A controversial strategy by Brian Rose at New Road in 1979 led to the abolition of declarations in limited-overs cricket.
On May 10, 2025 in a Women’s T20 World Cup Asia Region Qualifier match at Bangkok, the UAE raced to 192-0 after 16 overs. Then something curious took place. Esha Oza (113) and Teertha Sathish (74), the unbeaten batters, both retired out, leading to something even more surreal.
The next eight UAE batters arrived at the crease in groups of twos and left immediately. They were retiring out, they informed the authorities. Indeed, the UAE lost all ten wickets without another ball being bowled – for they wanted to bowl five overs before rain hit the ground. They eventually bowled out Qatar for 29 in 11.1 overs to win comfortably.
It seemed bizarre, but the UAE did what they did because they could not declare. While Law 15 (Declaration and Forfeiture) does not discriminate against limited-overs cricket, the ICC Playing Conditions clearly mention “does not apply” for women’s and men’s ODIs and T20Is.
However, there was a point in history when the Laws accommodated declarations, even in limited-overs cricket. While not common – there was seldom any reason to – teams had declared in the format.
The most famous instance was in the South Africa Gillette Cup of 1975/76. Barry Richards declared with Natal on 361-2 after 54.4 overs – this was a 60-over game – the moment Alan Barrow brought up his double hundred, the second in the history of List A cricket.
The Rose that became a thorn
Before getting into Rose’s declaration, it is important to understand the playing conditions of the Benson & Hedges Cup. If two teams were tied on points, the team with the superior bowling strike rate went ahead.
Having won their first three 55-over games, Somerset were at the top of the Group A points table when they came to New Road to play Worcestershire. The hosts were three points behind them, as were Glamorgan, who were certain to beat Minor Counties. However, Somerset had the best bowling strike rate. Since there were two qualifying slots, the only way Somerset could be eliminated was a truly colossal defeat in their last game.
Rose came up with a plan. Since the bowling strike rate depended on balls bowled and wickets taken, the best way was to minimise the number of balls that took place in the match. In other words, declare the innings.
Rose ran his idea past Test and County Cricket Board secretary Donald Carr. It was legal to declare, agreed Carr, while warning him of “repercussions”. Rose next approached Somerset chair Roy Kerslake, who assured him his backing.
The plan became almost redundant when rain washed out the day of the game (as was Glamorgan versus Minor Counties South at Watford). However, there was a reserve day, and play did begin on time despite the gloom. Rose won the toss and walked out to bat with Peter Denning.
Rose played out the first over, bowled by Vanburn Holder. The only run came off a no-ball. And then Rose and Denning walked off. Somerset had declared. Ten minutes later, Glenn Turner and Alan Ormrod walked out. Turner took a single off Colin Dredge, and another off the fourth ball of Keith Jennings. Some spectators were still walking in. It had, after all, been only 18 minutes. In another 14 minutes, the Somerset team had left the ground.
There was expected outrage from the paying spectators, who had travelled from far. Rose was subject to some angry response from fans at the car park. Worcestershire secretary Mike Vockings refunded the gate money.
The entire exercise turned out to be redundant, for Glamorgan never got the three points they needed: more rain prevented any cricket after Alan Wilkins bowled only four balls.
“If anybody wishes to complain, they should do it to the people who make them,” Rose was clear in his stance, adding that "there was no dissension in the dressing-room about the declaration.” True to Kerslake’s assurance, the Somerset committee backed him, at least initially.
The lashback was predictable. “Rose did not infringe the laws, he exploited them,” wrote John Arlott in The Guardian. Eight days later, TCCB assembled in an emergency meeting of its disciplinary committee. The 18 bodies voted 17-1 in favour of Somerset’s disqualification from the tournament. Curiously, the one vote in Somerset’s favour came from – for whatever reasons – Derbyshire, not Somerset.
Somerset were disqualified – not because they broke the rules but because they had spotted a loophole and exploited them.
Glamorgan qualified instead. Essex, who also won the County Championship that season, lifted the Benson and Hedges Cup. Somerset, however, did win the Gillette Cup and the Sunday League that summer. The playing conditions were subsequently changed.
Benson and Hedges Cup 1979 Group A
| Team | Matches | Won | Lost | NR | Points | Bowling SR | Final status |
| Somerset | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 33.321 | Disqualified |
| Worcestershire | 4 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 36.920 | Qualified |
| Glamorgan | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7 | 36.040 | Qualified |
| Gloucestershire | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 53.100 | |
| Minor Counties South | 4 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 55.692 |
In his last editor’s notes – he passed away shortly after the edition went to press – Norman Preston was scathing in the Wisden Almanack. In a section titled “Somerset’s Shame”, he wrote: “Somerset were within the law governing the competition – it has since been changed – but they showed no consideration to their sponsors or the spectators.”
However, Rose was named one of the five Wisden Cricketers of the Year for that summer, along with Joel Garner, Sunil Gavaskar, Graham Gooch, and Derek Randall.
However...
What if the reserve day at New Road had been washed out as well? What if Somerset’s game had started after Glamorgan’s game had been called off? What if Worcestershire had batted first and Somerset bowled them out cheaply?
Would we still have had declarations in limited-overs cricket in 2025? One can only speculate.
