SF Barnes

[watson]

Peter Gibbs talks to SF Barnes;

A chill wind beyond the boundary

Peter Gibbs


....."Would you mind signing these scorecards for some of the junior members?" SF frowned at me, then at the batch of cards. "Have you a pen?" Encouraged, I produced one. "A biro? Never touch them. An Oxford man should have a fountain pen." Even into his nineties, SF's skill as an inscriber of legal documents was still in demand. Seven years earlier he had presented a handwritten scroll to the Queen to commemorate her visit to Stafford. Giving him a biro was like asking Yehudi Menuhin to play the ukulele. I found a proper pen and, after he had signed the cards, he returned them with enough of a smile for me to brave further reproaches.

"The bowlers might like to roll this pitch up and take it with them?" I ventured. "They need all the help they can get. Cricket's a batters' game. Always has been." Anyone perusing SF's figures might think otherwise. His 719 first-class wickets (189 in Tests) were captured at an average of 17.09. His 1441 wickets for Staffordshire cost less than half that, and his 4069 league victims barely six runs apiece.

"Even so, an ideal pitch for cutters?" I persisted. "Possibly. I was a spinner, not a cutter." His expression had clouded again at my apparent confusion. There was no classification in my MCC coaching manual for a fast-medium spin bowler, though I had heard how he made the ball swerve in the air before bouncing and breaking sharply either way. The patented Barnes Ball was the legbreak delivered at pace and without rotation of the wrist. It was at its most potent on the matting tracks of South Africa when, at the age of 40, he took 49 wickets in four games, still a record for a Test series. Fielders at mid-off and mid-on reported hearing the snap of his fingers as he bowled, the batsmen unable to read which way the ball would break. In that respect he was the Ramadhin or Muralitharan of his day. But whereas they were spinners using a front-on action and freakish articulation of the arm, SF's spin was derived purely from the twist exerted by his fingers rather than through leverage of the wrist or elbow. In his opinion the cutter, delivered when the bowler drags his fingers down the side of the ball, was a much inferior cousin....

Wisden - A chill wind beyond the boundary

 

[Coronis]

Great finds, watson.

 

[watson]

Thanks Coronis. While I'm on a roll;

Sydney Barnes - cricket's living legend
In the June 1963 issue of The Cricketer, John Arlott paid tribute to Sydney Barnes

......More than six feet tall - he is still dominatingly erect at ninety - with high, wide, rugged shoulders, deep chest, long arms and strong legs, he was perfectly built to be a bowler. There was virtually no cricket in his family, and he was never coached. But he had a natural aptitude - and avidity - for the game, and, by application and determination, he made himself into a right-arm fast-medium bowler with the accuracy, spin and resource of a slow bowler, whose high delivery gave him a lift off the pitch that rapped the knuckles of the unwary and forced even the best batsmen to play him at an awkward height.

His usual pace was about that of Alec Bedser, with a faster ball and a slower one, in well-concealed reserve, and the ability to bowl a yorker. He himself is content that he was essentially a spin bowler, that his movement through the air was, in modern technical language, swerve - obtained by spin - rather than `swing', which derives from the 'seam-up' method. Certainly he made the ball move both ways through the air, and-with a first and second-finger application rather similar to that of Ramadhin - he bowled both the offbreak and the legbreak. Indeed, he could bowl the googly at about slow-medium pace and where, in exceptional conditions, the pitch dictated it, he could be a fine slow bowler.

This is such technical equipment as no one in the history of the game has excelled. Barnes added to it a sustained hostility and remarkable stamina, which were reflected in constant, unrelenting probing for a batsman's weakness and then attacking it by surprise, each ball fitting into a tactical pattern.....

Simply to see him bowl - and he was over sixty on the only occasion I ever watched him in action - was to make the instant impression of majesty, hostility and control. This was, without doubt, a born bowler, who lived to bowl.

No batsman even dared to claim that he was Barnes's master. Asked which of them he found most difficult he answers `Victor Trumper'. Who next? `No one else ever troubled me.'

No cricketer who played with or against him has any doubt that Sydney Barnes was the greatest bowler the world has ever seen. Had Warwickshire, in 1896, or Lancashire, in 1903, thought differently and kept him in county cricket, the history of the game would be markedly different - and richer.

Sydney Barnes - cricket's living legend | Cricket Features | The Cricketer | ESPN Cricinfo

Since John Arlott made the observation that Barnes usually bowled at about the pace of Alec Bedser I thought I'd include some good footage of Beder in action from his 1946 tour of Australia. It fortunate that the footage also contains Doug Wright bowling one of his leg-spinners because Barnes has also been desribed as bowling as Wright's pace as well;

THE ASHES - BRISBANE. AUSTRALIA aka THE FIRST TEST - British Pathé

I don't think that I would describe Bedser as 'fast-medium' like Arlott, but of course so much of cricket parlance in open to subjective interpretation.

(It should be noted that at first glance the overall comments of Arlott seem to contradict the preceding articles a little bit. However, if you think about them further, they do not.)

 

[watson]

Anyway, in summary;

1. Barnes bowled at about the pace of Alec Bedser or Doug Wright. That is, he generally bowled at medium or fast-medium pace. He would vary his pace depending on the conditions and state of the pitch.

2. Barnes was a finger-spinner who spun the ball like he was 'unscrewing a light-bulb'. That is, in order to bowl a leg-spinner he would 'flick' his third finger up-wards against the ball, while at the same time his middle and index fingers would pull-down. A similar method would be used to bowl the off-spnner, but in 'reverse'.

3. Barnes unique method of spinning the ball also allowed him to swing the ball at the same time.

4. Barnes was a very accurate bowler who relied on an immacualte length to claim wickets.

5. Barnes was an aggressive and attacking bowler who generally aimed at the stumps.

6. Barnes was an 'up-right' bowler who used his height to achieve extra bounce. He did not have a 'round-arm' action.

 

[watson]

And here's the subjective bit;

1. Does Barnes make an acceptable ATG first change bowler after Marsall and Lillee (for example) have finished their opening spells - Yes.

2. Is Barnes an ATG spin bowler who can successfully partner Warne or Murali - Yes

3. Does Barnes deserve his place in any ATG team - Yes

 

[Prince EWS]

And here's the subjective bit;

1. Does Barnes make an acceptable ATG first change bowler after Marsall and Lillee (for example) have finished their opening spells - Yes.

2. Is Barnes an ATG spin bowler who can successfully partner Warne or Murali - Yes

3. Does Barnes deserve his place in any ATG team - Yes

Barnes is my twelfth man. I straight up think Marshall, Hadlee and Murali were better bowlers and I'm not picking a team without Imran in it. He's close but he just misses out, regardless of what he actually bowled.

 

[watson]

Barnes is my twelfth man. I straight up think Marshall, Hadlee and Murali were better bowlers and I'm not picking a team without Imran in it. He's close but he just misses out, regardless of what he actually bowled.

Marshall, Hadlee, Murali, Imran - You would have to be pretty daft or blinkered to argue against the inclusion of any of those bowlers.

 

[the big bambino]

No real shock there. Barnes was medium to fast medium. As you'd expect for someone sharing the new ball. Frankly it is a confirmation of modern generational prejudice bcos we didin't see him we can't credit someone spinning the ball at pace. Must have been all down to the pitches or the old reporters were silly old duffers who couldn't be trusted. Jokes on us instead.

So yeah go and pick your atg xi and leave him out. Let me pick an all time staffordshire xi and watch him put your team of champions through the heavy wash cycle. Bad start for the atg xi tour: Beaten by staffordshire.

 

[harsh.ag]

Bad start for the atg xi tour: Beaten by staffordshire.

On that note, did Bradman, Headley or Hammond ever face Barnes? Hammond must have surely.

 

[fredfertang]

On that note, did Bradman, Headley or Hammond ever face Barnes? Hammond must have surely.

Not in a First Class match - Barnes only played in a handful of those after the Great War

 

[Coronis]

On that note, did Bradman, Headley or Hammond ever face Barnes? Hammond must have surely.

Hammond may have, I'll be sure to check Barnes' FC match record.

Barnes only played 11 FC matches after WWI, between 1927 and 1930. The other 7 years he must've stuck to minor cricket. Doubt Hammond faced him.

 

[watson]

Apparently Barnes did bowl to Len Hutton in 1933 according to Bernard Hollowood ('Boys Own Paper'),

All who have been fortunate enough to play with him are agreed that as a bowler of length and spin, Barnes has no equal. Even one of our youngest cricketers, the record breaking Len Hutton, has said, 'One of my best innings was against Sydney Barnes when I was sixteen; I scored 69 not out.' I remember that innings of Hutton's and I recall the warm praise it received from Barnes.

Cited in 'The Greatest of Bowlers' (1970) by Bernard Hollowood

Here is the scorecard;

The Home of CricketArchive

 

[the big bambino]

On that note, did Bradman, Headley or Hammond ever face Barnes? Hammond must have surely.

Bradman no. Pretty sure the others didn't. Hammond didn't mention it in his book.

Eventual English opener Cyril Walters did. Walters saw him off and said he didn't find him difficult at all. That was in the late 20s I think.

 

[watson]

Here is an interesting scorecard from the 1929 tour of England by the South Africans.

Barnes (56 yrs old) knocked over both the openers, Herbie Taylor (28), and Bruce Mitchell (7);

The Home of CricketArchive

 

[watson]

Bradman no. Pretty sure the others didn't. Hammond didn't mention it in his book.

Eventual English opener Cyril Walters did. Walters saw him off and said he didn't find him difficult at all. That was in the late 20s I think.

I think that Walters and Barnes were in the same side representing Wales, rather than on opposing teams;

The Home of CricketArchive

 

[the big bambino]

I remember reading it in an old wisden mag article. Could be cricketer. Quite possible the game took place at club level. The match in your link seems to be a rep fixture with the best players from the catchment clubs participating.

 

[the big bambino]

I found the article. Its on one of my favourites. Walters and Turnbull played for Wales at Llandudno against the MCC. Barnes playing for the latter. He said Barnes couldn't get either of them out but Walters recalled what a great bowler he was. I can't find the match on cricketarchive.

The reference to Barnes not being difficult is down to faulty memory. Walters was referring to Rhodes and on another occasion.

 

[54321]

Apologies for resurrecting such an old thread, but it's an interesting discussion. I'm not sure if anyone has read "The Bowlers Art" by Brian Wilkins, but in there he talks quite a bit about SF Barnes in one small chapter, and reproduces what he thinks were Barnes' grips for the off break and leg break. If i had a scanner i would scan the images. It's more or less just as everyone else describes it, and looks identical to the grip you see in images of Barnes, but with the benefit of clearer angles.

There is also this page . The only grip that looks similar to any of Barnes' is the off break and the supposed top spinner. The illustrated leg break doesn't really look practical, but the leg break in Wilkins' book is similar to the off break and looks much more practical.

Wilkins describes the mechanic of swerve, but like some people have suggested what is considered swerve is the same as drift in this day and age. He also goes into detail on Grimmett's flipper variations. Also, it is said that Barnes' off break which drifted to the off before pitching towards leg was taught to him by Monty Noble.

 

[harsh.ag]

Apologies for resurrecting such an old thread, but it's an interesting discussion. I'm not sure if anyone has read "The Bowlers Art" by Brian Wilkins, but in there he talks quite a bit about SF Barnes in one small chapter, and reproduces what he thinks were Barnes' grips for the off break and leg break. If i had a scanner i would scan the images. It's more or less just as everyone else describes it, and looks identical to the grip you see in images of Barnes, but with the benefit of clearer angles.

There is also this page . The only grip that looks similar to any of Barnes' is the off break and the supposed top spinner. The illustrated leg break doesn't really look practical, but the leg break in Wilkins' book is similar to the off break and looks much more practical.

Wilkins describes the mechanic of swerve, but like some people have suggested what is considered swerve is the same as drift in this day and age. He also goes into detail on Grimmett's flipper variations. Also, it is said that Barnes' off break which drifted to the off before pitching towards leg was taught to him by Monty Noble.

That is a wonderful link. Good first post

 

[watson]

Apologies for resurrecting such an old thread, but it's an interesting discussion. I'm not sure if anyone has read "The Bowlers Art" by Brian Wilkins, but in there he talks quite a bit about SF Barnes in one small chapter, and reproduces what he thinks were Barnes' grips for the off break and leg break. If i had a scanner i would scan the images. It's more or less just as everyone else describes it, and looks identical to the grip you see in images of Barnes, but with the benefit of clearer angles.

There is also this page . The only grip that looks similar to any of Barnes' is the off break and the supposed top spinner. The illustrated leg break doesn't really look practical, but the leg break in Wilkins' book is similar to the off break and looks much more practical.

Wilkins describes the mechanic of swerve, but like some people have suggested what is considered swerve is the same as drift in this day and age. He also goes into detail on Grimmett's flipper variations. Also, it is said that Barnes' off break which drifted to the off before pitching towards leg was taught to him by Monty Noble.

.

Barnes, "square shouldered as a tailor's model" as Alan Ross put it in his poem, is said to be by men who saw them both to have been around the same speed as Alec Bedser, which suggests he was bowling between 70 and 80mph. These days Swann is reckoned to bowl quickly for a spinner, and his average speed is around 60mph. Barnes's stock delivery was a fast leg break that swerved one way in the air and then span back the other off the pitch. He married this with a fast off break that did the exact reverse, a ball he was taught by the Australian Monty Noble, another early master of spin-swerve bowling. Barnes's particular release meant that the two were difficult to distinguish. He did not unfurl the wrist for his leg break, but rather ****ed it backwards and rotated it, as though he was, as Rajan says, "unscrewing a light bulb". If you want a more technical explanation, you can find one in Bob Woolmer's Art and Science of Cricket.

The Spin | Rejoicing in the Twirlymen and the forgotten art of medium-paced spin | Andy Bull | Sport | The Guardian