Bodyline. (Leg theory)

[neville cardus]

Yep, at the invitation of Jack Fingleton.

I don't suppose that anyone here has seen the poignant press conference that Fingo held to mark Larwood's arrival?

 

[neville cardus]

Also not sure why a leg stump line ball that comes up to your hips is more dangerous to the person that your usual bouncer

It is far more difficult to evade the body-bound ball than it is the genuine bouncer. Umpire Bird always held that limiting the number per over was pointless; it was the rib-tickler that made the 'seventies and 'eighties so lethal.

 

[Goughy]

I don't suppose that anyone here has seen the poignant press conference that Fingo held to mark Larwood's arrival?

Yeah, Ive seen little bits of it. Focuses on Larwood and even when Fingleton speaks he isnt in the frame

A short clip is included on the popular DVD 'Century of Cricket' hosted by David Gower

 

[Richard]

I thought that might be the one Rodders was on about. Yeah, I've got that vid, haven't watched it for a few years now tho, and currently the only thing I can remember of t' top of ' head is Larwood saying "and this time I'm sitting on the fence Jack", and Fingleton laughing and saying "outside the fence not on the fence! That's the best part to sit on!"

 

[Goughy]

The rule about maximum of 2 short deliveries per over was brought in in either the late-1970s or early-1980s IIRR, sure someone (Sean or Kev?) could tell us the exact date.

Nah, much later than that.

I dont know the exact date but it wasnt until mid-late 90s.

Previously there was no limit. Teams may exchange pieces of paper with names of players that shouldnt have bouncers bowled to them and there were gentlemans agreements like the Fast Bowlers Union where you didnt drop it short to a fellow quick.

However, there was no actual limit to what could be bowled until the 90s. The WI got away with murder in the 70s and 80s and even into the 90s Robin Smith famously faced 15 bouncers in a row against them in a Test at Antigua.

 

[Richard]

Blimey, that late.

I certainly remember it being mentioned in, I think, 1995 (may have been 1996), vis-a-vis either Ambrose and Walsh or Waqar and Wasim.

I realised West Indies had got away with murder in the 2nd half of the '70s and the '80s, and I thought it was brought in as a (somewhat belated) reaction to that. Didn't realise how belated, though.

 

[Engle]

Bodyline, IMV, has added to the richness (romance even) of the sport. Had it not happened, the game would’ve been a touch poorer. At the time, I probably would’ve been against it, and the fact that it was outlawed soon after, suggests being on the right side of the argument.

However, the characters, contest, conflicts, quotes, cultural nuances even…all combine together to construct a plot of one of sports most captivating stories; one which I don’t believe any other cricketing encounter has managed to create nor come close to.

 

[Richard]

Yeah, as I said in my first post this thread - had Bodyline not happened, cricket history would be that much less interesting. The series is one of the most famous and fascinating in the history of the sport. The fact there is so little intimacy (as well as being a reason for its continuation - as I also said earlier had communications been better there's little doubt it'd have been stopped very early on) only adds to the charm in a mystique sort of way.

But whether cricket history would be less interesting isn't really too relevant to the question of "was it right or wrong?"

 

[BoyBrumby]

So when Gubby Allen refused to bowl to the on-side field, did Jardine not bowl him or did Jardine relent and set a more normal field? Allen took a bunch of wickets too, so one of them had to have backed off.

Jardine did. In his sublime tome on the subject, Bodyline Autopsy, David Frith reports DRJ as asking Gubby to bowl to a leg-theory field before the first test, to which the latter replied,

"Douglas, I have never done that, and it's not the way I want to play cricket. If you don't like it, you should leave me out of the team."

Clearly Jardine rated Allen's bowling as being worth the insubordination in the ranks and Gubby was duly included. There's no doubt that had Allen not been a well connected amateur (reportedly the bastard son of Plum Warner, the tour manager, no less) he'd have been told to bowl to the field he was set.

Frith does note tho that Allen had no such qualms about fielding in the leg trap & held 5 catches off Larwood at short-leg in the series.

I'd be prepared to bet that dear old Gubby never used the word "ain't."

Wouldn't be so sure myself; he was Australian by birth after all..

 

[Richard]

Jardine did. In his sublime tome on the subject, Bodyline Autopsy, David Frith reports DRJ as asking Gubby to bowl to a leg-theory field before the first test, to which the latter replied,

"Douglas, I have never done that, and it's not the way I want to play cricket. If you don't like it, you should leave me out of the team."

Clearly Jardine rated Allen's bowling as being worth the insubordination in the ranks and Gubby was duly included. There's no doubt that had Allen not been a well connected amateur (reportedly the bastard son of Plum Warner, the tour manager, no less) he'd have been told to bowl to the field he was set.

Let's also not forget: Allen bowling to conventional fields was quite something of an asset, in any case.

 

[archie mac]

It should be said that many thought Gubby to erratic to bowl Bodyline

 

[Richard]

Indeed, the claim the management either did or planned to and eventually decided against (not sure which - both stories have persisted to this day) make was that Allen had never been asked to bowl the leg-theory because he wasn't accurate enough.

On the documentary mentioned a little while ago featuring the likes of Larwood and Wyatt, Wyatt alludes to the fact that they wanted to be sure to present a united front by saying that Allen was not asked to bowl the leg-theory. When the other story was first aired I'm not sure.

 

[BoyBrumby]

On the documentary mentioned a little while ago featuring the likes of Larwood and Wyatt, Wyatt alludes to the fact that they wanted to be sure to present a united front by saying that Allen was not asked to bowl the leg-theory. When the other story was first aired I'm not sure.

Allen mentioned it in his letters home to his father (well putative father...), so if his refusal was a lie it was one he maintained from the outset.

It should also be noted that Bowes bowled to a leg-theory field in the second test but was never preferred to Allen in the series. I'm personally inclined to believe Gubby was a genuine refusenik WRT bowling Bodyline.

 

[archie mac]

Allen mentioned it in his letters home to his father (well putative father...), so if his refusal was a lie it was one he maintained from the outset.

It should also be noted that Bowes bowled to a leg-theory field in the second test but was never preferred to Allen in the series. I'm personally inclined to believe Gubby was a genuine refusenik WRT bowling Bodyline.

I tend to agree

I wonder if they could some how do a DNA test of relations of Gubby and Plum and find out if they are related?

 

[BoyBrumby]

I tend to agree

I wonder if they could some how do a DNA test of relations of Gubby and Plum and find out if they are related?

I doubt it's possible, actually. Gubby didn't have children (or at least died a bachelor with none acknowledged I know of).

 

[Richard]

Allen mentioned it in his letters home to his father (well putative father...), so if his refusal was a lie it was one he maintained from the outset.

It should also be noted that Bowes bowled to a leg-theory field in the second test but was never preferred to Allen in the series. I'm personally inclined to believe Gubby was a genuine refusenik WRT bowling Bodyline.

I don't think there's any doubt Allen's refusal was genuine. I seem to recall Wyatt mentioning it, but saying the official line peddled at the time was that he had never been asked.

 

[neville cardus]

Gordon Bennett! This one died a snappy death!

I would think that, though, given that the last Bodyline thread to which I contributed lasted 584 posts:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec....663/b71be7409e101b1a?q=bodyline+legal&lnk=ol&