More »
Let us transport ourselves to the days of Jardine`s bodyline series made famous by the sheer speed and accuracy of Harold Larwood and Bill Voce. It is reported that the fastest ball by Larwood was recorded at 96 mph (remember miles not kilometers) with only the not so precise electrical instruments of the thirties, but players of his time vouched him to be even faster.
The essence of the bodyline theory was to attack the batsman with short rising deliveries rather than aim at the wickets. The purpose was to intimidate the indomitable Don and prevent him from scoring as many at such furious rate. It succeeded to a large extent, because Bradman failed in the series, but only by his lofty standards. His average in the series stood at 53 point something as against his grand average of 100 minus fraction. But his average of 54 for the bloodiest series is as good as, if not better than the average of all the modern gladiators- Lara and Sachin included.
But…
Bradman played in only four of the five match series and scored a century, a fifty plus (73, I Believe) and two near fifties in the eight innings he played in the series. Not a bad job for a man facing missiles hurled at him in excess of 150 kmph constantly by the deadliest combination of Larwood and Voce.
Of course he did take quite a few body blows, so did the old Bill Ford and the versatile Macabe. But they scored runs, not enough to win the ashes (they lost the series 1-4), But enough to show some fight and determination.
Let us consider the protective armor that Don and his contemporaries had.
The pads that protected the longest single bone of the body that carries the frame on it.
The pair of gloves that protected the maximum number of bone joints in our body.
Then the abdomen guard that protected the human race.
Some preferred to have a cap to protect against the sun-glare.
A pair of buck-skin boots to protect the toes and they had spikes to give a good grip.
Contrast this with the gladiatorial gears of the modern day professional. A helmet to protect the skull. A chest pad to protect the chest. The arm guard to protect the fore arm. The conventional box to protect the vitals. Then a thigh pad that covered the part of the leg above the knee. The conventional pad to protect the legs.
With a donkey’s load of protective gear the best average of all the greats of the fully armored men of modern times just about matches the scantily protected Bradman and the co exposed to the ‘bodyline attack’ of the bowlers hurling down constantly in excess of 150 kmph.
Perhaps the pre-gladiatorial men are driven by fear. How else can we explain the craze for more and more of protective gears? Added to the satiety of the protective gears is the senseless law (added quite recently) restricting the fast bowler to bowl no more than one short rising delivery aimed at the batsman.
The fast bowler has become near irrelevant. A few McGrath’s still command respect, but these are the men of Gubby Allen pace, not the express pace of Larwood.
If KP’s switch hit and the now more often used reverse-sweep are legitimate , why should the bowler be obliged to inform the umpire and the batsman if the is going to bowl over around the wicket. Let the bowler run up and deliver the ball from whatever angle he wants.
Why should law prevent a bowler from wearing some rough plaster around the fingers of his bowling arm to get better grip of the ball. Why should law prevent a bowler (or a quiet captain like Atherton) from applying some foreign matter to one surface of the ball or lift the seam (a la Tendulkar) with the nail.
If law could be silent about new arrivals in a batsman’s protective gear, it has to go silent about what adds to the advantage of a bowler. Or it is not cricket. (Both in the literal and in the figurative sense)
by M Rajagopalan
The essence of the bodyline theory was to attack the batsman with short rising deliveries rather than aim at the wickets. The purpose was to intimidate the indomitable Don and prevent him from scoring as many at such furious rate. It succeeded to a large extent, because Bradman failed in the series, but only by his lofty standards. His average in the series stood at 53 point something as against his grand average of 100 minus fraction. But his average of 54 for the bloodiest series is as good as, if not better than the average of all the modern gladiators- Lara and Sachin included.
But…
Bradman played in only four of the five match series and scored a century, a fifty plus (73, I Believe) and two near fifties in the eight innings he played in the series. Not a bad job for a man facing missiles hurled at him in excess of 150 kmph constantly by the deadliest combination of Larwood and Voce.
Of course he did take quite a few body blows, so did the old Bill Ford and the versatile Macabe. But they scored runs, not enough to win the ashes (they lost the series 1-4), But enough to show some fight and determination.
Let us consider the protective armor that Don and his contemporaries had.
The pads that protected the longest single bone of the body that carries the frame on it.
The pair of gloves that protected the maximum number of bone joints in our body.
Then the abdomen guard that protected the human race.
Some preferred to have a cap to protect against the sun-glare.
A pair of buck-skin boots to protect the toes and they had spikes to give a good grip.
Contrast this with the gladiatorial gears of the modern day professional. A helmet to protect the skull. A chest pad to protect the chest. The arm guard to protect the fore arm. The conventional box to protect the vitals. Then a thigh pad that covered the part of the leg above the knee. The conventional pad to protect the legs.
With a donkey’s load of protective gear the best average of all the greats of the fully armored men of modern times just about matches the scantily protected Bradman and the co exposed to the ‘bodyline attack’ of the bowlers hurling down constantly in excess of 150 kmph.
Perhaps the pre-gladiatorial men are driven by fear. How else can we explain the craze for more and more of protective gears? Added to the satiety of the protective gears is the senseless law (added quite recently) restricting the fast bowler to bowl no more than one short rising delivery aimed at the batsman.
The fast bowler has become near irrelevant. A few McGrath’s still command respect, but these are the men of Gubby Allen pace, not the express pace of Larwood.
If KP’s switch hit and the now more often used reverse-sweep are legitimate , why should the bowler be obliged to inform the umpire and the batsman if the is going to bowl over around the wicket. Let the bowler run up and deliver the ball from whatever angle he wants.
Why should law prevent a bowler from wearing some rough plaster around the fingers of his bowling arm to get better grip of the ball. Why should law prevent a bowler (or a quiet captain like Atherton) from applying some foreign matter to one surface of the ball or lift the seam (a la Tendulkar) with the nail.
If law could be silent about new arrivals in a batsman’s protective gear, it has to go silent about what adds to the advantage of a bowler. Or it is not cricket. (Both in the literal and in the figurative sense)
by M Rajagopalan
