Ashes Heroes No 49: Ken Barrington

Continuing our weekly series of essays on the men who made the Ashes, counting down the weeks before Cap'n KP takes on Ricky Ponting's Aussies (God help them). After Gary Pratt last week, this week's hero is Ken Barrington. Yes, two Englishmen in a row, but I suspect the top half of this list will be overpopulated with Australians.

Twenty-one Englishmen average 50 or more in Ashes Tests, but only seven of them played more than a handful of matches and of them, Ken Barrington, with an average of 64 from 23 matches against the men in green caps, stands in second place, a smidgin behind Herbert Sutcliffe.

Yet if Sutcliffe's runs, first in tandem with Hobbs and then supported by Hammond and others, helped England to win three of the six series he competed in, Barrington's efforts with the bat never led to him lifting the urn. His matches came between 1961 and 1968, a spell when England lost two and drew three series (the two defeats each time being by one match in the rubber), but Barrington was often the difference between draw and defeat.

The craggy-faced Surrey batsman was a bit of a dasher in his youth but transformed himself by necessity into one of cricket's great stonewallers, the hardest man in the side to shift. And Down Under, where he averaged 70 in two series, he helped England to come away with a share of the spoils each time he toured.

On his first tour, the series was tied at 1-1 when England came to Adelaide for the fourth Test, with Australia looking to tighten the screw. Barrington top-scored with 63 in the first innings but England gave up a 62-run deficit and then, chasing 356 to win, were four for two before Barrington's four-hour 132 not out steadied the ship and secured a draw.

Series alive and on to Sydney, then, where Barrington did his best to set up the crucial win, but he lacked support. In the first innings, Barrington made 101, with Fred Titmus's 34 the next best score, and in the second he made 94 but Australia ground out 152 in 72 eight-ball overs to share the spoils.

Three years on, Barrington again seemed to be fighting a one-man resistance. Now bumped down a place in the order to No 4 by John Edrich, Barrington made 60 and 102 at Adelaide in the fourth Test (Titmus, again, was the only other man to make a half-century in either innings) but England were well beaten as Australia levelled the series. With the momentum with them, Australia pushed for victory in the final Test but Barrington's 115, plus the weather, stymied them and again England escaped the tour with a draw.

Did England rely too much on his runs? It is an odd fact that England won only two Ashes matches at home in the 1960s and Barrington made only six in the first, while he didn't play in the second. Yet in drawn matches at home, as abroad, he was often the man who staved off defeat. His best innings was at Old Trafford in 1964, on an ideal batting wicket, when England, 1-0 down in the series, replied to Australia's 656 for eight. Barrington made 256 to ensure that the series would go down to the wire. Alas, despite making 47 and 54* at the Oval, the rest of England's batsmen weren't up to putting pressure on Australia.

The 1968 series, another draw, was Barrington's last, his final Test being 49 and 46* at Headingley as England - what else? - drew with Australia. He suffered a heart attack at the age of only 37, which ended his playing career, but he became a successful coach and England tour manager.

One of his roles was to nurture the young Ian Botham, protecting him during a difficult captaincy of England. But during England's tour of West Indies in 1981, barely a few months before one of the greatest chapters in Ashes history, Barrington suffered a fatal heart attack in Barbados. He was only 50.

Comments

[Amit]

Why is there a total arrogant preoccupation with the Ashes at the expense of all other test series. Yes, granted Ashes has a great tradition but that does not mean classic encounters with Pakistan (esp. in England), WI, SA, India, etc are any lesser. Even in Football we have moved with the preoccupation with Eng-Scot battles in the mid-70's and so hence we are far culturally enriched. Isnt it time to move away from the outdated fuddy ole imperialistic way thinking in cricket as well.

[Tom]

How we need a Barrington now: a grown up, adult player, gritty realist, not a celeb whiz bang boy who drops catches and flashes unneccesarily outside the off stump when his side need a long innings.

Barrington sort of illustrates the cultural decline of England, steady and reliable, formidable, to shallow, lager swilling asbo ism

Sad.