Victor Trumper - A Tribute

[SJS]

'. . . he would completely revolutionise the art of batting and that his name would forever be associated with the initial crumbling of erstwhile cricket convention, and the glorious capitulating of orthodoxy in favour of a more versatile and virile comprehension of batting possibilities. Personally, I firmly believe that Victor's great purpose in life was to be the pioneer of a new conception of what may be best described as "cricket harmony."'​

​

Another player senior to Trumper who played with him in all forms of the game was Australian captain and a legend in his own right, Monty Noble-himself one of the Australia's leading batsmen. What he says above is very pertinent to determine the place Trumper occupies in the pantheon of cricket's greats and its pioneers. We have all read of how WG brought about a dramatic change in batting by combining backfoot play and frontfoot play in his style. Before that the batsmen would either be frontfoot players (a vast majority) or backfoot players. WG played of both feet with equal facility and thus gave more importance to length and a merging of the two styles which made for a vaster repertoire of strokes and also a better option for defensive play. However, look back at those pictures of Ranji (taken closer to the end of his playing days) and you will notice that it is still drives off the front foot, pushes of the backfoot and cuts that constituted his strokeplay. There is a very important area of the ground he does not address, the leg side. Yes, he played the push off the front foot (with a straight bat) and the "cow shot" but you do not see the backfoot strokes from midwicket to long leg that we see so much of today. Now look at these strokes below.

The hook and the pull, played to perfection a hundred years ago and even from outside the off stump and at a time when playing such a shot would get the opposition to scream their head off at the vulgarity of it. He played them from mid on to mid wicket to square leg and behind square.

Trumper to me is the first complete batsman. Hobbs is his successor. As Noble so succinctly puts it. . . .
"With his coming the old order passed for ever."

Noble writes in detail about Trumper in two chapters of his book, The Game's the Thing. The very fact that he devotes two entire chapters to Trumper (out of 16) in a book on Cricket and not cricketers speaks for itself. Their is a lot of biographical material and about Trumper as a person which is very good but I am putting here some excerpts of him as a cricketer.

Monty Noble on Trumper

A Genius Without Compeer and the harbinger of the New Order of Batsmanship​

Opinions willl vary as to who was or is the world's greatest batsman. For myself I have no hesitation in giving the palm to Victor Trumper. He was not only great; he was a genius without compeer, and only his early death prevented him from establishing records alongside which even those of the redoubtable Grace and Hobbs would look less formidable. During the whole of his brief cricketing career I was closely associated with him, and have always felt a desire to set down in print some record of my appreciation of his wonderful ability.

.... from relative obscurity he, in a few short years, attained the goal towards which half the world is striving - fame; .... at all events ... he scaled to greater heights than had been achieved by any of his predecessors. Although the magnitude of his ultimate triumph could not then be foreseen, those of us who were intimately associated with him were not greatly astonished that cricketing success would eventually be his portion. . . Nature was moulding him mentally and physically - his brain, his eyes and his muscles- to such perfection of harmonious purpose that he might properly fulfill the destiny allotted to him, But we did not imagine that in a few seasons, he would completely revolutionise the art of batting and that his name would forever be associated with the initial crumbling of erstwhile cricket convention, and the glorious capitulating of orthodoxy in favour of a more versatile and virile comprehension of batting possibilities. Personally, I firmly believe that Victor's great purpose in life was to be the pioneer of a new conception of what may be best described as "cricket harmony."

Cricket at that time was languishing under the spell of unorthodoxy and passive resistance, which was fast throttling the people's appreciation of the game and destroying the allegiance of its many devotees. How Victor's wonderful demonstrations shocked old ideas and brought light out of semi-darkness is well known, particularly in Australia.

With his coming the old order passed for ever.​

.... to be continued

 

[SJS]

Before I continue with Noble's writings, it is very interesting to note what Ranjitsinhji has to say about Trumper's batting from what he first saw of him in NSW versus AE Stoddart's England side in 1897.

"The New South Wales batting was opened by Trumper and Donnan. Trumper was the first to leave, after registering 5, having played a loose ball rather carelessly into my hands. He created a very favourable impression on me from the way he was shaping at the wicket. He seemed to be all there, and the confidence with which he played the bowling, although it was for a very short time, makes me firmly believe that he will be a very great batsman in this country, and at no very distant date. Indeed I have seen very few beginners play the ball so well and show the same excellent style."​

Amazing praise indeed for someone who scored just five runs and what prophecy of his future greatness. How good do you have to be that when a great player who has neither seen nor heard of you before (not much) proclaims that you will be a "very great batsman. . . at no very distant date" ! And Trumper scored only 5 and 0 in the match and Ranji wrote this account 1898 much before he ever got a chance to see Trumper again.

I do not know what is more amazing to dwell upon here - how beautifully Trumper must have batted even in that short time and how he must have really stood out AND how great a judge of talent Ranji must be.

At least it shows you one thing that a great player is a great player and you dont need to see triple centuries to be able to see that if, of course, you know what constitutes greatness.

PS : Trumper played another tour game (for NSW again) against them and scored 4 and 23.

 

[The Sean]

I'd read that prediction of Ranji's and my first thought was as yours SJS - that it did nothing but enhance the reputation of both men.

Noble, who we have already mentioned in this thread, once said that Trumper could really only be appreciated out in the middle - that you had to bat with him to fully "get" him. Given how much pleasure and enjoyment he habitually gave the watching crowds that is quite some praise, but it does go further toward identifying the man's greatness. Hill confirmed this when he spoke of Trumper always being willing to take the risks and handle the dangerous bowlers. If a bowler was causing trouble to his batting partner, Trumper would tell him to rest up the non-strikers end and that "I'll take the strike for a while and try to knock him off."

Trumper's value to his captains can also never be understated. It's reported that when Joe Darling was captain of Australia and the team was driving to the ground, he would ask "Is Vic Trumper here?" If the answer was yes, he would instruct the coach driver to proceed, seemingly unconcerned as to whether the rest of the team was there or not.

 

[archie mac]

Before I continue with Noble's writings, it is very interesting to note what Ranjitsinhji has to say about Trumper's batting from what he first saw of him in NSW versus AE Stoddart's England side in 1897.

"The New South Wales batting was opened by Trumper and Donnan. Trumper was the first to leave, after registering 5, having played a loose ball rather carelessly into my hands. He created a very favourable impression on me from the way he was shaping at the wicket. He seemed to be all there, and the confidence with which he played the bowling, although it was for a very short time, makes me firmly believe that he will be a very great batsman in this country, and at no very distant date. Indeed I have seen very few beginners play the ball so well and show the same excellent style."​

Amazing praise indeed for someone who scored just five runs and what prophecy of his future greatness. How good do you have to be that when a great player who has neither seen nor heard of you before (not much) proclaims that you will be a "very great batsman. . . at no very distant date" ! And Trumper scored only 5 and 0 in the match and Ranji wrote this account 1898 much before he ever got a chance to see Trumper again.

I do not know what is more amazing to dwell upon here - how beautifully Trumper must have batted even in that short time and how he must have really stood out AND how great a judge of talent Ranji must be.

At least it shows you one thing that a great player is a great player and you dont need to see triple centuries to be able to see that if, of course, you know what constitutes greatness.

PS : Trumper played another tour game (for NSW again) against them and scored 4 and 23.

I'd read that prediction of Ranji's and my first thought was as yours SJS - that it did nothing but enhance the reputation of both men.

Noble, who we have already mentioned in this thread, once said that Trumper could really only be appreciated out in the middle - that you had to bat with him to fully "get" him. Given how much pleasure and enjoyment he habitually gave the watching crowds that is quite some praise, but it does go further toward identifying the man's greatness. Hill confirmed this when he spoke of Trumper always being willing to take the risks and handle the dangerous bowlers. If a bowler was causing trouble to his batting partner, Trumper would tell him to rest up the non-strikers end and that "I'll take the strike for a while and try to knock him off."

Trumper's value to his captains can also never be understated. It's reported that when Joe Darling was captain of Australia and the team was driving to the ground, he would ask "Is Vic Trumper here?" If the answer was yes, he would instruct the coach driver to proceed, seemingly unconcerned as to whether the rest of the team was there or not.

I have included the Ranji story in my Clem Hill book, and as such I am claiming copyright

 

[The Sean]

I have included the Ranji story in my Clem Hill book, and as such I am claiming copyright

Not sure if this has been asked elsewhere mate, but is there a target date for completion of this book?

 

[archie mac]

Not sure if this has been asked elsewhere mate, but is there a target date for completion of this book?

I would love to have it done by 1912, to coincide with the famous 'punch up!'

 

[SJS]

When I read about Trumper and his stroke play, it somehow takes me to a mental picture of a young Tendulkar - decisive in his footwork, going forward to drive, if finding that the ball was not a half volley, adjusting the shot to drive with the lateral movement either through the gaps or above the fielders, in case of a spinner turning the ball and bowling a line and/or length not conducive to driving off the front foot, stepping out to the pitch of the ball and hitting it on the half volley, driving balls pitched on the off stump to the on side or on the leg stump to the off side to make a mockery of restrictive field placements and finally rarely going forward to defend. Finding that the ball is not of a drivable length off the front foot, going right back on to the stumps and trying to play forcing shots from point to long leg, again defying conventional wisdom by pulling balls from the off stump or cutting those on the stumps past point. The domination of the bowling was a basic instinct as it was with the young Tendulkar or Sir Garfield Sobers.

The picture that one gets of Trumper from Monty Noble explains why I feel thus.

Monty Noble on Trumper - continued. . .

Dominate from the first ball​

Victor Trumper, unlike most other batsmen, never played himself in before trying to score. If he considered his first ball should be hit for four he hit it. On rare occasions he failed to time it properly and thus brought about his early downfall. It was then that people said : "What a pity he does not leave them alone and play Scotch for a few overs." Had he done so he would not have been Trumper. Nevertheless, this was the only weakness in his batting, because it sometimes helped the element of chance to bring about his early dismissal. Before he had accustomed himself to the light, or the pace and height of the pitch, and being unaware of the characteristics of the bowler, he might attempt a back-cut, easy enough later on but difficult at the moment. The ball perhaps doing something unexpected, would be edged into the slips or behind the wickets. Again in the fast bowlers first over he might make a pull shot off a straight ball just short of a good length, a ball which making pace and lifting quickly high off the pitch, would be mistimed and edged, giving a catch close in on the on side.

One of his maxim's used to be : "Spoil a bowler's length and you've got him." . . . Invariably he put his percept into practice. Sometimes, however, he did meet a bowler who kept his length despite Victor's onslaught. This did not stop him, though it made it harder for him to make his wonder strokes, and perhaps slowed down his rate of scoring.

Batting in Tough Conditions​

It was when he was "up against it" that he revealed his genius. The marvellous thing about him was that when other batsmen, of international or any other calibre, were in sore distress with the bowling on a bad, a fiery, or a crumbling wicket, he always appeared to be most at ease. Most of his best efforts were made on such wickets, and against bowlers able to extract the last ounce of assistance from them.


The reason for this, I think, was to be found in his attention to and his concentration on the bowler's fingers just prior to the delivery of the ball. He could invariably spot the over-spin from a left-hander, and, instead of shaping for a leg-break, was ready for the straight one which skidded through and, of course, he at once walked in front of the wicket and banged it to the on-side where the fielders were few.

Dealing with a good length ball just outside the off stump, breaking away, he would sometimes let it go, but not often; and the way he could follow the course of that break and late cut it for four was a sight for the batsman at the other end to marvel at. The most difficult and dangerous strokes were made with consummate ease. His action was so free, in fact, that onlookers were often deceived into the belief that he was facing the easiest bowling.

Batting against slow left-handed bowling​

His success against left handers on bad wickets was due to the fact that he never allowed bowlers to make him play at his blind spot, to be beaten by the break off the pitch. He would go down the pitch, turning the ball into a harmless and scorable half-volley. He played left handers on bad wickets similar to his treatment of slow leg-break bowlers on good wickets. When facing a ball just short of a good length on the off stump, breaking away to the slips, he would step right across to the off side and, meeting it as it broke, would pull it away from the numerous fieldsmen on the off, right across the wicket to the on side.

The bowler believing his length to be short, quite naturally pitched the next time a little further up. Instantly Victor would jump into it and make a forcing shot into the country.

Playing In-swing (in times of favourable LBW laws)​

To left handed swervers he did not use his legs to cover up nearly as much as most batsmen do. That is to say, his legs were not used for that special purpose. They were in this position, certainly, but only as a means to make the stroke with certainity, and not with the object of defending the wicket.​

..... To be continued​

 

[SJS]

Monty Noble on Trumper (continued)

Victor always acted on the principle that it is a fatal error to allow a slow bowler to make you play forward to him (in defense) - what is commonly called 'scratching.' His anticipation of the pitch of the ball was uncanny and his decision to use any particular stroke was made so early in the ball's flight that, being also quick footed, he was yards down the pitch before another less gifted batsman would have decided upon the stroke to be made.

. . . Sometimes, however, when he had jumped out, the bal would drop shorter than anticipated, and, he would change the direction of the stroke. Following the course of the break he would pick it up as it were and make a long, low hit over covers and between the outfields, and, if necessary, would lift it right over the long off fence; but he used this stroke only when he found it impossible to place the ball correctly.

Handling different field placements​

His method of dealing with "Bosie" bowling was simple. He did not bother trying to detect the finger action. If he could get to it, the wrong one did not matter, and if it were bowled short there was plenty of time to deal with it after it had left the pitch. His ability to score quickly off medium pace bowling was amazing. Instead of playing forward in the orthodox way, he would surprise the bowler by getting across the wicket and, with a straight bat, would hit a good length ball on the rise from the pitch outside the off stump with great force and along the ground between mid-on and square leg. This stroke was made possible because of his perfect timing and because of his exceptionally strong wrists. If mid-on were moved to a wider and more forward position to block this stroke, he would at once make a far easier one between mid on and the bowler. If mid-on were brought back and square leg brought forward to fill the gap, he would wait for the good length ball pitched on the wicket, not outside the off stump, and would hit it past the square leg umpire like a flash. In this manner he was always beating the fielders.

Placement​

The marvel of his placing was such that I do not remember his ever being caught close in on the on side, though hundreds of times the ball was in the air when passing between the fields-men. Seeing ball after ball hit this way, the bowler was apt to conclude that he was pitching them on the short side and so would pitch them up a little more. The Victor would sprint down the pitch and drive them anywhere he pleased.

His remarkable on side play obviated the necessity of his using the cut. . . This was not because Victor could not cut, for none could make this stroke better than he.

I know of no stroke of which Trumper was not the absolute master. That is a big claim to make of anyone, but I make it unreservedly, because I have seen nearly all the great batsmen of the last forty years (1886-1926), from Grace downwards and have seen none to equal him.
​

. . . to be continued​

 

[zaremba]

The Trumper-jumping-out-to-drive photo is rightly famous, but I'm really glad to see the follow-though shot as well. The jumping-out photo suggests he's about to absolutely **** the ball, and the follow-through shows that, hallelujah, he's done just that.

Top 3 cricket photos of all time:

1. Hammond cover drive

2. Trumper jumping out to drive

3. Flintoff consoling Lee at Edgbaston.

I really don't know what order to put these in. I could stare at each of them for almost literally hours on end.

 

[archie mac]

The Trumper-jumping-out-to-drive photo is rightly famous, but I'm really glad to see the follow-though shot as well. The jumping-out photo suggests he's about to absolutely **** the ball, and the follow-through shows that, hallelujah, he's done just that.

Top 3 cricket photos of all time:

1. Hammond cover drive

2. Trumper jumping out to drive

3. Flintoff consoling Lee at Edgbaston.

I really don't know what order to put these in. I could stare at each of them for almost literally hours on end.

Good list, I also enjoyed the Miller cut shot and the Warwick Armstrong drive (which I think he missed the ball!)

 

[zaremba]

Good list, I also enjoyed the Miller cut shot and the Warwick Armstrong drive (which I think he missed the ball!)

The Miller cut shot is a good 'un, no doubt about it. I don't think I've seen the Big Ship pic - could you post a link by any chance?

 

[archie mac]

The Miller cut shot is a good 'un, no doubt about it. I don't think I've seen the Big Ship pic - could you post a link by any chance?

I found every photo except the one I was looking for Perhaps SJS can find it?

This one is not too bad Google Image Result for http://timesonline.typepad.com/line_and_length/images/2009/03/18/armstrong1.jpg

 

[Matt79]

Still the best example of cricket writing, after 50 years

Agreed. Thanks for posting it SJS

 

[aussie]

Bullet....reading this thread with the vivid analysis of Trumpers batting has given me a new appreciation for him.

Very tempted to argue a case for him opening for the Australian All-time being a "must".

 

[SJS]

I found every photo except the one I was looking for Perhaps SJS can find it?

Which one is that ?

 

[Days of Grace]

When reading Noble's "Dominate from the first ball" segment, I couldn't help but spot the similarity between Trumper and one Virender Sehwag.

 

[archie mac]

Which one is that ?

He is playing a drive and seems to be moving down the pitch, his frame fills the whole photo

 

[fredfertang]

Which one is that ?

The one on page 428 of Great Batsmen?

 

[archie mac]

The one on page 428 of Great Batsmen?

It is facing pg89 of The Datsun Book of Test Cricket by RS Whitington

 

[fredfertang]

I don't have that - one of us needs to scan the photo and as I don't possess a scanner it's over to you Archie