Historical footage: Impressions of some greats

[Starfighter]

Eh, I've decided I'm not going to blather anymore on this one. Form your own opinions.

 

[Starfighter]

I reckon not taking Wardle in 58-59 was as great an error as not taking Snow in 74-75. The England establishment always managed to muck things up then, some would say they still do. Oh, and then there's the mid to late sixties, where England had some pretty good stocks of fast bowling yet D'Oliviera was sending down his dobblies first change.

 

[fredfertang]

Wardle was picked, but then got himself sacked by Yorkshire so MCC had to withdraw the invitation

 

[Starfighter]

Still counts

 

[the big bambino]

Miller was quick as the recollections of those who faced him confirm. He was fast approaching 34 years of age in 1953 where some decrease in speed would be expected. The non selection of Wardle is in some way justifiable. Given the talent England had available and selected in 58/59 you'd think they wouldn't miss him. That they were well beaten is still one of the most inexplicable reverses in the Ashes contests.

 

[Red]

All the guys who played with or against Miller say that when he wanted to, he could be as quick as anyone. Jack Potter says he could be more lethal than Lindwall at times, particularly in relation to bounce as opposed to swing. Perhaps towards the end of his career he was used a bit more as a stock bowler, but Bradman certainly used him in very short (3 or 4 over) sharp spells in 48.

 

[Starfighter]

Okay, okay, all I'm saying is that in the newsreels Miller to me doesn't have the obvious hustle that Lindwall and some others have. He's not the only one of whom recollections say was faster than what they look on video. Sylvester Clark would be a good example.

I think part of Bradman's use of Miller in '48 was also in relation to his back troubles

Miller was quick as the recollections of those who faced him confirm. He was fast approaching 34 years of age in 1953 where some decrease in speed would be expected. The non selection of Wardle is in some way justifiable. Given the talent England had available and selected in 58/59 you'd think they wouldn't miss him. That they were well beaten is still one of the most inexplicable reverses in the Ashes contests.

Yeah, Lock seems to have been preferred anyway, at least at home. If Wardle didn't write that article it would be interesting to see who'd been selected in the XI in Australia, as Wardle way outbowled Lock in SA in 56/57. Ironically Lock was more effective on Australian pitches after he'd stopped throwing.
I think fitness issues with the fast bowlers aside the main issue with the England team in 58/59 was that they were very disunited as a team, and after their collapses in the first test (not that we did better in the first innings) they just checked out mentally, a bit like in 2013-14 I suppose.

One thing about that stands out in that series is the slowness of the over rates, something that seems to have been started by Hutton on the previous tour and enhanced by greater use of pace bowlers. On day 2 at Brisbane England bowled 57 overs - equivalent to 76 six balls, which was very slow for then although I think the West Indies must have neared the mark enough times later on, and Australia only 56 (74.4) on the last day Adelaide, but England takes the prize with only 51 (68) overs on the second day at Adelaide. Must have been supremely dull to watch. To think that in 1948 England had bowled 114 overs in a day as Australia chased 404 to win. A nearly 40% reduction in the over rate in just ten years is astonishing.

Anyway, here's the first test in '46. During England's innings you can see that the amount of bounce off a length from modestly paced balls from Toshack and Miller (who cut his pace to control the bounce) is quite remarkable, and perhaps one of the few films to show well the effects of a sticky pitch.

Also that shot from an Antarctic expedition at the start. I love how you get a bit of the clip before, always makes for a nice contrast.

 

[Starfighter]

Here's another longish video from 1953, of the 4th test. The left armer bowling medium pace with the keeper close or up is actually Davidson(!), Wisden doesn't say if he was injured or something. If someone could tell me where in the match this is that would be nice, I don't know the batsmen well enough.

 

[Starfighter]

Miller's only ten-wicket haul in tests, at Lord's in 1956. Not bad for a man of 36.

 

[Starfighter]

Australia's second innings in the third test, Laker takes 6/55. Not only are Laker and Lock miles apart in terms of the attractiveness and legitimacy of their bowling styles, but it's evident even from that one ball how much faster Lock bowled then Laker. Facing such contrasting styles on a favourable pitch would have been a trying experience.

 

[Starfighter]

The fourth test in 1930. Stan Nichols and Ian Peebles bowling in the Australian innings, and Tim Wall in the England. Wall is one of the better examples of a 'classic' mixed action, with his shoulders much more closed off than his hips. Interestingly a couple of fairly recent biomechanics papers I found showed showed that having the shoulders more open than the hips at back foot contact is actually the more prominent type of counter rotation, and perhaps explains the persistence of back injuries amongst modern players taught to bowl the 'safe' chest on style.

Ponsford seems to grip the bat very deeply but loosely against Peebles, presumably to avoid popping of a catch like modern stiff handed Australian players do. He scored 83 off 267, and the match was drawn without even two innings being completed after nearly two days were lost to rain.

 

[Starfighter]

The first test in 1934 - Chipperfield makes 99. Also a very nice side on shot of Farnes bowling and and what appears to be Verity's quicker ball that spelt doom to many a batsman in the thirties.

 

[Red]

So is Starfighter Watson's new account?

 

[Starfighter]

Nah, I haven't posted nearly as much colour footage...




yet.

 

[Burgey]

Okay, okay, all I'm saying is that in the newsreels Miller to me doesn't have the obvious hustle that Lindwall and some others have. He's not the only one of whom recollections say was faster than what they look on video. Sylvester Clark would be a good example.

I think part of Bradman's use of Miller in '48 was also in relation to his back troubles


Yeah, Lock seems to have been preferred anyway, at least at home. If Wardle didn't write that article it would be interesting to see who'd been selected in the XI in Australia, as Wardle way outbowled Lock in SA in 56/57. Ironically Lock was more effective on Australian pitches after he'd stopped throwing.
I think fitness issues with the fast bowlers aside the main issue with the England team in 58/59 was that they were very disunited as a team, and after their collapses in the first test (not that we did better in the first innings) they just checked out mentally, a bit like in 2013-14 I suppose.

One thing about that stands out in that series is the slowness of the over rates, something that seems to have been started by Hutton on the previous tour and enhanced by greater use of pace bowlers. On day 2 at Brisbane England bowled 57 overs - equivalent to 76 six balls, which was very slow for then although I think the West Indies must have neared the mark enough times later on, and Australia only 56 (74.4) on the last day Adelaide, but England takes the prize with only 51 (68) overs on the second day at Adelaide. Must have been supremely dull to watch. To think that in 1948 England had bowled 114 overs in a day as Australia chased 404 to win. A nearly 40% reduction in the over rate in just ten years is astonishing.

Anyway, here's the first test in '46. During England's innings you can see that the amount of bounce off a length from modestly paced balls from Toshack and Miller (who cut his pace to control the bounce) is quite remarkable, and perhaps one of the few films to show well the effects of a sticky pitch.

Also that shot from an Antarctic expedition at the start. I love how you get a bit of the clip before, always makes for a nice contrast.

That's actually Australia arriving at the Tilbury Docks in April.

 

[Starfighter]

Suffice to say, the 'Gabba looked at bit different then. Still ugly though.

The narrator's mispronunciation of O'Reilly is rather cringe worthy.

 

[Starfighter]

This is the first day of the infamous third test in 1932/33, and the events of it are much less well known than those of the second. Tim Wall opened the bowling with a rather hostile spell and England struggled to 4/30 before being rescued by their lower order with Leyland and Wyatt adding 156. Almost seems like the current day English side!

 

[Starfighter]

Now for something much more recent. Here's Colin Bland's 127 from the third test in 1965, and Brian Statham's last test match.

 

[a massive zebra]

Suffice to say, the 'Gabba looked at bit different then. Still ugly though.

The narrator's mispronunciation of O'Reilly is rather cringe worthy.

I think a contemporary commentator is more likely to know the correct prenunciation than an internet warrior looking on nearly a century later.

 

[Starfighter]

I think a contemporary commentator is more likely to know the correct prenunciation than an internet warrior looking on nearly a century later.

Except every other commentator, all O'Reilly's contemporaries and the man himself pronounced it the usual way mr smart.