An institution that is far from crumbling, the latest is once again full of fine stuff in which to lose yourself for hours
Paul Edwards15-Apr-2016″The danger of longevity is of toppling into self-parody,” writes Philip Collins in his fine contribution to the 2016 . Collins is assessing cricket’s coverage in the media and his target is Test Match Special and, in particular, the occasionally juvenile excesses of Phil Tufnell and Graeme Swann. Yet his words are a warning to any writer and, indeed, to itself. Praise can be dangerous, and the unqualified devotion frequently shown by its readers towards the famous almanack is a positive bear trap.The book has become an institution. It has spawned an online magazine, a quarterly journal, an Indian edition and a host of anthologies. There has been a book on the history of and a collector’ guide for those who would prefer possession of the early editions in good condition to owning a small cottage in the Lake District. For some fans, the yellow brick is a symbol of spring and something of a reassurance that “everything is alright”.It may be a curious paradox, then, that has altered so much over the past two decades or so. Oh, sure, it looks the same. The 2016 edition has 1552 pages and takes up 60.06 cubic inches on the bookshelf. But one only has to look at the contents to appreciate the reorganisation and changes that have taken place. The comment pieces are of the usual high standard and they come from a pleasingly wide range of voices. The almanack’s editor, Lawrence Booth, who is now entering his sixth year in the post, knows he cannot produce a for all nations and all formats. But that will not prevent him trying to reflect the game’s development across the world while retaining an English focus.In many respects, this has been New Zealand’s year, and several of us will be raising three appreciative cheers for that. Kane Williamson and Brendon McCullum are among the Five Cricketers of the Year, the first time in 86 years two Kiwis have been selected, and Williamson is the Leading Cricketer in the World. Suzie Bates is accorded an equivalent honour for the women’s game. In his characteristically acute Notes by the Editor, Booth looks forward to the summer of 2016 in which “county cricket will be full of disarmingly modest New Zealanders, and barely a grim forward defensive shot between them”.But an editor’s skill lies not only in what he or she says but in who else they ask to speak. So let us salute the choices of Patrick Collins to cover Five Days at the Ashes, Andy Bull to write about Deaths in Cricket, and Paul Farbrace to offer a wonderfully shrewd coach’s view of Kumar Sangakkara. If this review is to include one short paragraph as an indication of the quality of insight contained in the 2016 Wisden, let it be this from Farbrace on Sangakkara:
Every coach who worked with him knew you ended up needing reconstructive shoulder surgery. And your throwdowns had to be accurate. I was giving him a few at Sydney, and in the previous game he’d missed a couple of square drives, so I thought I’d throw one or two a little wider. He left the first alone, and just looked at me. When I did the same a few minutes later, he stared back, and then walked straight past me and into the dressing room. We never mentioned it again, but I got the message.
The 2016 is full of such fine stuff. Two pieces by the former editor, John Woodcock, show that an imitable style has not lost any of its class. The county correspondents, too, are in fine form, albeit that an ageing scallywag* seems to have infiltrated their noble ranks. The latest , therefore, retains its ability to toy with time. One settles down in mid-afternoon intending to spend 20 minutes catching up on what has happened in Essex and Kent, only to find oneself still in the armchair three hours later, a mug of cold coffee at one’s side and the sun sinking behind the flats across the road.Booth would acknowledge that such bewitchment is nothing like all his own work and he pays generous tribute to the team of editors in his preface. It seems to this reviewer that Hugh Chevallier is a co-editor of self-effacing genius, Steven Lynch is one of the best statisticians in the world and Harriet Monkhouse is a scholar of the highest calibre. When one edition is published, they turn their attention to the next. There are rumours they take holidays but it is still an astonishing effort.Enough of this. Reader, your reviewer has checked his drives for too long. is so clearly the cricket book of the year in England that plainly it must never be entered for any award. The vast majority of the 123 contributors listed at the beginning of the almanack do an excellent job and they help to make unique among sports books. In wider fields of study only Michael Barone’s is a credible current rival.As you are reading this, plans are probably being drawn up for 2017. For now, of course you should buy the 2016 edition. But if you are reading this review, there is a fair chance you have already had it delivered. If so, prepare to lose hours of your life in 60.06 cubic inches of fine writing. Lucky you. Lucky all of us. More unqualified praise, eh, Lawrence? Dammit. Sorry.Wisden Cricketers’ Almanack, 2016
Edited by Lawrence Booth
Bloomsbury
1552 pages, £50
