June 28, 2023 - 7:00am
“Summers will never be the same,” said then-Prime Minister John Major after the death of the great Brian Johnston in January 1994. Johnston had been commentating on cricket since just after the Second World War. In some ways he embodied many people’s idea of the sport in England: old-fashioned, a little stuffy, and dominated by the upper classes (Johnston’s grandfather was Governor of the Bank of England and one of his cousins commanded the Airborne Regiment at the Battle of Arnhem).
This image, while not entirely unfair, was in many respects false. Cricket enthusiasm has always cut across the class divide in England. Johnston’s contemporary John Arlott, another legendary commentator, was an ex-policeman and the son of a municipal civil servant. Other Test Match Special stalwarts of the Johnston era included Yorkshiremen Geoffrey Boycott and Fred Trueman, both of whom came from working-class backgrounds and had learned the game in pit villages.
Three decades on from Johnston’s death, cricket is once grappling with an image problem. The Independent Commission for Equity in Cricket (ICEC), a working group appointed by the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB), has issued a seemingly damning report (including a foreword by one John Major). The accusations are the usual litany: sexism, racism, classism, elitism and so forth.
The ICEC has undoubtedly identified some genuine problems, even if the useful parts of the report are swamped with interminable political jargon. However, there is a curious and disreputable sleight of hand at work in the ICEC report. Conservative approaches are treated as ipso facto morally dubious, and every sinew is strained to imply that such attitudes are intrinsically entwined with racial unpleasantness and bigotry.
“Just as some within the game try to move it forward,” we are informed in a tone of hectoring piety, “others seek to rely on its history to hold it back.” And what exactly are these sinister “others” doing to hold the game back? Racially abusing players, perhaps? Trying to prevent ethnic minorities from buying tickets to Test Matches?
No. These wicked individuals standing athwart progress are those who are sceptical of new formats like T20, or who dislike ugly new terminology such as “batters” instead of “batsmen”, or who support the MCC’s decision to continue hosting traditional fixtures like Eton v Harrow and Oxford v Cambridge. Incidentally, the report is obsessed with the Varsity cricket match: it is mentioned 17 times, including a recommendation that Lord’s no longer host it. Apparently this will help make English cricket less elitist, although the exact mechanism by which this will happen is left to the imagination of the reader.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeMerely another attack on the columns of whiteness in British society. Resist it or watch them crumble one by one. Rugby, classical music, opera, art. All will be in the firing line and the BBC will be at the front.
How very dare we be white…..
daa
The BBC? That bastion of wokeness?!
But I don’t like your association of cricket with “whiteness” nor has that been accurate for a century. That sort of comment seems to play into the hands of these women progressives. Look at those great West Indian teams for example, which among other things were completely happy to wear cricketing whites!
As usual this ICEC report has an unstated but revealing condescension in this report, along the lines that we can’t expect people with darker pigmented skins to support tradition of pretty much anything. Which is utter baloney!
How very dare we be white…..
daa
The BBC? That bastion of wokeness?!
But I don’t like your association of cricket with “whiteness” nor has that been accurate for a century. That sort of comment seems to play into the hands of these women progressives. Look at those great West Indian teams for example, which among other things were completely happy to wear cricketing whites!
As usual this ICEC report has an unstated but revealing condescension in this report, along the lines that we can’t expect people with darker pigmented skins to support tradition of pretty much anything. Which is utter baloney!
Merely another attack on the columns of whiteness in British society. Resist it or watch them crumble one by one. Rugby, classical music, opera, art. All will be in the firing line and the BBC will be at the front.
An absolute waste of time. But worse than that, time spent on something where there really is no problem to solve whilst real problems go unaddressed.
One can only assume that this vacuous displacement activity is somehow useful to the people involved in it. And talking about “problems” is so much easier than really solving problems.
If you ever needed proof that the media largely exists to fill an ever increasing amount of broadcasting space, turning on the radio today proved just that. Worthy after worthy queueing up to pronounce that there is some dreadful problem here when nothing of the sort exists.
Afro-Caribbean people are over-represented in athletic sprinting events, but apparently under-represented in cricket. It couldn’t possibly be that they’re freely choosing sports they prefer or at which they excel could it ? Likewise, East Africans are over-represented at endurance running. No one complains about that – and nor should they.
I can remember actual racism in the 1970s. And yet there’s far more noise about the subject now when the situation has massively improved and Britain is as open and inclusive as anywhere in the world. Nowhere’s perfect. But we’re really not doing that badly.
An absolute waste of time. But worse than that, time spent on something where there really is no problem to solve whilst real problems go unaddressed.
One can only assume that this vacuous displacement activity is somehow useful to the people involved in it. And talking about “problems” is so much easier than really solving problems.
If you ever needed proof that the media largely exists to fill an ever increasing amount of broadcasting space, turning on the radio today proved just that. Worthy after worthy queueing up to pronounce that there is some dreadful problem here when nothing of the sort exists.
Afro-Caribbean people are over-represented in athletic sprinting events, but apparently under-represented in cricket. It couldn’t possibly be that they’re freely choosing sports they prefer or at which they excel could it ? Likewise, East Africans are over-represented at endurance running. No one complains about that – and nor should they.
I can remember actual racism in the 1970s. And yet there’s far more noise about the subject now when the situation has massively improved and Britain is as open and inclusive as anywhere in the world. Nowhere’s perfect. But we’re really not doing that badly.
“the decline in participation among black Britons”
It seems most likely the answer is cricket being out-competed to capture the interest of young black men by the NBA or soccer, rather than anything particularly sinister.
Or perhaps the lack of green spaces and available facilities to support the generational development of cricket clubs across the country?
Similar to the shortfall of football pitches at grass roots level needed to support the junior game, closely followed by the above inflation increases in rental costs we are having to deal with
Just a quick riposte Tom. Cricket clubs are withering because of numbers. Same reason as clubs are seeing falling numbers too. Young people just aren’t interested and that includes white kids, black ones, green ones, purple ones and any other colour or configuration you care to mention. Too many other things to do. So seeing dwindling numbers of black kids isn’t that surprising — and lets take a side issue here, define black. Is it Afro-Caribbean, African, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan or whatever? This could go on forever and forever and all totally pointlessly. It’s just how it is.
There’s tons of green spaces available too. Just drive through any town or village and you will likely see the local common which is set up for football with posts still standing. Time was the local councils would mow the grass and set those areas aside for cricket. That’s how I started playing with a works team. You just don’t see the common areas being mown or laid out for cricket any more. Perhaps it is the councils being damned lazy (very likely) or perhaps its that people simply don’t want to play cricket, or rather get off their rear ends and organise something for themselves instead of whining about how difficult it is, etc, etc ad nauseam.
If you ask people what the problem is, they will surely tell you even if whatever subject it is (and lets for the sake of argument just say it is cricket) has no interest for them before the second they were asked the question. The whole report is virtue signalling nonsense full stop. It is the ECB themselves who are the total idiots for commissioning it. That Yorkshire guy who started it simply wasn’t good enough. Isn’t that enough?
Just a quick riposte Tom. Cricket clubs are withering because of numbers. Same reason as clubs are seeing falling numbers too. Young people just aren’t interested and that includes white kids, black ones, green ones, purple ones and any other colour or configuration you care to mention. Too many other things to do. So seeing dwindling numbers of black kids isn’t that surprising — and lets take a side issue here, define black. Is it Afro-Caribbean, African, Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan or whatever? This could go on forever and forever and all totally pointlessly. It’s just how it is.
There’s tons of green spaces available too. Just drive through any town or village and you will likely see the local common which is set up for football with posts still standing. Time was the local councils would mow the grass and set those areas aside for cricket. That’s how I started playing with a works team. You just don’t see the common areas being mown or laid out for cricket any more. Perhaps it is the councils being damned lazy (very likely) or perhaps its that people simply don’t want to play cricket, or rather get off their rear ends and organise something for themselves instead of whining about how difficult it is, etc, etc ad nauseam.
If you ask people what the problem is, they will surely tell you even if whatever subject it is (and lets for the sake of argument just say it is cricket) has no interest for them before the second they were asked the question. The whole report is virtue signalling nonsense full stop. It is the ECB themselves who are the total idiots for commissioning it. That Yorkshire guy who started it simply wasn’t good enough. Isn’t that enough?
The decline in cricket’s popularity in the Caribbean is put down to exactly that – more money and more cultural influence from the US. Sometimes explanations are simple.
Plenty of people whose ancestry is from the Indian sub-continent, though, or are they not counted as ethnic minorities anymore?
Nope.
Do you think they would raise a huge and cry about the utter absence of Indian players in the football league?
Nope.
Do you think they would raise a huge and cry about the utter absence of Indian players in the football league?
Or perhaps the lack of green spaces and available facilities to support the generational development of cricket clubs across the country?
Similar to the shortfall of football pitches at grass roots level needed to support the junior game, closely followed by the above inflation increases in rental costs we are having to deal with
The decline in cricket’s popularity in the Caribbean is put down to exactly that – more money and more cultural influence from the US. Sometimes explanations are simple.
Plenty of people whose ancestry is from the Indian sub-continent, though, or are they not counted as ethnic minorities anymore?
“the decline in participation among black Britons”
It seems most likely the answer is cricket being out-competed to capture the interest of young black men by the NBA or soccer, rather than anything particularly sinister.
Seems cricket is up next for destruction by people with no interest in the game. Wonder where they’ll go next, after cricket has been ruined?
Ławn bowls and then curling. Those nazis have it coming
Ławn bowls and then curling. Those nazis have it coming
Seems cricket is up next for destruction by people with no interest in the game. Wonder where they’ll go next, after cricket has been ruined?
I retired from 40 years as a wicket-keeper about five years ago, but came out of retirement for a two match tour of Holland in June last year with my old club. In the minibus on the way back from our first game to our hotel, the club captain, a white man working in corporate finance, favoured the rest of us with a woke racist tirade on the iniquities of white men working in corporate finance. I played in the remaining match and participated in the ensuing frolics with not much enthusiasm, and when we returned to England severed my longstanding links with the club.
Instead of speaking your mind.
So you have a better appreciation of what it must have been like for years for minorities having to listen to the equivalent?
Two wrongs make a right do they?
Course not and that’s not what was implied. – it was does one then have a moment of reflection?
Or in your instance a moment of deflection?
Course not and that’s not what was implied. – it was does one then have a moment of reflection?
Or in your instance a moment of deflection?
Indians were oppressed for a couple of centuries by the British empire
But they were oppressed for far longer, and much more brutally, by islamic invaders – and we didn’t even get any nice sports, literature or nifty scientific inventions in return, unlike with the Brits.
I suspect a tirade against some random muslims for their historical crimes might not be viewed as favourably.
You’re right. What did the Brits ever do for us? I presume there are aqueducts in India. They have them here in Malaysia.
You’re right. What did the Brits ever do for us? I presume there are aqueducts in India. They have them here in Malaysia.
Two wrongs make a right do they?
Indians were oppressed for a couple of centuries by the British empire
But they were oppressed for far longer, and much more brutally, by islamic invaders – and we didn’t even get any nice sports, literature or nifty scientific inventions in return, unlike with the Brits.
I suspect a tirade against some random muslims for their historical crimes might not be viewed as favourably.
Instead of speaking your mind.
So you have a better appreciation of what it must have been like for years for minorities having to listen to the equivalent?
I retired from 40 years as a wicket-keeper about five years ago, but came out of retirement for a two match tour of Holland in June last year with my old club. In the minibus on the way back from our first game to our hotel, the club captain, a white man working in corporate finance, favoured the rest of us with a woke racist tirade on the iniquities of white men working in corporate finance. I played in the remaining match and participated in the ensuing frolics with not much enthusiasm, and when we returned to England severed my longstanding links with the club.
Remember when Azeem Rafiq claimed that he had been subjected to racist abuse at Yorkshire and then it turned out that the “abuse” had been innocent banter and in fact he had himself been guilty of anti-Semitism a few years earlier on Twitter. Funny what gets dug up once you start a Race-grift. I hadn’t laughed so much since old Jessie Smollett.
At least Smollett got the reaction he deserved.
That’s true. I thought the whole report was going to be laughed out of court once Rafiq’s unfortunate tweets emerged. Alas, the BBC had already scheduled its 15-part “Racism in Cricket” season and so Azeem’s misdemeanours got brushed under the carpet.
Still, I think it added to the sense that all allegations of racism/sexism/homophobia etc are merely trumped up nonsense created to enrich the grifters in the grievance industry. Meghan Markle and Marlene Headley/Ngozi Fulani and the rest have made the general public highly sceptical of claims of racism in particular.
And there was a full house for all five days of the first test against the Aussies last week so I don’t think it has had any effect on the general public’s enthusiasm for cricket.
That’s true. I thought the whole report was going to be laughed out of court once Rafiq’s unfortunate tweets emerged. Alas, the BBC had already scheduled its 15-part “Racism in Cricket” season and so Azeem’s misdemeanours got brushed under the carpet.
Still, I think it added to the sense that all allegations of racism/sexism/homophobia etc are merely trumped up nonsense created to enrich the grifters in the grievance industry. Meghan Markle and Marlene Headley/Ngozi Fulani and the rest have made the general public highly sceptical of claims of racism in particular.
And there was a full house for all five days of the first test against the Aussies last week so I don’t think it has had any effect on the general public’s enthusiasm for cricket.
At least Smollett got the reaction he deserved.
Remember when Azeem Rafiq claimed that he had been subjected to racist abuse at Yorkshire and then it turned out that the “abuse” had been innocent banter and in fact he had himself been guilty of anti-Semitism a few years earlier on Twitter. Funny what gets dug up once you start a Race-grift. I hadn’t laughed so much since old Jessie Smollett.
Breaking: DEI people whose entire cushy job relies on finding discrimination find “discrimination”. The conflict of interest in these jobs is off the charts, I’d be willing to bet they have never once done a report and not found “discrimination”.
It would be better if these supposedly independent reports were actually independent. Not sure exactly how that would work, but the way we do it now definitely isn’t working. Perhaps a jury-duty style pick of a panel of professionals unrelated to the DEI industry who have real careers, not ones whose entire existence hinges on the report(s) having a specific conclusion.
Breaking: DEI people whose entire cushy job relies on finding discrimination find “discrimination”. The conflict of interest in these jobs is off the charts, I’d be willing to bet they have never once done a report and not found “discrimination”.
It would be better if these supposedly independent reports were actually independent. Not sure exactly how that would work, but the way we do it now definitely isn’t working. Perhaps a jury-duty style pick of a panel of professionals unrelated to the DEI industry who have real careers, not ones whose entire existence hinges on the report(s) having a specific conclusion.
I presume it recommended that we should deliberately lose overseas tours in order not to offend our colonial cousins with any hint of white supremacy and as compensation for hundreds of years of oppression. Actually, perhaps that explains many of our performances.
Are you saying that our former dismal performances were all deliberately planned? A conspiracy theory?? Thank God. I thought we were just rubbish.
Are you saying that our former dismal performances were all deliberately planned? A conspiracy theory?? Thank God. I thought we were just rubbish.
I presume it recommended that we should deliberately lose overseas tours in order not to offend our colonial cousins with any hint of white supremacy and as compensation for hundreds of years of oppression. Actually, perhaps that explains many of our performances.
These inquiries and their foregone conclusions are simply institutions displaying public fidelity to the new state religion. As a vassal of the great American Empire, our leaders seek legitimacy by adhering to the religious habits of the metropole. To declare your institution ‘structurally racist’ is, paradoxically, to place yourself among the righteous, to signal that you are a sinner but you have repented, much as a medieval prince would signal their piety by wearing a hair shirt and pleading for forgiveness from an archbishop.
Is it even conceivable that a public institution would conduct an inquiry and conclude that it was NOT institutionally racist?
If you engage an outfit called the Commission for Equity in cricket what do you expect? Equity proceeds on the basis that all existing institutions are irredeemably racist etc. and must be cleared away ahead of the great reordering.
If you engage an outfit called the Commission for Equity in cricket what do you expect? Equity proceeds on the basis that all existing institutions are irredeemably racist etc. and must be cleared away ahead of the great reordering.
These inquiries and their foregone conclusions are simply institutions displaying public fidelity to the new state religion. As a vassal of the great American Empire, our leaders seek legitimacy by adhering to the religious habits of the metropole. To declare your institution ‘structurally racist’ is, paradoxically, to place yourself among the righteous, to signal that you are a sinner but you have repented, much as a medieval prince would signal their piety by wearing a hair shirt and pleading for forgiveness from an archbishop.
Is it even conceivable that a public institution would conduct an inquiry and conclude that it was NOT institutionally racist?
I’m fine with T20, it can fill an evening after work. The hundred is utterly pointless, it doesn’t do anything that T20 can’t and for a sport, which already had three formats (and variations within), creating a fourth was a waste of time.
So, if not liking new formats of a sport is racist, does this mean that racism is actually a solved problem?
I’m fine with T20, it can fill an evening after work. The hundred is utterly pointless, it doesn’t do anything that T20 can’t and for a sport, which already had three formats (and variations within), creating a fourth was a waste of time.
So, if not liking new formats of a sport is racist, does this mean that racism is actually a solved problem?
How surprising that former Tory Prime Minister, Sir John Major, wrote the forward to this awful report. He it was who first introduced political correctness into public policy after he’d shafted Margaret Thatcher and gained power. It is people like him who paved the way for today’s Woking Class that now seeks to eliminate our history, culture and identity. Every Anti-White sentiment, statement or policy by this elite is no less racist than the racism they claim to seek to eradicate.
How surprising that former Tory Prime Minister, Sir John Major, wrote the forward to this awful report. He it was who first introduced political correctness into public policy after he’d shafted Margaret Thatcher and gained power. It is people like him who paved the way for today’s Woking Class that now seeks to eliminate our history, culture and identity. Every Anti-White sentiment, statement or policy by this elite is no less racist than the racism they claim to seek to eradicate.
Judging by this morning’s events, not only is cricket racist, it’s not carbon neutral.
I’ll tell you one colour I’m increasingly becoming prejudicial towards, and that’s orange.
Judging by this morning’s events, not only is cricket racist, it’s not carbon neutral.
I’ll tell you one colour I’m increasingly becoming prejudicial towards, and that’s orange.
I think we should be looking at this in the wider context of attempts to disestablish the majority as the native people of these islands in order to create a new settler society. We already have our First Fleet, which arrived 21 June 1947 at Tilbury.
I think we should be looking at this in the wider context of attempts to disestablish the majority as the native people of these islands in order to create a new settler society. We already have our First Fleet, which arrived 21 June 1947 at Tilbury.
The England women’s Test team used to wear white skirts, now they are wearing white trousers, why?
Are we soon to see women at Wimbledon following this fad?
Trousers are easier and more convenient to wear when running and jumping; or, at least, I found it so.
Trousers are easier and more convenient to wear when running and jumping; or, at least, I found it so.
The England women’s Test team used to wear white skirts, now they are wearing white trousers, why?
Are we soon to see women at Wimbledon following this fad?
loath the game… bores me witless… and who wants to stand about all day in a field dressed like a 1970s Boutique shop assistant? Like golf, another middle class tedium addiction.
I suspect Nicky that you are the precise type of person that this independent committee would have asked questions to. Hope there is something other than golf and cricket that floats your boat.
racing, hunting,shooting…
….However my family were co- founders of The Naples Cricket Club in the 1890s…
racing, hunting,shooting…
….However my family were co- founders of The Naples Cricket Club in the 1890s…
I suspect Nicky that you are the precise type of person that this independent committee would have asked questions to. Hope there is something other than golf and cricket that floats your boat.
loath the game… bores me witless… and who wants to stand about all day in a field dressed like a 1970s Boutique shop assistant? Like golf, another middle class tedium addiction.
When Eton vs Harrow is a match allowed to take place at Lords but there has yet to a Women’s Test Match offered the same opportunity you can only conclude we’ve some proper half-witted dinosaurs still roaming around the MCC.
I suspect some of the report is a bit over the top, but sense I get is cricket is not played as much in state schools as it was. Some of that may be the sell-off of playing fields.
Furthermore now most Cricket is on pay-to-watch it’s broader attraction will be limited and not quite what many of my generation experienced. That has to make a difference too one would think.
Might it have something to do with the fact that the women’s game is incredibly poorly attended, so having to open a large ground such as Lords would see the ECB lose a fortune?
Half of the population is women, therefore if they supported the women’s game in the same numbers as the men’s then it would be economically viable to play women’s cricket at the larger stadiums
I watch both men’s and women’s cricket (cricket is the only sport that I watch), however, none of my female friends or relations watch any sport what-so-ever, even those who play a sport. Therefore, from my, atmittedly limited anecdata, relying on women to watch might be a dead-end.
Did you not see the Wembley sell out crowd for the Lionesses LH?
Can take time to build but it’s there.
And what message do we want to send?
I know a number of people who received repeated email marketing offering free, or heavily discounted tickets for that tournament. I know at least two, who went as part of a trip organised by a corporate sponsor. There was continuous, high-pressure promotion on the BBC pushing the idea that Lionesses were likely to win, and that will always pull some elements of the crowd.
No, women’s sport is simply not of a sufficient standard, with the exception of various minority sports like equestrian events and swimming.
Back to the kitchen with them eh, old fruit?
YES!!!
YES!!!
Back to the kitchen with them eh, old fruit?
I know a number of people who received repeated email marketing offering free, or heavily discounted tickets for that tournament. I know at least two, who went as part of a trip organised by a corporate sponsor. There was continuous, high-pressure promotion on the BBC pushing the idea that Lionesses were likely to win, and that will always pull some elements of the crowd.
No, women’s sport is simply not of a sufficient standard, with the exception of various minority sports like equestrian events and swimming.
Did you not see the Wembley sell out crowd for the Lionesses LH?
Can take time to build but it’s there.
And what message do we want to send?
And how full is the ground when the public school boys turn up? Have you asked the same question or fallen straight into a hole with the dinosaurs?
I watch both men’s and women’s cricket (cricket is the only sport that I watch), however, none of my female friends or relations watch any sport what-so-ever, even those who play a sport. Therefore, from my, atmittedly limited anecdata, relying on women to watch might be a dead-end.
And how full is the ground when the public school boys turn up? Have you asked the same question or fallen straight into a hole with the dinosaurs?
Why is this being down thumbed? It’s an entirely sensible and balanced series of remarks. The more cricket has its backwoodsman image the less it will be played in state schools and down the drain it will go.
Cricket seems to be doing fine. Test match ticket prices are ridiculously high and yet they still sell out.
Cricket seems to be doing fine. Test match ticket prices are ridiculously high and yet they still sell out.
Lord’s is owned by the members of the MCC. If they want to continue a 200 year old tradition of inviting two particular schools to play a match once a year, it’s up to them. It’s really not a big deal.
Precisely this is a commercial decision too. The MCC get paid for the privilege.
the M iddle C lass C lub?!!!!
Precisely this is a commercial decision too. The MCC get paid for the privilege.
the M iddle C lass C lub?!!!!
You should know JW that the MCC do not run the sport of cricket in England any more. That is the ECB, who themselves are a bunch of total incompetents. The MCC is a private members club and as such probably has many such dinosaur members as you allude. But so what? Many private members clubs are the same and their first job is to operate with the benefit of their club members in mind. Not the public.
Might it have something to do with the fact that the women’s game is incredibly poorly attended, so having to open a large ground such as Lords would see the ECB lose a fortune?
Half of the population is women, therefore if they supported the women’s game in the same numbers as the men’s then it would be economically viable to play women’s cricket at the larger stadiums
Why is this being down thumbed? It’s an entirely sensible and balanced series of remarks. The more cricket has its backwoodsman image the less it will be played in state schools and down the drain it will go.
Lord’s is owned by the members of the MCC. If they want to continue a 200 year old tradition of inviting two particular schools to play a match once a year, it’s up to them. It’s really not a big deal.
You should know JW that the MCC do not run the sport of cricket in England any more. That is the ECB, who themselves are a bunch of total incompetents. The MCC is a private members club and as such probably has many such dinosaur members as you allude. But so what? Many private members clubs are the same and their first job is to operate with the benefit of their club members in mind. Not the public.
When Eton vs Harrow is a match allowed to take place at Lords but there has yet to a Women’s Test Match offered the same opportunity you can only conclude we’ve some proper half-witted dinosaurs still roaming around the MCC.
I suspect some of the report is a bit over the top, but sense I get is cricket is not played as much in state schools as it was. Some of that may be the sell-off of playing fields.
Furthermore now most Cricket is on pay-to-watch it’s broader attraction will be limited and not quite what many of my generation experienced. That has to make a difference too one would think.