-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
Strange, Funny, Bizzare !!
- Thread starter SJS
- Start date
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Strange, Funny & Bizzare # 14
The shortest spell of bowling in test cricket
Suppose I told you that someone had test bowling analysis of
NO overs, NO maidens, NO runs and NO wickets...you wouldnt believe me would you ?
Well it almost happened. In the 5thy test between India and WIndies in 1983, Windies needed 1 run to win and the keeper Kirmani was put on to bowl. He came in and bowled a no ball and that ended the test !
The moving finger in the score box dropped its pencil and scratched its head. Did Kirmani bowl in the test or not ??
Fortunately it transpired that Kirmani had bowled one legal delivery (not scored of) and the second was a noball. So Kirmani's spell could be recorded for posterity
The shortest spell of bowling in test cricket
Suppose I told you that someone had test bowling analysis of
NO overs, NO maidens, NO runs and NO wickets...you wouldnt believe me would you ?
Well it almost happened. In the 5thy test between India and WIndies in 1983, Windies needed 1 run to win and the keeper Kirmani was put on to bowl. He came in and bowled a no ball and that ended the test !
The moving finger in the score box dropped its pencil and scratched its head. Did Kirmani bowl in the test or not ??
Fortunately it transpired that Kirmani had bowled one legal delivery (not scored of) and the second was a noball. So Kirmani's spell could be recorded for posterity
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Bizzare and funny # 15
So you thought Paul Adams has a funny bowling action ??
Let me tell you something.
Les Glennon of Brighlton in the Yorkshire league had an action so peculiar, it was difficult to describe his bowling. You couldnt even say if he was right handed or left handed. One reporter actually described him as a "right-handed left-arm seamer".
How did he bowl ?
Well he bowled medium pace using his right arm but released the ball from behind his left ear !!
BTW, his best figures were 7 for 14 in 17 overs and in 1964 (as recently as that) averaged four runs per wicket for the entire season !
Incidentally, it maybe superfluous to reveal that in twent years of bowling in the leagues, he bowled only one wide. Pakistani coaches please note. Way to go maybe
So you thought Paul Adams has a funny bowling action ??
Let me tell you something.
Les Glennon of Brighlton in the Yorkshire league had an action so peculiar, it was difficult to describe his bowling. You couldnt even say if he was right handed or left handed. One reporter actually described him as a "right-handed left-arm seamer".
How did he bowl ?
Well he bowled medium pace using his right arm but released the ball from behind his left ear !!
BTW, his best figures were 7 for 14 in 17 overs and in 1964 (as recently as that) averaged four runs per wicket for the entire season !
Incidentally, it maybe superfluous to reveal that in twent years of bowling in the leagues, he bowled only one wide. Pakistani coaches please note. Way to go maybe
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Bizzare Incidents # 16
Bizzare dismissals :
Painfully in and painfully out without playing ?? : Sussex playing Somerset in 1919 lost their 9th second innings wicket with the scores level. H.J. Heygate, the number 11 was crippled with lumbago and had earlier decided not to bat.
Now with just 1 run required to win, the Somerset secretary sportingly invited him to go in and try to help his side get the one rune even in his desperate situation.
Heygate, who had already changed into civvies, was helped to painfully change again, after taking off his waistcoat and putting away his watch chain, he was helped to put on his pads and he ever so slowly, in extreme pain , proceeded to the wicket.
By the time he arrived well over two minutes had elapsed. A Somerset fielder appealed and the umpire had no choice but to declare him 'timed out'. Hey gate painfully and ever so slowly made his way back to the pavillion
as the match was declared a tie
Bizzare dismissals :
Painfully in and painfully out without playing ?? : Sussex playing Somerset in 1919 lost their 9th second innings wicket with the scores level. H.J. Heygate, the number 11 was crippled with lumbago and had earlier decided not to bat.
Now with just 1 run required to win, the Somerset secretary sportingly invited him to go in and try to help his side get the one rune even in his desperate situation.
Heygate, who had already changed into civvies, was helped to painfully change again, after taking off his waistcoat and putting away his watch chain, he was helped to put on his pads and he ever so slowly, in extreme pain , proceeded to the wicket.
By the time he arrived well over two minutes had elapsed. A Somerset fielder appealed and the umpire had no choice but to declare him 'timed out'. Hey gate painfully and ever so slowly made his way back to the pavillion
as the match was declared a tie 
I'll oblige you
It was not called timed out - it came into being only in 1980 - but an older version of it. There was a point of time when, if a batsman took too long to come out, the team would automatically lose the match as they were 'refusing to play'. Am not sure whether that version was in force in 1919.
Interesting story SJS.SJS said:Bizzare Incidents # 16
Bizzare dismissals :
Painfully in and painfully out without playing ?? : Sussex playing Somerset in 1919 lost their 9th second innings wicket with the scores level. H.J. Heygate, the number 11 was crippled with lumbago and had earlier decided not to bat.
Now with just 1 run required to win, the Somerset secretary sportingly invited him to go in and try to help his side get the one rune even in his desperate situation.
Heygate, who had already changed into civvies, was helped to painfully change again, after taking off his waistcoat and putting away his watch chain, he was helped to put on his pads and he ever so slowly, in extreme pain , proceeded to the wicket.
By the time he arrived well over two minutes had elapsed. A Somerset fielder appealed and the umpire had no choice but to declare him 'timed out'. Hey gate painfully and ever so slowly made his way back to the pavillion
I personally think the Umpire should be shot for not considering Heygate's circumstances in taking the time he took to get to the middle.
Where's the sportsmanship in all this !! Out through the window even back then it seems !!
Last edited:
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Well. 'Timed out' was my choice of words. In the book (where I got it from) it said, "By the time he arrived, well over two minutes had elapsed. A Somerset fielder appealed and the umpire was forced to refuse Haygate his innings and send him painfully back to the pavillion"Tapioca said:I'll oblige you
It was not called timed out - it came into being only in 1980 - but an older version of it. There was a point of time when, if a batsman took too long to come out, the team would automatically lose the match as they were 'refusing to play'. Am not sure whether that version was in force in 1919.
I used the term since it refers to two minutes.
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Sportsmanship !!JASON said:Interesting story SJS.
I personally think the Umpire should be shot for not considering Heygate's circumstances in taking the time he took to get to the middle.
Where's the sportsmanship in all this !! Out through the window even back then it seems !!
Dont you know Kathiawar team preferred to conced the match rather than continue and allow Nimbalkar a shot at the highest firstclass score ever !! That was way back in 1948. No no. Sportsmanship(or lack of it) hasnt been the preserve of any particular era)
SJS
Hall of Fame Member
Bizzare Incidents # 17
Bizzare dismissals - continued :
The hit wicket ball !! When we were kids we usde to jokingly call a ball on which a batsman was tun out a 'run out ball' as if the bowler was somehow responsible for the run out. However there was one English bowler who could lay some claim to being a specialist in inducing batsmen to hit their own wickets with their bats !!
Tich Freeman(Kent and England) seemed to do it too often for it not to be noticed as something strange.
Once, in 1921, in a county match at Lord's against Middlesex, three of the first four Middlesex batsmen were out 'hit wicket bowled Freeman' !
Whats more, one of them, the famous Patsy Hendren, no 4 and the third of Freeman's victims, had been hit wicket to the same bowler in the away fixture three weeks earlier too ! At Lord's he was dismissed in the first over he faced of Freeman, thus Hendren had been 'trapped' hit wicket by Freeman twice in six balls !!
Bizzare dismissals - continued :
The hit wicket ball !! When we were kids we usde to jokingly call a ball on which a batsman was tun out a 'run out ball' as if the bowler was somehow responsible for the run out. However there was one English bowler who could lay some claim to being a specialist in inducing batsmen to hit their own wickets with their bats !!
Tich Freeman(Kent and England) seemed to do it too often for it not to be noticed as something strange.
Once, in 1921, in a county match at Lord's against Middlesex, three of the first four Middlesex batsmen were out 'hit wicket bowled Freeman' !
Whats more, one of them, the famous Patsy Hendren, no 4 and the third of Freeman's victims, had been hit wicket to the same bowler in the away fixture three weeks earlier too ! At Lord's he was dismissed in the first over he faced of Freeman, thus Hendren had been 'trapped' hit wicket by Freeman twice in six balls !!
There are two matches fitting that description. In http://cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/f/24/f24554.html , Midx was 121/3 overnight. On the second day, 9 players failed to turn up. Midx innings was declared. Kent batted against 2 midx cricketers, their 12th man as WK and 8 substitues provided by Kent. Prodger who took a catch in the Kent innings as sub was a Kent cricketer. Three overs later the others turned up.
Another is this match : http://cricketarchive.co.uk/Archive/Scorecards/f/10/f10950.html
On the third day, Essex started at 333/7, but only Fender and another player were present for Surrey. They had come by car while the others travelled in a bus that had got stuck in the traffic. Play started with just two fielders but the batsmen did not attempt to score runs. After about 15 minutes, the rest of the players arrived.
==========
When I went home for lunch, I had an oppurtunity to look up this stuff. That explains my sudden erudition