• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

Most Courageous Act Ever

C_C

International Captain
I personally wouldnt consider "personal tragedy" in that list... since it is erroneous and often inaccurate to believe that death of a father/mother/brother/wife etc. has the same general impact on everyone.
That is purely dictated by the relationship between the people involved. If my father passed away, i would be devastated, since i am close to him. But i know atleast 3 people who wouldnt even blink or go to their dad's funeral. Simply because their dynamics have been far more traumatic than mine. So if one of their father dies, they wouldnt stop doing whatever they were but i would grind to a halt.
And i dont think you call call their 'persistance with getting the job done despite death of their dad' to be something exemplary or courageous.
 

SJS

Hall of Fame Member
Top_Cat said:
Evidently there's a fine line between bravery and stupidity. :)

I don't mean to affect the spirit of the thread but I would think that the last thing on my mind, armed with the information that a wife of mine had passed on in a horrible accident, would be cricket. If a series was on the line, if the bloody world cup was on the line, it'd be somewhere near the very back of my mind in those circumstances.

A stirring story but surely only one which sports fans would see merit in.
Why do I get a feeling that you have a "harem" full ? :p
 

Smudge

Hall of Fame Member
C_C said:
I personally wouldnt consider "personal tragedy" in that list... since it is erroneous and often inaccurate to believe that death of a father/mother/brother/wife etc. has the same general impact on everyone.
That is purely dictated by the relationship between the people involved. If my father passed away, i would be devastated, since i am close to him. But i know atleast 3 people who wouldnt even blink or go to their dad's funeral. Simply because their dynamics have been far more traumatic than mine. So if one of their father dies, they wouldnt stop doing whatever they were but i would grind to a halt.
And i dont think you call call their 'persistance with getting the job done despite death of their dad' to be something exemplary or courageous.
Talking about people's relationships to a father isn't quite the same as a fiance. For starters, you can choose who to marry but not your family...
 

C_C

International Captain
Perhaps.
But you seriously think that ALL husbands would be devastated at the death of their wives ? I can hear the chants of "Ohh Jaay" comming soon.
:D :D :D

PS: In all seriousness.. i dont think it can be automatically assumed that "death of a spouce ---------> devasted partner".... enough case of abuse and murder in marriages exist.
 

Neil Pickup

Request Your Custom Title Now!
Hoggy said:
Another one, that UAE captain that walked out to face Allan Donald wearing a floppy hat.

Needless to say the Sultan Zarawani got hit.
I think that one falls firmly into "stupid".
 

anzac

International Debutant
C_C said:
Perhaps.
But you seriously think that ALL husbands would be devastated at the death of their wives ? I can hear the chants of "Ohh Jaay" comming soon.
:D :D :D

PS: In all seriousness.. i dont think it can be automatically assumed that "death of a spouce ---------> devasted partner".... enough case of abuse and murder in marriages exist.
you have got to be shitting me.................or you have a very cynicle view of life..............

we're talking about an engaged couple here - not some poor escuse of a marriage at the end of it's ropes..........

from what I understand in 'those days' mariage actually meant something to people & a lifetime committment......................please don't place now-a-day values on another era..........

and even tho' I'm on my second time down the aisle I take offence at your attempt at humour...............

poor taste sir.................
 

marc71178

Eyes not spreadsheets
Voltman said:
Talking about people's relationships to a father isn't quite the same as a fiance. For starters, you can choose who to marry but not your family...
Blair's clearly from the age of namby pambies though, so nothing back then is any good at all!
 

C_C

International Captain
Look, i am not demeaning this person's loss and excellent gumption.....assuming it was all lovey dovey and rolly polly between him and his fiancee.
All i am saying is, people often make blanket statements such as "death of a father = catastrophic event, death of a spouse = catastrophic event, death of a friend = catastrophic event" etc. etc and it isnt always an automatic.
For not all grooms-to-be or sons/husbands/brothers etc. are utterly devastated by the loss of their brides-to-be/father/wife/brothers etc.
Some are devastated, some are apathetic, some are overjoyed.
That is the reality of human life and social dynamics.

from what I understand in 'those days' mariage actually meant something to people & a lifetime committment......................please don't place now-a-day values on another era..........
Yeah and i bet your granny told you that..my granny did too ( how her era was the blazing example of devotion and love and yadda yadda) but one thing she forgot to mention, that i found out a lot later : That was also the era of womanbeaters, chauvinist pigs masquarading as men and where the job of women was "to get pregnant, cook the food and please the hubby", the era of totally arbitary and unnatural norms of behaviour and "social protocol", etc etc.....
its amazing as how time goes by, society takes a rose-tinted glass as a kaleidoscope to look back into the past,utterly forgetting their perspective. Every generation is guilty of this and i bet when most of us are grandpa age, we will talk about 'the good old days compared to the deteriorated lifestyles of our grandchildren"...
In reality, that is escapism at its best and a quintissential case of "you think you have it tough ? well i had it 10x tougher" machismo.
 

FaaipDeOiad

Hall of Fame Member
C_C said:
In reality, that is escapism at its best and a quintissential case of "you think you have it tough ? well i had it 10x tougher" machismo.
Reminds me of a Monty Python skit with a bunch of old guys sitting around and talking about how tough they used to have it, with each story getting more and more extreme before culimating with something like:

"You think you had it tough?! When I was a lad, we had to get up six hours before we went to bed and work for 25 hours in a day! And when we got home, our dad would kill us and dance on our graves!"

Unfortuately I can't find a transcript of it. Bloody funny though. ;)
 

BoyBrumby

Englishman
FaaipDeOiad said:
Reminds me of a Monty Python skit with a bunch of old guys sitting around and talking about how tough they used to have it, with each story getting more and more extreme before culimating with something like:

"You think you had it tough?! When I was a lad, we had to get up six hours before we went to bed and work for 25 hours in a day! And when we got home, our dad would kill us and dance on our graves!"

Unfortuately I can't find a transcript of it. Bloody funny though. ;)
Google's great, isn't it?! :D

http://arago4.tn.utwente.nl/stonedead/movies/hollywood-bowl/16-we-were-poor.html
 

Kumar_42

Cricket Spectator
...Pieterson scoring all those runs in the recent ODI series in SAfrica when everyone in the crowd hated him and were verbally abusing him...that also springs to mind as being somewhat courageous...In fact the whole episode of him returning to SAf and playing there in itself (himself knowing full well that he would be given a hostile reception) was courageous in a way :mellow:
 
Last edited:

Deja moo

International Captain
Kumar_42 said:
...Pieterson scoring all those runs in the recent ODI series in SAfrica when everyone in the crowd hated him and were verbally abusing him...that also springs to mind as being somewhat courageous...In fact the whole episode of him returning to SAf and playing there in itself (himself knowing full well that he would be given a hostile reception) was courageous in a way :mellow:
The fat head brought it upon himself, didnt he ?
 

anzac

International Debutant
C_C said:
Look, i am not demeaning this person's loss and excellent gumption.....assuming it was all lovey dovey and rolly polly between him and his fiancee.
All i am saying is, people often make blanket statements such as "death of a father = catastrophic event, death of a spouse = catastrophic event, death of a friend = catastrophic event" etc. etc and it isnt always an automatic.
For not all grooms-to-be or sons/husbands/brothers etc. are utterly devastated by the loss of their brides-to-be/father/wife/brothers etc.
Some are devastated, some are apathetic, some are overjoyed.
That is the reality of human life and social dynamics.
I'm not disputing your point re relationship dynamics, just that all accounts I have seen report Blair & the team as being devastated not only by Blair's personal loss, but by the magnatude of the disaster as well....................a double whammy so to speak...........

so I see no reason to assume anything otherwise.....................
 

anzac

International Debutant
C_C said:
Yeah and i bet your granny told you that..my granny did too ( how her era was the blazing example of devotion and love and yadda yadda) but one thing she forgot to mention, that i found out a lot later : That was also the era of womanbeaters, chauvinist pigs masquarading as men and where the job of women was "to get pregnant, cook the food and please the hubby", the era of totally arbitary and unnatural norms of behaviour and "social protocol", etc etc.....
its amazing as how time goes by, society takes a rose-tinted glass as a kaleidoscope to look back into the past,utterly forgetting their perspective. Every generation is guilty of this and i bet when most of us are grandpa age, we will talk about 'the good old days compared to the deteriorated lifestyles of our grandchildren"...
In reality, that is escapism at its best and a quintissential case of "you think you have it tough ? well i had it 10x tougher" machismo.
and yet again we are applying todays standards to another era...............not applicable when we are talking about accepted social 'norms'.........

I'm not trying to defend the standards of those times - just that you can not apply today's moral standpoint to them as they have no relevance other than to give ourselves a warm fuzzy at how far we have come from those dark times.........
 

anzac

International Debutant
FaaipDeOiad said:
Reminds me of a Monty Python skit with a bunch of old guys sitting around and talking about how tough they used to have it, with each story getting more and more extreme before culimating with something like:

"You think you had it tough?! When I was a lad, we had to get up six hours before we went to bed and work for 25 hours in a day! And when we got home, our dad would kill us and dance on our graves!"

Unfortuately I can't find a transcript of it. Bloody funny though. ;)
Monty Python Live at the Hollywood Bowl.................
 

Mr Casson

Cricketer Of The Year
vic_orthdox said:
What do you deem as the bravest/most courageous act undertaken in world cricket?

There's one I read about, which i will detail below.

From the book, "Great Days in Test Cricket", by Rick Smith. (I've edited it to make it shorter. Hope it doesn't retract from the story)

South Africa vs New Zealand in 1953.

Second day of the second test.

Resuming with South Africa at 8/259 on a "moist and green pitch", the New Zealanders were informed that morning of Tangiwai rail disaster back home, where a mudslide destroyed a bridge and the express train was not informed. Included in the 150 people dead was the fiancee of Kiwi pace bowler Bob Blair. Blair, understandably, chose to stay in his hotel room, and not attend the game.

The Kiwis, after bowling out the Springboks for 271, had to face Neil Adcock, arguably the fastest bowler in the world at time, on this lively pitch, and Adcock struck both openers in the body in the first over. Bert Sutcliffe, the teams best batsman, came in at 2/9, and was struck behind the ear third ball, and was, by his own admission, "going out like a light". He was taken to hospital and fainted twice, bleeding profusely, and the crowd was informed that Sutcliffe would not bat again.

The South African bowlers continued to wreak havoc, falling to 4/41 including two retired hurt, and then 6/82. At this point, Bert Sutcliffe walked back out, head covered in bandages. "He confessed to being strongly fortified by a product of Scotland which he refused to name, except to say that it was not porridge" . He took the long handle to the SA attack, hitting his third ball in his resumed innings for 6. When the players went off for afternoon tea, the pair (Sutcliffe and wicketkeeper Frank Mooney) had added 50 in 30 mins.

However, after Tea, wickets 7, 8 and 9 fell quickly, with Sutcliffe stranded down the other end, and the score 154. As Sutcliffe was walking off, he looked up as he heard the crowd go silent. Joining him was at the wicket was Bob Blair.

"Sutcliffe remembered what he called 'a bloody marvellous moment', the most vivid of his memories of the day.

'I said, "What the hell are you doing here?" He half-smiled through teary eyes, "I'd like to feel I can help". I told him we had just avoided the follow on and to throw the bat and let's get out of here.'

Blair survived the rest of the over somehow, playing and missing at every ball. Sutcliffe took the chance then to blast Hugh Tayfield for three sixes off the next over, then took a single with one ball to go. Then Blair took a wild swing and deposited Tayfield for a fourth six from the over, to the raptures of the foreign crowd.

Eventually Blair was stumped without adding to his one boundary. The pair had scored 33 in 10 minutes, and Bert Sutcliffe had made 80* off 106 balls, including 7 sixes and 4 fours. New Zealand, 10/187.

They went on to lose the game by 132 runs. But I think its fair to say that no-one really remembers the result.
When I saw the title of this thread, I remembered a story that was in an edition of Inside Cricket earlier this summer. 'Twas the same story! I'm guessing you read it and went to find out a bit more? That was hella moving, though... I had been meaning to read a bit more about it!
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
nah, i just reread a book i already had. don't think i've ever even read inside cricket...unless thats the offspring of inside edge. anyways...
 

Top