For more than a century, the Singapore Cricket Club (SCC) has stood as an elegant landmark overlooking the Padang. Founded in 1852 as a only-men sports club, it gradually opened its doors and admitted women as members in 1938 and finally granting them voting rights in 1996.
Now, the club is back again in the spotlight, not for cricketing feats, but for the name of one of its watering holes – the Men’s Bar.
Once an exclusive area where gentlemen padded up with pints, swapped tales of glory, and kept score on life, the Men’s Bar is today open to all members. Yet, the scoreboard still reads Men’s Bar, and therein lies the rub.
Critics argue the name bowls out inclusivity, sending the wrong signal to new members and guests. “It’s just not cricket,” some have declared.
In 2024, reformists scored a small win when a poll among members led to a resolution at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) to rename it 1852 – The Heritage Bar. For a moment, it seemed the modernists had hit the winning runs.
But, at the 2025 AGM, the traditionalists staged a comeback. The name Men’s Bar was restored, with defenders insisting it symbolised not exclusion but heritage and a nod to the club’s colourful past and a reminder of how far it had come.
For them, renaming it would be an unnecessary capitulation to political correctness.
Not everyone agreed. One furious member, posting under the moniker fairyfitmama, lamented: “It is a sad day when inroads made in progress and inclusivity are erased by narrow-minded individuals in the name of preserving ‘history’ and ‘tradition’… To me, the worst part is that there were WOMEN who voted for the reinstatement of this outdated and exclusionary name. SHAME on you.”
The controversy is far from over. Fifty-six members have petitioned the SCC president to revisit the matter, resulting in a Special General Meeting (SGM) set for Sep 23.
They are asking for a level playing field and the setting up of “a neutral and inclusive naming protocol for all the shared spaces within the club that is in conformity with the cultural norms of Singapore in the 21st Century”.
Three resolutions are on the pitch: No facility shall be named after race, religion, or gender (except where functionally necessary, such as changing rooms); the Men’s Bar must be renamed immediately, with members choosing between 1852 and Captain’s Bar; a plaque would be installed to acknowledge the historical origins of the Men’s Bar.
The sponsors of the SGM believe that the re-adoption of the Men’s Bar name in the 2025 AGM, overturning the General Committee’s move to name it 1852 Heritage Bar is at odds with the SCC vision of an open and inclusive club, committed to fair play, and welcoming to all, regardless of race, religion or gender.
Mr Dennis Foo, 71, a long-time SCC member and founding president of the Singapore Nightlife Business Association, is firmly behind the resolutions. “It’s really about traditions versus norms,” he said. “Those against the name Men’s Bar have argued their case well, and they’ve suggested a prominently displayed plaque acknowledging the history and tradition of the bar.”
At its heart, this tussle is about more than a name. Supporters of these resolutions say it forces the SCC to confront what tradition truly means and what an organisation chooses to preserve reflects what it wishes to stand for.
They say that no one would defend the membership restrictions of the early 20th century, when certain races were barred from the club or public areas were reserved for specific categories of members.
Although women can now sit comfortably at the Men’s Bar, the restrictive connotations of the name linger, they add.
Their case also rests on a broader backdrop. In 1995, Singapore acceded to the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women.
At the UN Committee’s 88th session in May 2024, Minister of State Sun Xueling underscored the need to dismantle gender stereotypes and foster equal partnerships – starting in families, continuing in schools and workplaces, and extending into community life.
Against this framework, any name that carries discriminatory overtones, be it about race, religion, or gender, becomes indefensible.
The debate reveals one truth: Every institution is confronted with the need to change. Cricket itself has modernised itself with new forms like One Day Internationals and T20 cricket.
Will the SCC embrace change or maintain its roots? We await the final score.
