Why not call it the Worrell-Benaud Trophy?
Columnist By Kersi Meher-Homji, 21 Nov 2009 Kersi Meher-Homji is a Roar Expert
Australian cricket commentator Richie Benaud talks to Stuart McGill (left) at the annual cricket legends lunch in Sydney on Friday, Feb. 20, 2009. AAP Image/Jenny Evans
The least anticipated Test series in recent decades starts in Brisbane on Thursday. But for a shock or three, Australia should win the Test in four days and rhe Frank Worrell Trophy 3-0.
This brings me to the thrust of this post. Why is the series named The Frank Worrell Trophy and not The Worrell–Benaud Trophy?
After all, both captains had contributed equally to the suspenseful cricket provided every day, practically every session, in the memorable 1960-61 series.
In fact, this series between Australia and the West Indies in Australia revived Test cricket.
Three of the Tests in this spellbinding series were heart-stopping cliff-hangers.
The first Test in Brisbane in 1960 was a tie, the first out of two in Test history. In a throbbing climax, Australia lost their last four wickets for six runs including three run outs in the final over.
The drawn Adelaide Test of January-February 1961 was another thriller (unlike the recent boring Ahmedabad run marathon with seven centuries and 21 wickets in five days) when Australia’s last wicket pair of Ken Mackay and Lindsay Kline survived the final 100 minutes to salvage a draw.
Every ball was potentially the last ball in 25 overs.
With the series dead-locked at one-all, the final Test in Melbourne was played a week later and was watched by almost 250,000 spectators.
The second day attracted 90,800 – a world record attendance for any one day of Test cricket.
Needing 258 to win the Test and the series, Australia lost 8 for 256.
The ninth wicket pair of John Martin and crisis specialist Ken McKay ran for a bye to win the Test by two wickets and the tantalizing series 2-1.
Both the winning Aussies and the gallant Windies were cheered on the ground and in street parades a few days later.
The West Indies skipper Frank Worrell had won over Australians with his sportsmanship.
And it is a worthy honour to him that the Australia–West Indies series is named The Frank Worrell Trophy.
However, my suggestion is to rename the series tghe Worrell–Benaud Trophy as both captains Worrell and Richie Benaud had contributed equally to the outcome of an outstanding series, one of the greatest ever.
The legendary Australian all-rounder Alan Davidson, who had performed brilliantly in the series (including 44 and 80 runs and bowling spells of 5-135 and 6-87 in the Brisbane tied Test) told me recently: “On the eve of the last fluctuating day of the Brisbane Test, Don Bradman asked Richie whether Australia will chase the target of 233 or settle for a draw. And Richie replied firmly, ‘We’re going for a win.’”
Benaud did exactly that, even after Australia were 6 down for 92.
What do Roarers reckon? Should the Trophy be renamed to honour both the heroes, Worrell and Benaud?
After all, the Test series between Australia and India is called the Border-Gavaskar Trophy and the Australia- Sri Lanka series, the Warne-Muralitharan Trophy.
Also the One-day International series between Australia and New Zealand is named the Chappell-Hadlee Trophy.
Recommend this story.
November 23rd 2009 @ 2:37pm
Greg Russell said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:37pm | Report comment
Am I missing something here? Worrell died of leukemia in 1967 at age just 42 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Worrell). So it seems pretty obvious to me that this trophy was named in honour and memory of a good cricketer (and by all reports a great man) who died tragically young.
There was a time when things were only named after dead people, in fact in Germany this is still the case by law – nothing, not even a street, can be named after a living person (those with any knowledge of German history will understand why).
The fact that mores have now changed – although having the Warne-Murali trophy while the Sri Lankan is still playing is ridiculous, in my opinion – does not mean that the naming of the Worrell trophy should be revisited.
I’m sure that Benaud more than anyone is happy with the current situation, not least of all because he is still commentating. Not that Richie offends people, but readers might remember that last year Spiro argued for the removal of Gavaskar’s name from the Border-Gavaskar trophy, because Gavaskar was commentating on the series in progress and making some scathing comments about the Australians. Whether or not Gavaskar was correct with his comments, this doesn’t change that this was unedifying behavior given that his name was on the trophy being competed for.
So maybe consider adding Benaud’s name after he shuffles off this mortal coil (or is he immortal?), but for now let’s just leave the trophy named after his great and immensely respected adversary.
November 23rd 2009 @ 2:40pm
Dave1 said | November 23rd 2009 @ 2:40pm | Report comment
The Sir Frank Worrell Trophy was first presented in 1960/61 when Sir Frank Worrell was still alive http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Worrell_Trophy
November 24th 2009 @ 9:48am
Greg Russell said | November 24th 2009 @ 9:48am | Report comment
To be more precise (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Worrell): “As of the 1964–65 series the Frank Worrell Trophy has been awarded to the winner of the West Indies–Australia series, although the winning of the trophy has been applied retroactively to the 1960–61 series.”
So yes, he was alive by a few years, which impacts upon my point, but not in a fundamental way. To name a trophy after two adversaries seems to be largely restricted to cricket and is only a recent phenomenon. I really don’t see any problem with having the trophy named after just Worrell. It’s not as if Benaud is a forgotten person who is deserving of more recognition.
November 24th 2009 @ 11:23am
Kersi Meher-Homji said | November 24th 2009 @ 11:23am | Report comment
I sent this post to Richie Benaud and his comments are as below:
Sunday November 22 2009
Dear Kersi
I have just received your email concerning the article you are apparently publishing concerning a change in name to the Frank Worrell Trophy.
My comment on the article is below:
In my view it would be an insult to a great man who lifted West Indies cricket and West Indians with his leadership and wonderful ability to transcend cricket and embrace people. That’s why the Frank Worrell Trophy was conceived by Sir Donald Bradman and Australia’s cricket administrators of the time.
Yours sincerely
Richie
Richie Benaud
I feel so privileged to get the comment above from a truly great and humble person like Richie.
November 24th 2009 @ 2:12pm
Kento said | November 24th 2009 @ 2:12pm | Report comment
Awesome – great to have the great man’s voice on The Roar!