View Poll Results: bodyline

Voters
37. You may not vote on this poll
  • Brilliant initiative.

    22 59.46%
  • Disgracefull moment in cricketing history.

    11 29.73%
  • I pity the foo!!

    4 10.81%
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 117

Thread: Bodyline. (Leg theory)

  1. #1
    International Captain cover drive man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Liverpool, England
    Posts
    7,249

    Bodyline. (Leg theory)

    Everyone who calls themself a cricket fan knows about the bodyline series but what are you're views on it?
    Everyone wants to change the world, noone wants to change himself.

    -Tolstoy

  2. #2
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    46,837
    End justified the means.
    Cricket Web's current Premier League Tipping Champion

    - As featured in The Independent.

    "Rory Burns wafted and whooshed, hit a few, edged a few more and batted at times with all the graceful serenity of a man trying to force his way head-first through a privet hedge." - Barney Ronay on the Surrey opener's maiden test ton

  3. #3
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,629
    Rules are there to be exploited, it was a great piece of tactical genius, it is a shame that the lack of helmets and covered pitches made it unfeasible.
    The speed at which a fielding team gets through the innings is overrated.

  4. #4
    International Captain cover drive man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Liverpool, England
    Posts
    7,249
    Will be interesting to see what the aussies think when they come on.


  5. #5
    International Captain Redbacks's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    5,226
    How about you change the poll to do you support Australia. You could expect the same result.

    Although i'm pretty sure the Indians didn't appreciate leg theory either. The English always had moral high ground that they played the game like Gentlemen yet the Australians were ruthless, but they had to push the boundry of sportsmanship to win the series. No longer would anyone believe the English always place honour before victory. Values they so proudly preached

  6. #6
    International Coach archie mac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    canberra Australia
    Posts
    10,807
    It would have ruined the game, no drives and only cuts when you backed away from the wicket.

    I still wonder what would have happened if the Aussies had given it back to the Englishman?
    You know it makes sense.

  7. #7
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    It was poor form from those responsible to use the tactic - the fact that the rules were changed to prevent it shortly afterwards says everything.

    That said, cricket history would be infinitely less interesting had it not happened.

    Public polls, cdm, FFS!
    RD
    Appreciating cricket's greatest legend ever - HD Bird...............Funniest post (intentionally) ever.....Runner-up.....Third.....Fourth
    (Accidental) founder of Twenty20 Is Boring Society. Click and post to sign-up.
    chris.hinton: h
    FRAZ: Arshad's are a long gone stories
    RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990-15/4/2006

  8. #8
    International Captain cover drive man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Liverpool, England
    Posts
    7,249
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    It was poor form from those responsible to use the tactic - the fact that the rules were changed to prevent it shortly afterwards says everything.

    That said, cricket history would be infinitely less interesting had it not happened.

    Public polls, cdm, FFS!

    Although we would hear a lot more about the underarm incident and other incidents.
    Last edited by cover drive man; 09-03-2008 at 06:31 AM.

  9. #9
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,629
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    It was poor form from those responsible to use the tactic
    Why was it? They did what it took to silence Bradman.

  10. #10
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,629
    Quote Originally Posted by archie mac View Post
    It would have ruined the game, no drives and only cuts when you backed away from the wicket.
    'It would have' but it didn't, because it was always going to be outlawed.

  11. #11
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    Quote Originally Posted by Manee View Post
    Why was it? They did what it took to silence Bradman.
    Yes, and being legal (due to inattentive Law-making) didn't make it right. You could do what it took to silence batsmen ATT by bowling Beamers at them - wouldn't make that right if it was legal, either.

    Leg-theory is(\was) a tactic that was too easy to execute for the bowlers, meaning without a great deal of effort from the bowlers run-scoring could be made not a million miles short of realistically impossible.

    Teams have been accused of killing the game by applying off-theories, FFS - and full outside off with 8 on the off is nothing compared to short on leg with 7 or 8 men behind square on leg.

  12. #12
    Hall of Fame Member Goughy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    still scratching around in the same old hole
    Posts
    15,676
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Leg-theory is(\was) a tactic that was too easy to execute for the bowlers, meaning without a great deal of effort from the bowlers run-scoring could be made not a million miles short of realistically impossible.
    Thats just plain uninformed.

    The key to the success of leg theory was the accuracy of Larwood just as much as his pace. Without that accuracy it would have failed.

    In fact you read and analyse the Bodyline series and the need for accuracy is the essential.

    It was actually a tough thing to bowl well.
    If I only just posted the above post, please wait 5 mins before replying as there will be edits

    West Robham Rabid Wolves Caedere lemma quod eat lemma

  13. #13
    Cricketer Of The Year Manee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Heaven
    Posts
    8,629
    Quote Originally Posted by Richard View Post
    Yes, and being legal (due to inattentive Law-making) didn't make it right. You could do what it took to silence batsmen ATT by bowling Beamers at them - wouldn't make that right if it was legal, either.

    Leg-theory is(\was) a tactic that was too easy to execute for the bowlers, meaning without a great deal of effort from the bowlers run-scoring could be made not a million miles short of realistically impossible.

    Teams have been accused of killing the game by applying off-theories, FFS - and full outside off with 8 on the off is nothing compared to short on leg with 7 or 8 men behind square on leg.
    Captains are there to employ tactics to win, it was not a negative tactic, it was forcing the pace of the game. It was within the administrator's job to stop it and they did. Just because something is wrong, doesn't mean it is not right. (That sounded more poignant in my head).

  14. #14
    Englishman BoyBrumby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Gone too soon
    Posts
    46,837
    Yeah, Goughy's on the money here. "Leg theory" had been are for at least a couple of decades before 32/33, but it was only the pace and accuracy of Larwood & Voce that turned it into what was called "Bodyline".

    Moreover, the two most serious injuries happened when Larwood was bowling to conventional fields anyway.

  15. #15
    Cricket Web Staff Member Richard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    2005
    Posts
    80,401
    The injuries are beside the point - injuries have always happened throughout cricket history, especially on uneven, lively pitches like that Adelaide one.
    Quote Originally Posted by Goughy View Post
    Thats just plain uninformed.

    The key to the success of leg theory was the accuracy of Larwood just as much as his pace. Without that accuracy it would have failed.

    In fact you read and analyse the Bodyline series and the need for accuracy is the essential.

    It was actually a tough thing to bowl well.
    I'm aware of the need for accuracy, but bowling accurately in the areas they were aiming at is far, far easier than bowling in areas which are "good" with a conventional field. The margin-for-error in leg-theory areas is considerable. The ability to use that field made bowling too easy.

    It's not a tactic any fool could bowl, but when bowled by a pretty decent bowler it made the game an uneven contest.

    At Larwood and Voce's speed it also made things dangerous, but as I say to DB - danger is and always has been a part of cricket.

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Bodyline - The Movie (1984)
    By pasag in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 20-01-2007, 10:03 AM
  2. Modern Bodyline
    By andmark in forum Ashes 2006/07
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 02-12-2006, 03:04 PM
  3. Indoor Bodyline
    By Matt79 in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-11-2006, 04:24 PM
  4. Bodyline 1932-33
    By Lillian Thomson in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 23-10-2006, 02:06 AM
  5. Bodyline - Historical Fiction
    By membersstand in forum Cricket Chat
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 31-08-2005, 04:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •