A response from Cricinfo
So, Martin Willamson wrote back pronto:
And I wrote back:
I am English. Terribly sorry about that, but there it is. It is fairly understandable that just as my knowledge of the game is more in-depth about England and that research of newspapers etc is far easy for me using archives here.Thanks for the ONE instance. I am aware there are more abroad. I challenge you to come up with an interesting and varied XI.
Fair enough. Would you mind then, changing the article's title to "Eleven Unusual Interruptions in Cricket in matches played in, or by, England"? Cricinfo is a global website, and surely its writers can put more accurate titles on their pieces, when the scope of the article is not global.
Incidentally, this was the same response I received from Andrew Miller. I don't suppose you have any idea how incredibly lame it sounds for a journalist, writing for an international website (I dare say the top website for the game), to write a supposedly general, global in scope, piece, and then respond to someone pointing out that its completely England-centric, that "Sorry, I'm English"?
As for your 'challenge', well. I thought of one instance from memory. (by the way, what about the Kingston test in 1998(?) called off because of dodgy pitch conditions? On the first day? Yeah, that involved England too, but that was a test.) You guys have access to the best archives in the world - by far the best - and your only response is, "Sorry, I'm English, lets see if you can do better"? Thats poor journalism, and a lame response. I'm an academic, and if I wrote a piece that was supposed to be global in scope (say, about intellectual property) and someone pointed out to me that it was US-centric, my response would not be "I'm sorry, I'm an American academic, now bugger off, and see if you can do better". I would either add a disclaimer, pointing out that I'm not a specialist in global intellectual property issues, and hence my piece would reflect this focus, or if I had the time and inclination, I would work on making my pieces more accurately reflect the global dimensions of the issue. I dare say, that would be the professional response.
I'm sorry Martin, you can do much better. You work for the Wisden Group, and for the world's biggest sports website. You need to set higher standards for yourself. Telling readers that your ostensibly global pieces are unapologetically England-centric is, (have I said it before?), lame. I'm sorry if this sounds patronizing, but there it is.
Have a good summer.