Should Thirimanne have been sent off?

[Ultimate_Game]

You can't compare bodyline with underarm ball. Bodyline controversy was created on something which kind of became norm few decades later. Australians were just timid to cry out foul on seeing some short-pitch stuff. Underarm ball is something which became part of history following that incidence.

You are mistaken. Bodyline series resulted in a few rule changes. If I'm not mistaken not having more than 5 fielders on the leg side, and not more than 2 behind square on the leg resulted from that series. And now we also have a 2 bouncer per over rule (thanks to WI of 80s). In 70s (I think in 76) Bedi conceded the match or declared the Indian innings with just 5 batsmen out as the other 5 were injured facing short pitched stuff from WI bowlers :haha:

[Raghav_12]

:hysterical::hysterical: Bodyline is illegal even today! Became the norm - the one time it was implemented in modern times a line up of Gavaskar, Vengsarkar, Viswanath, and Amarnath ended up forfeiting the test.

That particular test match being called a bodyline test is something I have read only in your posts. That was dangerous bowling for sure but there were many other instances of dangerous bowlings from 70's and 80's, though I never heard of diplomatic crisis followings those pieces of dangerous bowling. Search on Youtube with keywords of Michael Holding and Brial Close. In resulting video, you'll see all balls of that over were targetted at Close's head. I wonder how you can uniquely define what is bodyline bowling and can say that particular over from Holding doesn't confirm to that definition of Bodyline. All hue and cry about Bodyline was because with all that short pitch stuff, it that was kind of departure from prevalent notion of international cricket which was of some fun activity in which some middle-aged guys would indulge.

[Lurker]

:hysterical::hysterical: Bodyline is illegal even today! Became the norm - the one time it was implemented in modern times a line up of Gavaskar, Vengsarkar, Viswanath, and Amarnath ended up forfeiting the test.

It was against such a backdrop that I asked Sunil, once he was back in India: "That head-hunting beamer we saw you barely manage to evade at Sabina Park in DD's Samachar highlights, how did it feel to measure up to it from Holding?" "Which beamer?" Sunil slyly sought to know, his tone making it obvious that beamers made no one beam. "There were so many of them bowled at us. Both Holding and Daniel bowled them regularly. Their technique was simple - mix a beamer with two-three bouncers in an over. Then, having shaken the batsman's confidence, produce a fast straight yorker to go through his defence. I did ask wicket-keeper Deryck Murray why they were still after me when they had virtually won that Sabina Park decider with three of our key men injured. Deryck said he had spoken to Clive about it, but they had simply been asked to turn their eyes away if they did not want to look!"

Sportstar has a great article on the Test. A good read for the jaahils who think Bodyline was a majaak and bouncers in 1980s were the same thing, or the Sabina Test for India for that matter. http://www.tssonnet.com/tss2520/25200240.htm

[Ultimate_Game]

That particular test match being call a bodyline test is something I have read only in your posts. That was dangerous bowling for sure but there were many other instances of dangerous bowlings from 70's and 80's, though I never heard of diplomatic crisis followings those pieces of dangerous bowling. Search on Youtube with keywords of Michael Holding and Brial Close. In resulting video, you'll see all balls of that over were targetted at Close's head. I wonder how you can uniquely define what is bodyline bowling and can say that particular over from Holding doesn't confirm to that definition of Bodyline. All hue and cry about Bodyline was because with all that short pitch stuff, it that was kind of departure from prevalent notion of international cricket which was of some fun activity in which some middle-aged guys would indulge.

One crucial element of bodyline was catchers on the leg side, especially behind square and that's why Bodyline was also referred to as Leg side Theory or Leg Theory. The idea was to target the batsmen's body with short pitched stuff and have short leg, leg slip, fine leg, square leg etc. in case batsman tried to fend the ball or hook/pull it. That's why fielding restrictions were imposed after the series as batsmen couldn't do anything about the bowling even if they knew the next ball would be short. Even if they hit the ball chances were they would get a single at max or they would get out if the hit the ball in the air. That's why only 2 fielders are allowed behind square now with no more than 5 on the leg side. The incident you are referring to was short pitched stuff but not with the bodyline/leg theory field. But even then the batsmen found it tough to face the short pitched stuff and ultimately led to the 2 bouncer per over rule. If I' not mistaken Gatting's nose was broken by Marshall in that very series and part of Gatting's bone from nose was embedded in the ball

[Lurker]

The incident you are referring to was short pitched stuff but not with the bodyline/leg theory field. But even then the batsmen found it tough to face the short pitched stuff and ultimately led to the 2 bouncer per over rule. If I' not mistaken Gatting's nose was broken by Marshall in that very series and part of Gatting's bone from nose was embedded in the ball

Different series. Close-Holding was in 1970s, Gatting-Marshall was in mid 80s. After Gatting was taken to hospital and Marshall got ready to bowl the next delivery he saw the bones of Gatting's nose were buried deep in the red cherry.

[Ultimate_Game]

Different series. Close-Holding was in 1970s, Gatting-Marshall was in mid 80s. After Gatting was taken to hospital and Marshall got ready to bowl the next delivery he saw the bones of Gatting's nose were buried deep in the red cherry.

I'm sure that ball would have reverse swung like anything with Gatting's bone on one side :winky:

[ganeshran]

The intimidatory part of bodyline was the short pitched bowling aimed at the body, the tactical part was positioning fielders all around the leg side so any mishit would go straight to the fielders. However, After the one bouncer rule, the leg side field placement laws dont really matter as the batsman can safely leave or duck under that one and then the leg side close in fielders would be useless for the remaining deliveries

[Lurker]

I'm sure that ball would have reverse swung like anything with Gatting's bone on one side

lol..Well Marshall never reverse swung so thats a moot point, but he did puke after seeing the nose bones. Marshall coming from around the wicket was certainly a frightening sight. He almost came from behind of the umpire at the last second and his pacey action would skid the ball off the surface. You have to wonder how the modern day batsmen would have performed against him. Probably the best fast bowler of last 3-4 decades.

[akshayxyz]

lol..Well Marshall never reverse swung so thats a moot point, but he did puke after seeing the nose bones. Marshall coming from around the wicket was certainly a frightening sight. He almost came from behind of the umpire at the last second and his pacey action would skid the ball off the surface. You have to wonder how the modern day batsmen would have performed against him. Probably the best fast bowler of last 3-4 decades.

++. I also wonder how 99.94 would have fared against that quality fast bowling.

[Ultimate_Game]

lol..Well Marshall never reverse swung so thats a moot point, but he did puke after seeing the nose bones. Marshall coming from around the wicket was certainly a frightening sight. He almost came from behind of the umpire at the last second and his pacey action would skid the ball off the surface. You have to wonder how the modern day batsmen would have performed against him. Probably the best fast bowler of last 3-4 decades.

Facing the likes of Marshall, Holding, Garner and Roberts etc. during late 70s and 80s must have been a hair raising scenario, especially with no limitation on the bouncers and pitches being much faster than they were in 2000s.

The intimidatory part of bodyline was the short pitched bowling aimed at the body, the tactical part was positioning fielders all around the leg side so any mishit would go straight to the fielders. However, After the one bouncer rule, the leg side field placement laws dont really matter as the batsman can safely leave or duck under that one and then the leg side close in fielders would be useless for the remaining deliveries

With the change in field settings where you can only put 2 fielders behind square, it wouldn't be that easy to pick wkts either as you can no longer have leg slip, short leg, leg gully, fine leg, square leg etc.

[Brainfade]

lol..Well Marshall never reverse swung so thats a moot point, but he did puke after seeing the nose bones. Marshall coming from around the wicket was certainly a frightening sight. He almost came from behind of the umpire at the last second and his pacey action would skid the ball off the surface. You have to wonder how the modern day batsmen would have performed against him. Probably the best fast bowler of last 3-4 decades.

I'd venture to say the best-ever. Certainly my favorite bowler of all time. Howz this for slips: Jaane kahaan gaye woh din ....

[Ultimate_Game]

++. I also wonder how 99.94 would have fared against that quality fast bowling.

Similar questions can be raised regarding "god" :winky:

[Lurker]

I'd venture to say the best-ever. Certainly my favorite bowler of all time. Howz this for slips: Jaane kahaan gaye woh din ....

Isnt that Dennis Lillee. Yeah certainly a case(Marshall) for best-ever. Had the full repertoire. Lovely run-up, smooth action, ability to swing both ways, could bowl off-cutters and also developed a mean leg cutter towards the end of his career. Incidentally he credited Imran Khan with knowledge transfer of leg-cutter who had picked it from Dennis Lillee who in turn had picked it from John Snow. One more reason why fast bowlers have their own union, and why Imran was rated greatly by best pace bowlers. That picture, there is something fascinating about it, isnt it? It is pre-professional era (by today's standards). Dennis Lillee with button down shirt, batsmen with only pads and skull cap. Rod Marsh with tree trunk legs and slips and gully galore. Marvellous sight.

[Lurker]

++. I also wonder how 99.94 would have fared against that quality fast bowling.

Dude phir wahi? When SRT faced Ambrose, Wasim, Waqar, Mcgrath & Donald he averages 36. And none of these would be as good as Marshall. So SRT would be averaging in low 20s (maybe). No wonder Sunny Gavaskar is considered the better batsman by those who have watched both Sunny and SRT. That should be enough for SRT-Bradman discussion for this thread, no?

[Raghav_12]

Sportstar has a great article on the Test. A good read for the jaahils who think Bodyline was a majaak and bouncers in 1980s were the same thing, or the Sabina Test for India for that matter. http://www.tssonnet.com/tss2520/25200240.htm

Gali- Galauz par mat aiyega. Cricket ki bat kar rahe hain, we can do with some manners.

[Lurker]

Facing the likes of Marshall, Holding, Garner and Roberts etc. during late 70s and 80s must have been a hair raising scenario, especially with no limitation on the bouncers and pitches being much faster than they were in 2000s.

Of course. The funny thing was opposition had no respite. The only players who succeeded were those who didnt wait for these bowlers to tire and were on the top of their game from ball 1. Which is why Sunny, Border, Lamb, Gooch succeeded against them. And really what kind of respite would you expect? There were 4 of these gentlemen. And if they would get injured (which opposition hoped for), you had folks Sylvester Clarke, Wayne Daniel and Winston Davis to walk in! lol. Sylvester Clarker was considered the maddest of the lot. Very strong, very fast, very drunk lol..Who would wanna face him? Winston Davis once took 7 wickets in LOI game in an age when Imran, Kapil, Botham huffed to get to 5 wickets (not like today where Afridi probably has 10 of these). Wayne Daniel was big lad, with a double barrel chest and awkward angle and as fast as anybody else. And these 3 lades were 2nd tier :giggle:

[Ultimate_Game]

Gali- Galauz par mat aiyega. Cricket ki bat kar rahe hain' date=' we can do with some manners.[/quote'] Arrey bhai terms/words like "jaahil" and "gawaar" are not gaalis. They are simply adjectives which describe the people Galli woh hoti hai jo Kohli aur Gambhir dete hain (i.e. MC, BC etc.)

[Lurker]

Gali- Galauz par mat aiyega. Cricket ki bat kar rahe hain' date=' we can do with some manners.[/quote'] Jaahil and jahalat(or jahaala) is lafz, its not gaali-galauz. Maybe time for some Urdu education as well?? :blink::blink:

[akshayxyz]

Dude phir wahi? When SRT faced Ambrose, Wasim, Waqar, Mcgrath & Donald he averages 36. And none of these would be as good as Marshall. So SRT would be averaging in low 20s (maybe). No wonder Sunny Gavaskar is considered the better batsman by those who have watched both Sunny and SRT. That should be enough for SRT-Bradman discussion for this thread, no?

so, considering the quality of fast bowling faced - how would you compare Gavaskar and DGB? [chichorapanti kee shuruat karoge, then be ready to take it back.]

[ganeshran]

With the change in field settings where you can only put 2 fielders behind square, it wouldn't be that easy to pick wkts either as you can no longer have leg slip, short leg, leg gully, fine leg, square leg etc.

All of those fielders would come into play only if you can keep bowling short pitched balls on the batsmen so he eventually has to go for shots. With the one bouncer rule, bowlers cant keep bowling short pitched stuff, so all the leg side fielders would be useless after the one bouncer is over the batsman can play shots on other balls. Unless of course, the bowler can keep bowling chest high accurate deliveries, but that is a much more difficult proposition.