Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Rapprochement

  1. #1
    Cricket Web Staff Member fredfertang's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    It is a far far better place ............ etc etc
    Posts
    12,012

    Rapprochement

    Rapprochement

    Interest in the Bodyline tour is as strong as ever, but in truth the next Ashes series lost little in comparison, even though it is seldom now recalled. In this feature Martin tells the story of the 1936/37 Tests

  2. #2
    International Debutant
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dunno. I say Marco you say Polo.
    Posts
    2,070
    I think Sutcliffe was past it and Hutton and Compton too young. I forget who (Wellings I think) called the non selection of Bowes and Paynter one of the worst bits of selectorship he'd seen. Add Larwood to those 2 and England may very well have won the series without bodyline. Most of all though the player they didn't need was Bradman. Australia's batting was vulnerable in this series and Eng may well have swept the series - but for the Don.

  3. #3
    Cricket Web Staff Member fredfertang's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    It is a far far better place ............ etc etc
    Posts
    12,012
    'tis true that Sutcliffe would've been 42 by the time the first Test begun, but he had three excellent seasons for Yorkshire still to come, and he couldn't have been less effective than Fagg, Fishlock and Worthington

  4. #4
    International Debutant
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dunno. I say Marco you say Polo.
    Posts
    2,070
    True enough. He was a champion. I have a feeling that Bowes didn't make the tour bcos he and Allen had a strong dislike of each other. Saw the animosity btwn the 2 on a documentary about bodyline.

    Copson was an interesting selection and on figures deserved his spot but a bout of injuries kept him from playing tests though he topped the fc averages. I've read newspaper accounts of the tour and they mentioned his ability to get lift and "fizz" from the wickets. An article from a friend, Easterbrook credited him with getting life even out of flat wickets so I think he could have handled Australian pitches. But you'd have to say an impartial selection process would have had Larwood and Bowes ahead of him. Even then Gover and Stephenson were unlucky. I'm a fan of the latter who seemed a real character.

    Overall the batting let Eng down though you can imagine a line up of Wyatt, Barnett, Hardstaff, Hammond, Leyland and Paynter with a sigh of what could have been.

    EDIT: Not to mention Sutcliffe
    Last edited by the big bambino; 12-03-2013 at 02:45 AM.


  5. #5
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    new york
    Posts
    18
    Yep, a great batsman Sutcliffe. I remember reading somewhere that his batting average never fell below 50 thoughout his Test career. It's a pity he started playing Tests so late (30ish).

  6. #6
    State Regular L Trumper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    906
    Quote Originally Posted by complan View Post
    Yep, a great batsman Sutcliffe. I remember reading somewhere that his batting average never fell below 50 thoughout his Test career. It's a pity he started playing Tests so late (30ish).
    Never fell below 60 let alone 50. He finished his career with his least batting average.



Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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