The Outsider Posted March 25, 2010 Author Posted March 25, 2010 You call that bodyline ! Then what do you call Shoaib felling Lara ' date=' Kirsten etc as ... Deathline ? They bowl like that almost all the time these days. Shortbal .. shortball followed by a full one is the oldest trick in the book. Mind games before any Perth test match ( Someone might get hurt badly tomorrow : Steve Waugh ) are routine. And lets not forget the term "Chin-Music" .. no-one even remotely thinks twice about such things its just common. The silly aussies came up against it for once and started throwing their toys out of ... hmm sounds familiar to me .... If you listen to David Gowers commentary in that clip he tells that Bodyline was already being used in county cricket. And Larwood doesnt appear to be superfast at all from that footage let alone fearfull. Heck the first time Woodfull got hit there wasnt even a leg-trap set. Sounds more like the Aussies were never seriously tested with short pitch stuff. I also recall reading that Larwood was reluctant to bowl bodyline because it was un-gentlemanly in those times. And you call that a test match? ![/quote'] Bhaiyya, do you even have any idea of what Bodyline was? It was not bowling a maximum of 2 bouncers per over with the batsman protected with a spacesuit and no more than 2 fielders allowed behind the leg stump. It was a concentrated attack from round the stumps into the body of the batsman with an umbrella field on the leg side. The very laws of cricket were changed after that with regards to intimidatory bowling and field placements, so what happens today is not even close to it. BTW, it was replicated when the umpires turned blind eye to it - even then the fielding restrictions were in place and look what happened to a world record chasing batting line up : http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63162.html You are making a fool of yourself by comparing Bodyline to what passes for Sami trying to bounce out Ponting on covered pitches today.
Roshanrocks Posted March 25, 2010 Posted March 25, 2010 getting tougher and tougher to follow this debate.... its going on all over the forum in so many threads :vollkommenauf:
The Outsider Posted March 25, 2010 Author Posted March 25, 2010 babuji... they bowl in the ribcage day in and day out these days you can still have 2 close in behind the square on leg side and a shortleg and silly midon and silly point ... nobody does that anymore because the 2 behind square are a wastage of fielders ... this is why there are no legslips in the modern game. Batsmen have learned to adapt and they now either sway away or ramp it over slips. It will be called as intimidatory bowling and the umpire will step in if you continuously bowl bouncers at the batsman from round the wicket. Go read up the laws of cricket before you continue making a first rate fool out of yourself. What happened to being "used to" this kind of bowling here : http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63162.html Half the team in the hospital and captain begging for mercy . That is what Bodyline was about, but I don't expect someone so blinded by jingoism to understand. EDIT : BTW, the ramp over slips and through gully was first used by Bradman in the Bodyline series and that too from a round the wicket angle.
Roshanrocks Posted March 25, 2010 Posted March 25, 2010 t will be called as intimidatory bowling and the umpire will step in if you continuously bowl bouncers at the batsman from round the wicket. Go read up the laws of cricket before you continue making a first rate fool out of yourself. What happened to being "used to" this kind of bowling here : http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/match/63162.html Half the team in the hospital and captain begging for mercy . That is what Bodyline was about, but I don't expect someone so blinded by jingoism to understand. i have totally lost the plot... wat has this to do with sachin or bradman???? i must read this thread again.... i wont post any more here.... don want to disturb u folks!
The Outsider Posted March 25, 2010 Author Posted March 25, 2010 and what has that score card got to do with SRT ? Everything. That is the only instance after the rule change in cricket when Bodyline like tactics were used and the result is there for all to see. Do you understand a simple concept...let me try to guide you step by step : 1. Bodyline happened 2. Laws were rewritten to make it illegal 3. Hence by definition it cannot be replicated because to do so would be breaking the laws of cricket. 4. None of the modern batsmen have faced Bodyline tactics ever in their careers even with their spacesuits. 5. The closest instance of when it was replicated in modern cricket led to half the team being injured and suffering a huge loss. If you still don't get it and continue to make asinine assertions like short pitch bowling is the equivalent of Bodyline, then keep on doing so. Short pitch bowling existed before and after Bodyline - in fact Jardine got the idea of Bodyline from regular short pitch bowling, the one you are talking about. And I am sure you will go down that route because of your blind jingoism.
vvvslaxman Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 And FWIW the bodyline tactics were tried in about 2 or 3 tests IIRC of which DGB missed one. Hilarious to think the embassies and politicians got involved. By that token shall we nominate Nari Contractor as the best ? But Nari contractor in an era that is outside your " so called phaast bowler era" :cantstop: You lose the right to use him as an example.
Bumper Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 I hate to get into this debate, as i dont have the time for lengthy rebuttals. Can anyone answer these questions for me ? 1) What proportion of Bradman's career constituted Bodyline type attack ? 2) How does Bradman's average (57) compare to his peers in the bodyline series. Since Bradman's touted greatness is based on the gulf between his own avg and that of his peers, this is an important question. 3) Are you guys suggesting that bodyline was the most difficult attack ever or implying that it is as good as any of the attacks of today ? 4) The no-helmet & 'vanilla bat' disadvantage applies to even Gavaskar's era (till 80s). So not sure why this advances Bradman's greatness. (No am not comparing him to SRT, merely wondering about the 'Bradman being the greatest ever' claim).
Bumper Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 grand total of 2 matches may be 3. But hey he could have been killed you know :hitler: If what you say is true, I dont know how this bodyline series proves anything about Bradman's greatness ? If anything it only pokes holes into his invincible status. Bradman's avg of 99 fell by a whooping 42% to 57 in the only the series he was tested. And a grand total of 3 tests (am just going by what Boss mentions above) is an insignificant part of Bradman's career spanning 50 tests over a decade or more, to be taken as a representative of the quality of the attack he faced.
teacup Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 If what you say is true' date=' I dont know how this bodyline series proves anything about Bradman's greatness ? If anything it only pokes holes into his invincible status. Bradman's avg of 99 fell by a whooping 42% to 57 in the only the series he was tested. And a grand total of 3 tests (am just going by what Boss mentions above) is an insignificant part of Bradman's career spanning 50 tests over a decade or more, to be taken as a representative of the quality of the attack he faced.[/quote'] And, the difference in averages between Bradman and the next best batsman in the period in which he played drops to 10 if you include only England or Australia as opposition.
Bumper Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 2) How does Bradman's average (57) compare to his peers. Since Bradman's touted greatness is based on the gulf between his own avg and that of his peers, this is an important question. :hmmm: I misworded my question. I meant Bradman's avg of 57 in the bodyline series. How does this compare with his peers in the same series ?
teacup Posted March 26, 2010 Posted March 26, 2010 I misworded my question. I meant Bradman's avg of 57 in the bodyline series. How does this compare with his peers in the same series ? By peers, I take it that you mean only Australian batsmen? Oldfield and Woodfull averaged in the 40s. 43.56 to Oldfield and 42.57 to Woodfull.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now