledges and recognises their remarkable feats of that distant summer.

The A-Z of Derbyshire Cricket - R is for Rhodes: Harold Rhodes

Writing this piece on the run up to Christmas, it strikes me that it is a shame we never did sign Rudolph at Derbyshire...

Jacques Rudolph very nearly became a Derbyshire player, but cried off with a need for shoulder surgery and went on to become a major force for Yorkshire over several seasons. His form was spectacular, but would he have got top place in a very strong 'R' category?

Probably not, because there's some major talent. One cannot allow the category to pass without mention of Arthur Richardson, no great player but still the only man to lead Derbyshire to a county championship title. He never made a century for the club, but had a wonderful habit of scoring runs when they were most needed. An average of only nineteen tells a tale of an ordinary batsman, but Richardson was a gritty fighter and pulled together a group of strong individuals to make Derbyshire an outstanding side in the 1930s.

Moving forward, Alan Revill was a doughty batsman and wonderful fielder for the Derbyshire side of the 1950s. He scored a respectable fifteen centuries for the club, but also held almost four hundred catches. Good judges have told me that he had one of the best pairs of hands they have ever seen and I'm not going to argue with a record like that.

Then there's Adrian Rollins, a very good opening batsman over several seasons who hit the ball extremely hard and had a fairly sound technique to back it up. His career was ended prematurely by injury after a move to Northamptonshire, at a time when the advent of winter saw a revolving door installed at the County Ground and far too many good players go through it, never to return. A mid-thirties average is indicative of a talent that never quite reached full flower, but left good memories for supporters.

Another player I enjoyed watching was Bruce Roberts, whose background was in Northern Rhodesia and whose style somewhat indicative of that. He was a poor starter to an innings, but when he got going was a fine stroke player, very strong in front of the wicket. He was also a useful medium-pace bowler and a stopgap wicket-keeper, though an average of just over thirty isn't enough to get him top spot in this company.

In third place is Chris Rogers, who has played for four counties and seemed destined to only win a solitary Test cap, until a belated call-up last summer saw him look as good as any of the Australian batsmen, something that has continued to be the case this winter.

In Derbyshire colours, Rogers often carried the batting, much as Michael Di Venuto did before him and he remains a compact, organised player who knows his game and plays within his limitations. He's not a hitter and has largely found T20 cricket a challenge, but will be remembered by Derbyshire followers as a batsman of rare talent, charm and class.

Yet for me, it comes down to a father and son, a spinner and seamer.

Albert Ennion Groucutt Rhodes was better known as 'Dusty' and was one of the countless cricketers whose careers were severely truncated by the Second World War. He emerged from the conflict as the replacement for Tommy Mitchell, who opted for the greater financial rewards of league cricket, and was a very fine bowler until 1954, as well as a batsman good enough to score four centuries. On five occasions he took a hat trick (four of them for the county) and he offered a fine alternative to the seam of Gladwin and Jackson. He took over 650 wickets, despite losing six summers to the war and later became a successful and highly-regarded umpire.

Sons of sporting fathers have a very difficult path to success and relatively few have surpassed the parental exploits, but Harold Rhodes was, by any standards, a wonderful bowler. Although his career was unfairly and unnecessarily tarnished by accusations of throwing from a couple of umpires, Rhodes maintained a remarkably high standard of bowling throughout his career with the club.

Derbyshire County Cricket Club has been blessed with its fair share of outstanding seam bowlers over its long history, but none of those reared locally were quicker than Rhodes, who remained so for a long period. Alan Ward was perhaps the same pace at his best, but had a much shorter period at his peak.

In considering top spot in a category blessed with very good players, I have taken longevity into account. Chris Rogers was a very good player, but for a shorter period than 'Dusty Rhodes'. Harold was one of the top three seam bowlers in the country for ten years or more and was shockingly ignored by national selectors.

England's loss was Derbyshire's gain though and Rhodes finished his first-class career with over a thousand wickets taken at under twenty. He was quick, when conditions and the match situation warranted it, but he was also unfailingly accurate. The first alone will trouble batsmen, but when coupled with a rhythmic action and pinpoint accuracy he became the scourge of the county circuit, even when playing under untolerable pressure.

As I have written before, I am slightly biased as he was a childhood hero, but Harold Rhodes was a standout performer, not always in an especially good side.

If you want more information on his career, you can read more in the ongoing interview I had with him recently. While some will find it hard to believe I overlooked Chris Rogers, I can only say one thing.

He was - and remains - a very fine player. But I saw Harold Rhodes...

Postscript - what happened to Q? We've never had a player whose name began with that letter!