Bradman, Tubby and the beauty of numbers
Columnist By Kersi Meher-Homji, 2 Sep 2009 Kersi Meher-Homji is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australian Cricket, Cricket, Don Bradman, Greg Chappell, Ian Chappell, International Cricket, mark taylor
NSW Cricket Association Southern Tour in December 1927. Don Bradman is in the back row 3rd from right. AAP Photo/ Mortlock Library of South Australia
As I was walking this morning, thinking furiously for a unique idea for The Roar, I saw a parked car with a registration plate 334 and I had a mental image of Don Bradman and Mark Taylor scoring 334 in a Test 68 years apart.
Bradman’s was against England in the 1930 Leeds Test, and Mark Taylor’s 334 not out was versus Pakistan at Peshawar in 1998-99.
But what a contrast!
Bradman was then a 22 year-old prodigy at his supreme best. Skipper Taylor, at 34, was passing through a horror patch.
After being unbeaten on 334 overnight, Taylor declared the innings closed.
Was it out of deference for the legendary Don or was it for a chance of snatching a victory for Australia?
The high scoring Test was drawn.
When Taylor visited Bradman at his home a few weeks later, the Don thanked him – as he had in a letter – for not exceeding his score
This gave me an idea for an interesting Roar story.
334 has become a historical number. However, it is not the most recognized number in the game’s history.
Mention 99.94 to even a cricket non-tragic and you will get the answer, Bradman’s Test batting average, of course. ABC radio has the Postal address, GPO Box 9994.
Last August, Bradman’s 99.94th birthday was celebrated on 4 August with splendour. His birth centenary came 23 days later as he was born on 27 August 1908.
Bradman is also associated with another joint-figure of cricket curiosity, 234.
Sid Barnes and Bradman established a fifth wicket Test record of 405 runs with both scoring 234 runs in the Sydney Test of December 1946 against England. This record still stands after 63 years.
There is a belief – perhaps a myth – that Barnes, a true character, threw away his wicket after Bradman was dismissed so that he would be remembered the same way as the Don.
Mark Waugh has two nicknames, Afghan (for being a forgotten Waugh) and Audi. He was nicknamed Audi after scoring four ducks in a row against Sri Lanka in Colombo and Moratuwa in 1992-93. (0000, as you know, is the logo for the Audi car).
One more zero and he could have been nicknamed Olympics!
Can Roarers come up with more such historic numbers?
From historic to downright trivial:
In the Oval Test of 1972 against England, Australia’s Ian and Greg Chappell became the first brothers to hit Test centuries together. At one stage during their 201 run partnership, the scoreboard read: IM Chappell 34, GS Chappell 34, Last wicket 34. No. of overs 34.More on the Chappell brother saga: at one stage on the final day in the Brisbane Test of November 1975, the scoreboard read: IM Chappell 64, GS Chappell 64. Total 2-164.
And finally, on the 3rd day of the 3rd Test in the “3” sponsored Test series on 28 December 2003 in Melbourne, Australia was at one stage 3-333, trailing India by 33 runs.
Figures are fun. But at times they make you fume!
Recommend this story.
September 2nd 2009 @ 9:04pm
sheek said | September 2nd 2009 @ 9:04pm | Report comment
Kersi,
I know I’ve mentioned this several times before, but it tickles my fancy all the same. In 1973 when Australia toured the West Indies, the Caribbean folk had high expectations of paceman Uton Dowe.
However, in his opening spell of the first test, he was despatched by Keith Stackpole to all parts of the ground. Skipper Rohan Kanhai then banished him to the outfield for several hours.
Later in the day when Kanhai montioned to Dowe to return to the bowling crease, a wag in the crowd shouted, “Hey Kanhai, don’t you know the eleventh commandment? Dowe shalt not bowl”!
September 2nd 2009 @ 9:16pm
Kersi Meher-Homji said | September 2nd 2009 @ 9:16pm | Report comment
Thank you, Whiteline and Sheek, for the interesting additions.
Keep them coming!
September 3rd 2009 @ 11:18am
Mary Percy said | September 3rd 2009 @ 11:18am | Report comment
Whilst talking about cricket names, don’t forget the Dilley-Willey-Lillee dismissal in Melbourne (I think — my rememberer doesn’t work too well these days!). I’m not guaranteeing spelling (other than Lillee) either. But it was certainly good fun for the commentators at the time.
September 3rd 2009 @ 11:59am
Kersi Meher-Homji said | September 3rd 2009 @ 11:59am | Report comment
Your spelling of all three cricketers is perfect, Mary.
Yes, Lillee c. Dilley b. Willey provided many laughs on air and amid listeners in 1980s.
Here are more interesting score-lines; some real, some imaginary:
Headley c. Hadlee b. Hadlee
Angel c. Priest b. Chappell
Rose c. Flower b. Flower
Prince c. Raja b. King
Phil Jaques c. Jacques Rudolph b. Jacques Kallis. (It nearly happened on Boxing Day in the 2005 Melbourne Test between Australia and South Africa).
September 3rd 2009 @ 3:02pm
whiteline said | September 3rd 2009 @ 3:02pm | Report comment
Greg
You are spot on regarding Gilchrist. I lost count of the amount of times (especially in the Ponting captaincy era) that Gilchrist went out and was dismissed for 0 or half a dozen trying to hit the ball into next week and then Ponting would immediately declare. This demonstrates the unselfishness of the man, especially when such fuss was made (by everyone except him) that his average was above 50 for much of his career.
This also translated into one-day cricket where he could easily have pushed ones or twos after reaching 100 in the 28th over or thereabouts and scored the elusive 200 in an ODI. My mates and I used to laugh at how many times he ‘threw it away’.
I’ve never seen anyone show such disregard for their personal statistics as this man did throughout his illustrious career.
September 3rd 2009 @ 5:19pm
sheek said | September 3rd 2009 @ 5:19pm | Report comment
In 1980 an English commentator, Christopher Martin Jenkins or Henry Blofeld, made the timeless comment:
“The batsman’s Holding…the bowler’s Willey”.
Apparently stunned silence was followed uproarious laughter.
BTW, Kersi, Crininfo have finalised their alltime England XI, & are now starting on NZ. What do you think of the English selection, as Follows? Hobbs, Hutton, Hammond, Pietersen, Barrington, Botham, Knott, Larwood, Trueman, Underwood, Barnes, Compton(12th).
I would love to see Compton in the XI but it’s hard to argue who should make way out of Pietersen or Barrington. I think Underwood’s selection is wrong. As good as he was, I think Laker or Verity might have better claims, especially Laker.
Also, it’s been traditional in past alltime selections to play Rhodes as a lower order bat (coming in at say no.8) & 2nd spinner. But that would mean dropping either Larwood or Trueman, another thankless option.
September 3rd 2009 @ 7:02pm
Kersi Meher-Homji said | September 3rd 2009 @ 7:02pm | Report comment
Greg and Whiteline,
I agree that Gilchrist was a glorious contributor and a match-winner. But he was not a rock. So he satisfies David Boot’s criteria 2 and 3 but not the first crirerion. To me, Steve Waugh and Ian Chappell satisfied all three criteria. Paradoxically, it was Chappelli who called Steve Waugh selfish.
Sheek,
To select an all-time great national XI is oh so tough. And Cricinfo has done a good job. But I would have Compton for Pietersen and Peter May or Colin Cowdrey for Barrington. And I agree with you, Laker or Verity for Underwood. And what about Alec Bedser, John Snow, Brian Statham? Unless there is a sound statistical criterion, to select 12 out of about 30 strong candidates is never going to satisfy everyone.
September 3rd 2009 @ 7:13pm
whiteline said | September 3rd 2009 @ 7:13pm | Report comment
Hi Kersi
It depends how you define folding under pressure. Often pressure is defined by commentators and journalists…it would be interesting to get opponents and team mates call on that in regards Gilchrist (except Warne of course!!).
Ian Chappell has made a living out of criticising in public those who he doesn’t like personally. As I’ve said before, he slips into Steve Waugh when given any opportunity and Steve has never made comment. Bradman also was a favourite whipping boy of Chappells; and he got the same response from him as Waugh gives. I suppose it tells you a bit about Chappell, does it not? On that subject, what has Ian Chappell ever done for Australian cricket post retirement besides criticise? He reminds me of a modern day Neil Harvey.
September 3rd 2009 @ 11:25pm
sheek said | September 3rd 2009 @ 11:25pm | Report comment
Whiteline,
Just some historical perspective. As a captain, Chappelli led from the front, as all great leaders should. He stood up for his players, not only on the field, but especially off the field – demanding better overall conditions.
Even though he & his team mates have been retired now for 25-30 years, pretty well most of them who served under Chappelli still idolize him today.
At the beginning of the 70s, cricket, especially test cricket was burgeoning, attracting massive media & sponsorship interest. But administrators still expected players to make sacrifices giving up careers, to play cricket. It was incredibly unreasonable.
Every well paid cricketer today owes their livelihood to the guys who sacrificed their careers for WSC (1977-79). They made the break that allowed players to move from indentured serfs to earning a comfortable living from cricket.
Chappelli was at the forefront of that movement. He rubs people up the wrong way because of his forthright, abrasive manner. He tells it like it is. He once or twice told Lillee, when he thought he was bowling like a girl, if he wanted a spinner, he would toss the ball to Mallett, or Jenner, or O’Keeffe.
But make no mistake, in my eyes he is a legend. I respect & admire Ian Chappell so much, if I went to war with him, I would willingly follow him anywhere.
Since I started following cricket circa 1968, Chappelli is the best Aussie skipper I’ve seen – better than R.Simpson, W.Lawry, G.Chappell, K.Hughes, A.Border, M.Taylor, S.Waugh or R.Ponting.
As a batsman, he wasn’t in the very top order, but he often played his best innings when his team needed him most. A little anecdote:
In 1975/76, Ian Chappell had surrendered the captaincy to brother Greg, for the series against West Indies. The Windies interestingly considered Ian’s wicket more valuable than Greg’s, even though Greg was a 10 points better average batsman. Their reasoning was that Ian was the heart & sole of the Australian batting, irrespective of averages.
You may not like Chappelli’s persona, but make no mistake, he’s a lion of a human being, & he’s done great deeds for cricket, both Australia & international.
Move beyond his abrasive, forthright manner, & you might begin to appreciate Ian Chappell better. I actually felt the same way as you about Neil Harvey, but when I understood him better, I understood the way he was, & was more accepting.
November 21st 2009 @ 5:24pm
Dave1 said | November 21st 2009 @ 5:24pm | Report comment
I wouldn’t say “At the beginning of the 70s test cricket was burgeoning”,
In the 1970s, In Australia it really only had two big seasons 1974/75 and 1975/76 and there was a bigger first day crowd for the West Indies team in 2000 at Brisbane than in 1975.
http://www.cricinfo.com/ci/content/current/story/92606.html
“………19878 people saw first day’s play. It was the biggest first day crowd in Brisbane since Test against England 68 years ago…..”
September 4th 2009 @ 10:56pm
Whiteline said | September 4th 2009 @ 10:56pm | Report comment
Sheek
A fair response. Thanks for your perspective on the issue. You certainly know your cricket, which I respect. I look forward to more of your posts.