h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Hi Elentari !

Made the changes . The incident was during the third Test, when Woodfull claimed only one side was playing cricket, and the other was making no attempt to do so. I mention Wisden for the first time at the start of the section on the second Test. I've added a footnote explaining a bit more about it.

Not only do I manage to lose track of the number of posts in the conversation and miss the chance to post this:

Entry: Bodyline - Just Not Cricket? - A36622712
Author: laconian - U1477064

but I also make up a smiley. I could have sworn we had a !


Mala:

>>As far as I can gather it's "England did something or other that was within the rules but rather unsportsmanlike. The Australians didn't like it." - but this is embedded in, well, gibberish. <<

As far as I'm concerned, that's good enough . I find the whole thing interesting from a non-cricketing perspective as well because of its wider significance. I've kind of covered this - briefly, at least - in the 'Wider Significance' bit.

We should have a wave smiley.

We do have though!

Then my work here is done

Though just as a warning, if I get this one to sub I'm sending it back

Still not a *bad* entry - don't get me wrong. I just fail to understand more than that

Well I finally got round to reading this entry again and note the changes as well. A couple of typo's:

<>
*Bowlers quite often bowl the ball on a line towards the off stump*
<>
*until they could bowl the ball at 90mph an over on the correct line*

I was wondering about the section titled "The Plan" if you might include that Jardine met F.R.Foster (Frank Rowbotham) the former great English Test fast bowler(and famous in his time) in his flat and got a copy of Foster's Leg-Theory from him.

I'll just quote verbatim from a published article lifted from( Radio from "Smith's" London Office. 'Smith's Weekly') and it is reproduced in the publication, 'The Bradman Album's'.
In it Foster remarks:
"Jardine is welcome to the Ashes, at the price England payed for them.

"Say this from me to the Captain of the England Eleven in Australia:- "Douglas Jardine, I am ashamed of England's win. I will face you on your return with these words on my lips.
Woodfull won the Second Test by clean methods. We won our four matches by other methods. I take my hat off to Woodfull, for resisting the temptation to retaliate in body-linebowling. Cricket history has no finer example of sportsmanship.

He goes on to talk about his style of leg bowling and applauds Gubby Allen for refusing to bowl bodyline and also suggests that as " Allen has proved himself a perfect gentleman and on his ability and sportsmanship he should be England's Captain.

The newspaper heading on the next page read:- England is shamed by the victory, "unworthy uses", "indignation by great bowler".

He goes on to speak of regret at Larwood's actions and says that unless the MCC upholds the protest from the ACB the game will be ruined in the following season(1934). Opining that "even schoolboys bowlers will resort to the tactic if they meet difficult wickets and expert batsmen.

"Body-line bowling must be abolished. The only solution was to give the umpire power to no-ball."

The paper goes on to say:- "Foster's final statement concerning Jardine contains the honest indignation of a sportsman who has felt himself misused:-

Before Jardine left England, he came frequently to my flat in the St. James, and secured from me my leg-theory field placings. I had no hint that these would be used for body-line bowling. I would like all my old friends in Australian Cricket to know that I am sorry that my experience and my advice were put to such unworthy uses.


An interesting article to be sure.


And another quote from Jack Fingleton's book 'Cricket Crisis' which displays that Body-line was not a uniquely Australian experience:-

India was almost Australia all over again. Larwood, Voce and Bowes were not there. But Jardine, Clark, of Northants, and the Bodyline field were sufficient for a hot curry of trouble. Here is a portion of what happened in India: Merchant had his chin split; Naoomal had his eye cut open; a ball in Madras narrowly missed the Maharajah of Patalia's turban and bitterly incensed the crowd. Dilawar Hussain was hit on the head at Calcutta and like Oldfield at Adelaide, was carried off the field. Clark, at Colombo amazed everyone by walking down the wicket and deliberately scraping off with his sprigs that part of the pitch where the good length ball would land. Clark's action was so blatant that the MCC batsman at the other end apologized to the Cingalese captain, Dr. Gunesakari.


You mention the letter Larwood was asked to sign in your section dealing with the aftermath, I think you could expand upon it just a bit to give the reader a taste of the atmosphere of the time. You probably came across this in your research:-

"Larwood never played for England again. Welcomed home as a popular hero, he soon found that `diplomacy' was at work. At Lord's members of the MCC committee had begun to understand the cause of Australian indignation. That cricket had been damaged was becoming obvious to all but the blindly partisan. Moves to outlaw the leg-side field-setting, if not the short-pitched fast ball, were instituted. And a letter of apology was drawn up for signature by Harold Larwood, the arch-exponent of Bodyline. Since he had been bowling to orders and believed in his heart that there was nothing sinister in his method of attack, he refused to sign the letter. His Test career was over at 28."

It's quite stark really and I've read that his decision to move to Australia was not so much strange as more along the lines of economic expediency:

"in 1950, now with five daughters, he and wife Lois decided to join the mass exodus of the disillusioned from war-fatigued Britain. They sailed to Sydney on none other than Orontes, the vessel which had taken Jardine's MCC side to Australia in 1932."

All up I think you've done a good job on this contentious subject. More could be said on it and of course libraries and the web are littered with books on it but I think 'more' might only be of interest to a cricket tragic like myself(hence my nickname coined by one Neville Cardus)

Thanks Keith . I've made the changes and a few additions. I haven't put in an awful lot though, because I'm still aware of this length. It would be nice to have non-cricketing people reading it even if they don't understand the details, and the longer it gets, the less appealing it is to a non-enthusiast.

True, we must think of those poor souls unaffected and sadly lacking in their cultural life who have nary a clue of what we're talking about.
Me? I think it too short by a good few thousand words at the very least.

If I'd done it we'd still be in England tracing the roots of it
Enough is never enough I'm afraid when it comes to Cricket.

If you did want to add a wee bit of levity though you could do worse than to mention the wag in the ground at one of the Test venues(it may have been in Sydney and it may have been the famous 'Yabba') who upon seeing Jardine shooing flies away with his hand yelled out, his voice carrying across the ground..."Leave our flies alone!"

It really does read well, this.

You changed the title. Since you're concerned that the Entry might only appeal to cricket fans, is this an improvement? The old title was possibly too portentous, but it carried the useful information that the Entry was about more than cricket.

First paragraph of "aftermath" section - >>Warner was the only one there who criticised Bodyline bowling<<. I'm sure you realise this from other comments, but others at the meeting were critical too. Allen was the only critic who'd been in the touring party.

It's interesting that Wyatt wasn't invited, even though he would succeed as captain. Wyatt's "Three Straight Sticks" is another intriguing book on the subject. Wyatt seems to have stood for the middle ground on the matter, believing that leg theory and a rising ball around the hip were an effective tactic against the otherwise foot-perfect top batsmen of the day, but that Jardine had overdone it and paid bowlers everywhere a huge disservice. The foppish Allen he seems to have disliked, considering him almost as histrionic as the Australians. There was to be another twist, too, since Wyatt had his jaw shattered by a West Indian bouncer in 1935. To his credit, it didn't change his opinion on what might be called 'hip theory'.

I guess that those of us who play know all about the effectiveness of the leg stump straight ball, too short to drive, bowled to a field of square catchers. Larwood could throw in the away-swinger starting on the same line too. Really, how else are you going to bowl to a sharp-footed batsman who'll otherwise pepper the covers all day?

Picking Nits:

Para 4, bottom line 'six balls for most of crickets history' => ... cricket's...

Section 'The Urn and the Don' para 3:
'An average of 50 and above is reserved for the very best'
alternative: 'The very best reserve averages of 50 and above for themselves'
?

I'll look further later, if only to enjoy the whole piece.

I've been flip-flopping about with this title for a while now. While I was writing it it had the work in progress title 'A Controversial Method of Bowling'. How dull does that sound. 'How Cricket Split an Empire' went to the other extreme, I feel. I do take your point that the current one doesn't really explain the incident's real significant.

After some more pondering, the Empire-splitting title has a good message behind its melodramatics. Something along similar lines would be 'When Cricket Divided Nations'. What do you lot think?

I think that would work.

*considering him almost as histrionic as the Australians.*
Is this a quote from Jardine perhaps?
Leg stump straight ball? Step away and whack it is an effective antidote to it.

Batsmen who whack tend to regret the rush of blood sooner or later, same as people who bite in on-line convos.
Still, let's not get off-topic in PR, OK?

Nah, that's the difference you see in attitudes and approaches and I was asking about Jardine.

I'll check what Wyatt actually wrote. It was on those lines, but the phrase is mine. Jardine's prouncements were of course generally more direct.

It's funny, for some reason I just remembered reading somewhere about Jardine and an Australian Cricketer/Commentator being in the same commentary box at a ground(I'd presume an English one, I don't think he ever returned to Aus'.) and for the entire time they were seated together they never spoke to each other and this in a commentary box!

Good haters I guess.

Probably apocryphal, that one. Jardine didn't return to Australia, but a fairly comprehensive book on the history of BBC cricket broadcasting makes no reference to him ever commentating either. He was a regular in the pressbox from the time of the 1934 Ashes, but as John Woodcock's piece below makes clear, the antagonism you allude to wasn't much in evidence at least by the 1950s:

"When I started writing about cricket, Jardine was in the press box, a much more staid place than it is today, and his manner was more one of self-consciousness than superiority. In 1953, an Ashes year, when Bradman, Jack Fingleton, Bill O’Reilly and Bill Bowes, who had all fought in the bodyline campaign, were also there, their joint presence kindled no tension. Regarding Jardine, O’Reilly even surprised himself by “rather liking the man”. "

You might be recalling the bad blood between Arlott and McGilvray?

Hmmm, I must see if I can dig it up somewhere, I'm sure it's not apocrypha, I can even vaguely see a photo in my minds eye but I might also have it arse about too and their actually chatting away.

Yes old Alan McGilvray, grew up listening to him and Arlott and the rest of various voices on the ABC.

Section 'Aftermath' last para, the 2 last sentences, where you say

"Woodfull himself later said he refused to be dragged down to the level of using Bodyline himself, and also that it would do no good to international relations to retaliate in kind. Though admirable, this lack of imaginative captaincy almost certainly had a part to play in Australia's defeat."

Far from a lack of, surely Woodfull's attitude was nothing but imaginative. It's tolerably obvious that he foresaw the furore and, rightly, refused to escalate the matter, thus keeping his team 'clean'.
Admirable, Yes.
Unimaginative, patently not.

Woodfull imaginative? Come off it. He had no answer but stoicism, not just to Bodyline but to England's clear edge in the field all-round. This when it was his job to devise tactics to counter Jardine. Instead he just left each member of his team to sort out his own answer individually.

All the proactive captaincy in the series came from Jardine. The way he turned the screw was efficient and ruthless. In terms of honourable conduct you're entitled to argue that Woodfull surpassed Jardine. In terms of captaincy, leadership and intellect applied to winning at cricket, such a suggestion would be preposterous.

Pretty well every Australian captain thereafter, and certainly all the recent ones, have of course emulated the Jardine model of leadership: win at all costs, being scrupulous only to keep within the letter of the Laws, and go for the kill at any sign of weakness. We have a fine and balanced Entry here. We absolutely must not let it be distorted by the myth that England somehow cheated in that series.

Here, have a read of this everyone, and get some sense of proportion: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,20781227-5006016,00.html

Speaking personally, the only thing I find contemptible about Jardine is his practised disdain for fellow sportsmen beyond the field of play. Even then, the contempt is moderated by shades of the same trait in Bradman too.