CROQUET NEWS:  Croquet's Dark Side

30 May 2006
Dorneywood, Buckinghamshire, England, UK
in BBC News, London, England, UK

Players must get their balls through six hoops twice and then onto a peg.

Some of the coverage of the deputy prime minister's distinctive choice in recreation has centred on its reputation as a sport for toffs, juxtaposing this with the working class origins of the former ship steward and MP for Hull East.

But as much as the world of croquet is fighting hard to shed its image as a sport of the posh, there is a darker side to the stereotyping of the hoops-and-mallets game, a belief that it is a uniquely "vicious" pastime.

One correspondent to the Daily Telegraph describes it as "one of the most self-serving, unsporting games ever played, requiring ruthless meanness and ungenerosity of spirit towards one's opponents".

Another correspondent, in the Times, recalls an episode where the Archdeacon of Oakham was quite insistent that it was "a vicious game".

For the uninitiated observer there is no escaping the observation that a major part of the game seems to involve bashing other people's balls off the pitch.

Association Croquet, the most commonly played competitive version of the game, is played with four coloured balls, either in singles or doubles form. A side wins when it manages to get all of its balls through the six hoops on the court twice, in a specified route, and on to a peg in the centre.

A major element is the roquet, when you strike somebody else's ball, you get a chance to blast it out of the way, and another shot as a bonus.

Klim Seabright, secretary of the Croquet Association, the sport's equivalent of the FA, says the sport is working to shrug off stereotypes, including its reputation as a nasty game.

"You are trying to stop the opponent. There is that competitive element but I wouldn't describe it as vicious. At the same time you would try and position your balls in a certain place, you can hit your opponent's ball off the lawn."

He says some people are under the impression you can stand on your ball while biffing away the opponent's, but that this was outlawed in 1920.

Social spectrum

Mr Seabright paints a picture of a sport taking advantage of the sudden wave of publicity to highlight its drive to get people involved in clubs, and at the same time ending its associations with posh people, the elderly, and cads.

Its refined image belies fierce competition, say some.

"It goes back to before World War I. At most croquet clubs you wouldn't play at the weekend, you would play in the week. So who would have been available to play - the landed gentry, military officers.

"If you look at the club I belong to, they range right across the social spectrum. I would suggest I don't sound particularly posh. And if you look at the England team, most people wouldn't guess the average age is 39."

But there are dissenting voices. James Hawkins, co-editor of Croquet World Online, has just published a piece suggesting that the sport could do worse than exploit its vicious reputation.

"If we admire members of Parliament who take the floor to rip their opponent to shreds in a debate," he writes, "and if we cheer hockey stars who come as close to killing their adversaries on the field as the referees will allow - all in the give and take of the game - why shouldn't croquet players be admired as well for the vicious tactics they employ to win on the croquet court."

Mr Hawkins notes that of all the stereotypes it is likely to be the one least likely to repel people from the sport.

Kenneth Hope-Jones, who encountered the viciously-playing Archdeacon of Oakham says croquet would continue to suffer from a strangely split image.

"There are two opposite views. One is that it is about playing on the vicarage lawn with cucumber sandwiches and that it is very genteel, another that it is a very vicious game where you bash your opponents' balls into the rose bushes.

"But it is not a vicious game at all, it is in fact very much like snooker."