The braying jeers of “We’ve had more Prime Ministers than you!” will be able to ring around the stands at Lord’s for at least another five years after the Eton v Harrow fixture was given a reprieve by the MCC.
The news that this match, played at Lord’s since 1805, and the Oxford v Cambridge Varsity match, played since 1851, were to be axed from the ground this year caused an acrimonious split in the club with a specialist historic fixtures group formed to organise a vote against the move.
That was avoided when the MCC Committee performed a U-turn in September, and the whole issue has been kicked down the road to be revisited again in 2027.
In January the membership of more than 20,000 were invited to take part in a survey in which nearly 9,000 responded and expressed opinions on the minor matches at the ground with an almost equal split in the strength of feeling both for and against the matches.
The five year stay of execution for the matches will tie in with an invitation to other national schools and university competitions to play their finals at Lord’s too with the aim of increasing the number of young people who can play at the ground.
The decision flies in the face of the Committee’s desire to move the club in a more inclusive direction, but should satisfy those in the membership who place tradition and history above many other aspects of the club’s existence.
MCC President Stephen Fry had made his feelings on the matter known when he said in September: "My urging for MCC members is, 'If you really love cricket, don't you want more kids to play? Don't you want it to lose that image that it sometimes still has: a turgid image of snobbery and elitism?"
MCC chief executive Guy Lavender added: "Our survey showed that members wanted three things. They wanted to promote Lord's as a place for all, to make sure cricket was a game for all, and to maintain our history and traditions.
"We have tried to do all three things here and we are making good progress in a number of areas.
"So while it would be easy to view this as a binary issue about the club's appetite for openness and development, I think that would be unfair. We should be judged on the breadth of what we do and not just this particular issue.
"The world is changing quickly and cricket is changing quickly and the survey showed us very strong polarised views across the membership and it had become a divisive issue which is why I think leaving this debate and moving forward was sensible.
"We will take stock in four years time and see what the world looks like then. That is a pragmatic and sensible course of action."
