In cricket, scoring centuries, double hundreds, or even triple hundreds is usually a ticket to glory, praise, and an assured spot on the team. Yet history reveals some fascinating—and somewhat puzzling—exceptions. Imagine reaching your highest-ever Test score or even a triple century, only to find yourself dropped from the next match!
Yes, it happened. Not just once, but multiple times, involving cricketing legends no less. Sir Geoffrey Boycott, Ken Barrington, and notably, a batsman who scored a rare triple century—each found himself controversially sidelined right after stellar performances.
How could this happen? Why did selectors drop players who seemingly did everything right? In this intriguing dive into cricket history, we explore these extraordinary incidents, highlighting the fascinating tension between individual glory and team dynamics.
Sir Geoffrey Boycott’s 246*: Too Slow or Too Selfish?
Headingley, 1967. Geoffrey Boycott—a batting maestro known for his dogged determination and flawless defensive technique—spent nearly ten hours at the crease, grinding out an unbeaten 246 against India. It was his highest Test score, a testament to remarkable concentration and determination.
But instead of earning applause and a guaranteed spot, Boycott faced backlash from England’s selectors. Chairman Doug Insole, rather surprisingly, dropped him for the very next Test match, citing not just the slow pace but “selfish batting.”
Why Did It Happen?
Insole and his fellow selectors believed Boycott’s slow scoring had prioritized personal milestones over the team’s interests. Even though England won the match comfortably by six wickets, the selectors felt Boycott’s approach drained momentum, depriving fans of exciting cricket—something they desperately wanted to deliver in that era.
Boycott’s case was peculiar because it wasn’t just slow batting that got him dropped—it was the perception that he batted selfishly, prioritizing his personal record above all else.
Ken Barrington’s Patient 137: Winning Isn’t Everything?
Just a couple of years earlier, England had already set a precedent for dropping players who batted too slowly—even if they won matches. Ken Barrington, another English great renowned for his immense patience and concentration, faced similar criticism.
In 1965 at Edgbaston, Barrington meticulously compiled 137 runs in seven hours and 17 minutes against New Zealand, guiding England to an easy victory. Yet astonishingly, despite securing the win, Barrington found himself dropped for the subsequent Test at Lord’s.
What Prompted Barrington’s Dropping?
Cricket authorities of the 1960s were under significant pressure to popularize the game and appeal to broader audiences. Slow, cautious innings—though effective—weren’t deemed exciting enough for spectators. Authorities desperately wanted brighter, faster cricket, and Barrington’s grinding style didn’t align with their vision. Thus, Barrington became a symbol of cricket’s paradox: being dropped not for failure, but for cautious success.
The Saddest Case: Dropped Despite a Triple Century!
While Boycott and Barrington’s situations were shocking, perhaps the most baffling of all was when a batsman was dropped after scoring a rare and illustrious triple century.
Andy Sandham: The Triple-Centurion Who Was Immediately Dropped
In 1930, English batsman Andy Sandham achieved something extraordinary—he became the first player ever to score a triple hundred in Test cricket. Playing against the West Indies in Kingston, Sandham crafted a marathon innings of 325 runs, cementing his name in cricketing folklore.
But rather than being celebrated and secured as a cornerstone of the team, Sandham’s magnificent innings ended up being his final Test appearance. Astonishingly, the selectors decided to drop him immediately afterward, effectively ending his Test career.
Why Was Sandham Dropped?
Unlike Boycott and Barrington, Sandham wasn’t punished for slow scoring or selfishness. Rather, age and timing worked against him. At 39, Sandham was considered past his prime, and selectors viewed his innings as a one-off miracle rather than sustainable brilliance. Additionally, the innings coincided with an emerging new generation of English batsmen, prompting selectors to overlook Sandham despite his historic performance.
His story stands as one of the saddest ironies in cricket: a record-breaking innings that became a poignant farewell rather than a triumphant milestone.
The Bigger Picture: Individual Glory vs. Team Dynamics
These incidents offer a profound insight into cricket’s intricate relationship between individual success and collective team interests. Selectors in each scenario weren’t solely interested in statistics or results; they valued style, entertainment, and team culture, occasionally placing these above sheer numbers.
Boycott and Barrington’s cases illustrate cricket’s desire to maintain popularity by promoting exciting, entertaining play over cautious, personal milestones. Sandham’s story underscores the harsh realities of age and transition, where even groundbreaking records can’t guarantee longevity in the game.
Lessons for Today’s Cricket
In modern cricket, such decisions might seem unthinkable. Players today scoring double or triple hundreds are celebrated and rarely—if ever—dropped. However, cricket continues to evolve, with formats like T20 demanding faster scoring and entertainment value. Perhaps, subtly, cricket still grapples with the same balancing act: performance versus spectacle.
Boycott, Barrington, and Sandham’s experiences remind selectors, fans, and players alike that the game isn’t purely about individual stats. Cricket remains a nuanced, team-oriented sport where selectors’ priorities can differ vastly from raw statistics.
Conclusion: Cricket’s Most Curious Decisions—A Lesson in Perspective
These remarkable historical cases are more than mere cricket trivia—they reflect broader debates about sportsmanship, entertainment, and the spirit of cricket itself. Geoffrey Boycott’s patient brilliance, Ken Barrington’s cautious mastery, and Andy Sandham’s bittersweet triple century collectively highlight how cricket selectors’ priorities have changed over time, and how context dramatically shapes the game’s history.
Their stories serve as a powerful reminder that cricket is as much about collective achievement and spectator experience as it is about individual records. As the game evolves, the balance between personal achievement and team priorities continues to influence decisions—reminding us that sometimes, scoring big isn’t always enough.
Cricket truly remains, above all, a fascinating game of contrasts, curiosities, and captivating decisions.
Explore Further:
- Sir Geoffrey Boycott’s Career Highlights
- Ken Barrington’s Remarkable Cricket Journey
- Andy Sandham’s Triple Century and Career
Cricket continues to surprise us, proving that sometimes the most astonishing decisions happen off the field.