Wimbledon victory not enough to justify knighthood for Murray

Sir Ian Botham

England and Somerset cricket legend Sir Ian Botham (C) poses with two Yeoman of the Guard after he received his knighthood from the Queen at Buckingham Palace, in London, 10 October 2007.

Ian Botham is another example of a man who truly earned his title. Despite occasionally landing in the tabloids amid a cricket controversy or personal indiscretion, the ex-England Test cricket captain has raised over £12 million for charity, with leukaemia research prominent among the causes to benefit from his efforts.

While Botham received his knighthood for his charitable work, his contributions to cricket would have probably got him the honour eventually anyway. The man nicknamed “Beefy” effectively single-handedly won the Ashes for England in 1981 despite being stripped of captaincy in a disgraceful fashion mid-series.

The all-rounder finished the series with 399 runs and 34 wickets taken, including two unbelievable innings with the bat at Headingley and at Old Trafford that clinched the tournament for the Three Lions.

Both as a commendable contributor to worthy charitable causes for the last two decades, and as probably the greatest cricketer Great Britain has ever called its own, Ian Botham’s knighthood is justified.

Knee-jerk reactions

One of the biggest problems with sporting knighthoods is that they are awarded with knee-jerk reactions in the aftermath of a single impressive victory that captures the imagination of the entire country, as was the case for Olympians like Kelly Holmes, Bradley Wiggins and Chris Hoy, who were knighted almost immediately following their gold medal performances. All three were still on the shallow side of 40 and were still competing in their respective sports.

That is not the way it should be done. A knighthood should only be given to an older person after a long and established career of accomplishments both on and off the sporting field. This was the case for Botham and for Matthews. It was also the case for Sebastian Coe, the great Olympian who was largely responsible for bringing the Olympic Games to the UK in 2012, as well as spending time before that as a Member of Parliament and a life peer.

It is not the case for Andy Murray. Murray just won Wimbledon. He is good at the sport that he competes in, but so are a lot of people. Perhaps if, following this victory, he goes on to win a few more Grand Slams and then spends the next 20 years putting back into tennis or contributing to charitable foundations, a knighthood would then be justified. But excelling in your chosen sport is, quite frankly, the minimum we should expect in Britain from heavily publicly funded sportspersons, and not something that should be considered remarkable.

Murray is a hero of the nation right now; and with his accomplishments to date, he has fully earned the OBE that he was awarded back in the 2012 Honours List. But to hand him a seat at Arthur’s round table to share the company of men like Stanley Matthews and Ian Botham would be a knee-jerk reaction in the same vein as Chris Hoy and Bradley Wiggins. One that even he realises he has not earned.

So let’s not get carried away, Mr Cameron. By all means, let Murray be the hero of the hour, but save the knighthood for the people who spend a lifetime to earn it.