Harold Larwood never played for England again after this series - after he took 'Bodyline' back to English county cricket. They didn't fancy it so much on the receiving end.
Funnily enough Don Bradman never forgot this series - the 1948 Australian side with fast bowlers Ray Lindwall and Keith Miller massacred the English cricketers in every game they played.
WTF @4:20!!! The sound!!!!......Thanks for putting it in though:)....You understand the difference right? It's the line and the field placement. Lillee is trying to scare him so he'll play back to a fuller one, Larwood (Jardine, really) was trying to get batsmen out with the short ball on leg stump. If you were good enough (and Viv was on more than one occasion) there was the chance of a four or a single off Lillee's short one, that wasn't the case with Jardine's field.
I absolutely agree with mwhite4324 here. After watching this whoever can say Bradman faced mediocre bowling and gave away. This is just Larwood we are talking about and then there were a few more. We've already seen a few videos of Tendular misjudging some bouncers from Broad and Anderson. Nothing as fiercely fast and furious as this we see in the video that Bradman faces. The DON was really the DON
Funny how the Australians were crying over a genius tactic. Not so great when you're on the recieving end of it eh Aussies? Atleast this was an actual tactic though, as opposed to a cheap underarm ball.
Larwood was from Nottingham and in mines there ..lived in Sydney in Kingsford ...my son watched the movie in the part where Harold hurt his foot...7years old....in Ipswich in Qld....so he wrote a letter ro him asking about his foot ..some 50 years on..a letter came back answered by him/or his wife inviting him to visit when next in Sydney..we did in 1981-2..left him with the Larwoods for some hours he has never forgotten this ..now at 36..Harold and the DON were good friends
its quite silly to compare don to any other cricketer of our era. or vice versa. the game has evolved manifold to garner any chance of a comparison. no helmets, no body protection, no rules to stop bouncers every ball. but then again the game has a lot of subtle changes, such as the lbw rule. back in the dons era only ball pitching in the line of the stump and hitting them was given out. it clearly cut chances of getting lbws through off spinners, inswingers n the cutters.
Larwood, his body toughened in the Yorkshire coal mines, was arguably the fastest ever and had tremendous skill to boot. His length and line were uncanny. In nets, he used to pitch the ball time and time again on a coin.
Sir Donald Bradman is the greatest of all ,though being an indian i would rate him above sachin ,infact sachin is no where near him,truly inspiring figure
@proudindian4u completely agree wid u. sachin is good but nowhere near the Don. Don had 6 years of his career taken away by the war. Don belonged to the era of bodyline... Today cricket is a much more batsman friendly game with rules restricting bowlers to just a bouncer an over.
Bradman still averaged 56.57 that series with a 1st innigs duck in his first game in the 2nd test playing with an illness, to a ball that keeped low due to a low standard quality of wicket in comparisson to today's roads that remain uncoverd during tests. If he had a helmet & a chest guard cricket gloves (not garden gloves) & an arm guard & inner thigh guard & a state of the art bat like players these days have, Bradman could & would've dominated this series too..
@shiv100p No 60mph bowler will bowl short all time.Any batsman will find easy to play short balls from slow bowler.And human being havenot evolved so much that u can say batsman of that era will get hurt after being hit by balls of 60mph or bowlers of today will bowl faster with same action
@shiv100p That's absolutely stupid. There are guys at my amateur cricket club that can bowl at 70+mph. You don't think guys back in the 1930's were capable of bowling faster than amateur's today? Don't be so daft. Even through the grainy footage available you can see that Larwood was bowling faster than 60. You're an armchair fanboy and know nothing of the game.
I met Harold Larwood on 1977 when I lived in Nottingham on the road named after him.We held as street party for then Queens Jubilee & he & his wife were invited as guests oh honour.He came and chatted to us all , I was 19 & knew about the series and what happened .I asked him why he had gone to Austarlia & he said he liked the people & the country,but was too much of a gent to say why he could not settle back here after the series.I cannot believe how that small wiry man bowled so fast.
I met Harold Larwood on 1977 when I lived in Nottingham on the road named after him.We held as street party for then Queens Jubilee & he & his wife were invited as guests oh honour.He came and ahatted to us all and as I was 19 I knew about the series and what happened .I asked him why he had gone to Austarlia & he said he liked the people and the country,but was too much of a gent to say why he could not settle back here after the series.I cannot believe how that small wiry man bowled so fast.
Context is important here - the bat ruled the ball at that time. The ball was made smaller in 1928, the stumps were made bigger in 1932 and in 1935 the off-side LBW was changed to help bowlers. Captains had to work hard to give their bowlers a chance - leg theory allowed England to exploit their greatest resource, the pace of Larwood. The Aussies weren't up to the challenge, but it's the only sporting challenge they've ever whinged about. And Jardine was a great batsmen and captain.
gr8 video........till yesteday i thought that thompson was the fastest ever........but now after seeing this video iam sure that larwood was the fastest ever.....some say that he had been clocking 130mph...iam a strong beleiver of it
Those who say England were well within their rights to bowl bodyline have to agree that Australia were well within their rights to bowl underarms against New Zealand.
@colesguy - " Those who say England were well within their rights to bowl bodyline have to agree that Australia were well within their rights to bowl underarms against New Zealand."
From these angles, you can see how Larwood's front leg was collapsed rather than classically braced. There's a lot of similarities between Larwood and Shaun Tait. Also note how that back foot drags. There must have been unbelievable stress on his right ankle.
(cont.) There was nothing 'unfair' in the English actions. A case could perhaps be made that it was outside the spirit of the game as it stood then but that's another whole thing. For we Aussies to complain about the 'Bodyline' series today when we took intimidation with Lillee and Thomson to the very limits of the rules in the 70's is really a bit hypocritical. 'Bodyline' may have been shocking at the time but the English were well within their rights to use it as the laws stood then.
As an Aussie I have to say the whole 'Bodyline' thing has been hyped out of proportion. The English played within the rules of the game as they stood then, just as we did in 74/75 with Lillee and Thomson, and the Windies did in the 80's. Remember it took the underarm bowling incident in the early 80's to have that loophole written out of the laws and until the law against more than 2 fielders behind square on the leg side was brought in 'Bodyline' was perfectly legal,
@007dalal -Plainly. If you had read my post thoroughly you would have noticed that I mentioned that. The point I was making was that Bodyline was legal at the time, so the only valid issue one could take with it was that somehow contravened the 'spirit' of the game.
looks like the aussies have always been whining bullies- eager to dish out anything and call it tough cricket but unable to take a dose of their own medicine. man talk about a legacy. 1st this in 1932 and right upto sydney 2008.
@Loonie1970 hey..bodyline has been so hyped up throughout the years..the actual fact is that the theory was just a theory until the THIRD test..that was the only test in the series when this theory was ACTUALLY employed..even then england won it grandly..and the australians satisfy themselves by blaming the leg theory for the series loss..thats coz except bradman and mccabe, everyone was a loser..lol
i was surprised to learn that douglas jardine, the england captain, averaged nearly 50 in tests yet only played 22 times for england, probably as a result of the controversy over ''leg theory''.
Entitled 'In Quest of the Ashes' it is Jardine's own self-written account of the tour. Some of the infomous incidents are dealt with in a matter of fact way and Plum Warner is only mentioned once in the book. It is a great book though and well worth getting hold of. It is available at amazon.
it was ok for australia to bowl bouncers at us in the twenties with gregory and mcdonald a, it all got blown out of per portion because of poor old donald bradman, he was scared shitless of it and with his connections with the press made sure they printed in the newspapers all the behind the scene stories.
it finished harold larwood no wonder he emigrated to oz after the way the mcc treated him.
@jrulez16 Actually Larwood was timed by stopwatch at 96 mph, though with a human element in the calculation (pressing go-stop while watching delivery) we can't know how accurate it was.
Many batsmen of the day stated he was the quickest they'd ever faced, though Bradman reckoned Aboriginal Eddie Gilbert had a yard on Larwood. Gilbert operated from a very short run-up and his action was considered suspect by some.
Bodyline or Leg-Theory was one of if not the most influential series of test cricket EVER. There is so much to the story that it really is and continues to be a fascinating and very dominate period in cricketing folklore.
Disturbed to see personal views brought into the stroy some forty years on with Lillie and Richards. 1 star
now with such equipment we have these days three fielders should be allowed behinf square on the leg instead of 2 & picthes should be made faster & greener.Then ICC doesnt need to worry about the health of test cricket-It is stupid administrators who are killing test cricket,the most beautiful formof game,by making placid pitches & putting more & more restrictions on bowlers-the day batsmen are fearful of plonkin down on front foot test cricket will be back on its feet
If batsmen is hesitant and takes his eyes of ball it is likely that ball will hit. Most who got hit were scared and let ball hit. Sunil Gavaskar was so small and played West Endies fast bowling very well..
yes personally body line is bad and yea its banned from the game....but....i would lyk to see any new fast bowler of thiz generation to take the risk of using it again for just 1 last time....and i swear it would make headlines all over the world that....BODY LINE IS BACK....!!! now that would be awesome right....???
It is unlikely,as the laws regarding the number of fielders allowed behind square on the leg side were ammended following the bodyline series.I would like to see the laws regarding short piched bowling relaxed in test matches.
Mitchell Johnson used it in the series against india this month. He bowled a coupla bouncers on the leg side at Ishant Sharma. Other than that his bowling was crappy.
i hate bodyline bowling if they didn't do bodyline bowling maybe don bradman average would be over 100 because of the bodyline bowling he got out on 0
I can`t believe that a man of 5ft 8` could sling a ball down like Larwood could!
In computer analysis taken from old film of Larwood bowling he was bowling at over 90mph...the speed people like Freddie and Lee are bowling at these days!
Cricket must be one of the only sports where speed (from a fast bowler)has not improved over the decades,or fast bowlers become "better". Larwood would probably still be World class even today.
I played baseball & softball for many years & have observed that pitching (our equivalent of bowling) speed has not increased today despite our players being much bigger & stronger than yesteryear's players. Strangely, the strike zone is smaller when it should have been increased. In cric the wickets should have been increased as well because the players are so much taller than they were in the past. If they had been the game would be a lot better I think.
@TangerineGray With the straight arm action rule, it probably is hard for bowlers to bowl faster. Accommodate jerking or flexing the arm and the speeds will increase.
@TangerineGray Larwood was a remarkable bowler. Some of the reports I've read of him are amazing, and I'm sure you are right, he would be world class today.
Tragic how he was treated by the England authorities. Whilst in my opinion Leg Theory was a disgrace, Larwood only did what his captain asked of him, and that's who should have taken the blame for such unsporting conduct.
@PaulMJohnson larwood wasn't in trouble for leg theory, he was in trouble for his infamous bodyline bowling, for injuring many australian batsmen and partially for cracking bert oldfield's skull. but whatever did happen, larwood was still a brilliant bowler
and from what i know, leg theory was bowling on a slightly outside leg-stump line, to infuriate the batsman and force him to play a rash shot. leg theory wasn't harmful to the batsman, it was just boring to watch and was considered cheap
@xk8erbxg Leg theory & bodyline are one & the same. Was used in county cricket to a limited extent, then refined & executed in Aus to keep Bradman in check.
Leg theory/bodyline has a bowler of at least fast-medium pace (Larwood, Voce, Bowes) pitch shortish balls at your ribs. Your choices were either to duck, take a hit to the body, or hook to a packed legside field.
It worked: Bradman's average in 1932-33 was half his career average & England won the Ashes back 4-1.
BTW England capt Douglas Jardine knew that without Larwood he couldn't have pulled it off. After the dust settled & the team had sailed home, Jardine sent HL an ashtray inscribed: "To Harold for the Ashes--1932-33--From a grateful Skipper."
MCC later made HL an outcast after he refused to sign a prepared letter of apology. He wouldn't be anyone's scapegoat for bodyline.
@TangerineGray Well Marshall, Gough, Waqar, Lindwall and a few other genuinely quick bowlers were under 6 feet tall. I don't think height is an important ingredient. Some guys skid onto you while some others get true bounce due to their height.
@sskgrs Holding was a beautiful bowler....although being English myself and a teenager at the time,I maybe didn`t appreciate 'the whispering death' quite as much as I should have done!
Still on the Larwood theme.Harold Larwood was the pro at my hometown club (Blackpool) after WW2 and he had a newsagents shop in the town until he emigrated with his family to Aussie in 1950.
A plaque has been erected at Blackpool CC to commemorate this fact and his daughter came over to unveil it,which was nice.
They had no idea of the firestorm of controversy that lay ahead - resulting in strained diplomacy between nations & the changing of cricket forever after.
Note how short Larwood is, but strong as an ox - an ex-coal miner from Notts. Bill Bowes (in glasses) was a giant at 6'4".
Gubby Allen was ex-Australian.
And tell me Jardine doesn't look like Count Dracula.
I am from Oz, by the way, but have no problem offering kudos to England when they outplay us.
"Cricket" is a game but also an attitude -- fair play & sportsmanship.
Bodyline WAS within the rules at the time but was unethical by most standards. As was Greg Chappel's decision to bowl underarm on the last ball to the Kiwis.
Larwood was under 5'8" and could make the ball skid very quickly off the wicket. His stock ball was the outswinger but he could often get the ball to cut back sharply.
You are spot on windigo. I admire your sportsmanship. I made my earlier comment to wind you Aussies up, but your Sporting reply put me to shame. We have been put to the sword by some great Aussie sides, on rare occasions when we do beat you (as in the Rugby world cup Final 2003), than who can blame us for being over zealous. You have a young side, I am very impressed with Peter Siddle, he has lots of agression and I reckon one day he will be as good as Dennis Lillie. Good luck my friend :o)
I am about your age. I remember John Snow cracking Jenner on the nut. I loved watching Snow -- he was easily the best bowler for either side in that series. I was ticked off when the idiot drunk Oz fan grabbed Snow by the arm and abused him.
Larwood was an awesome player and a decent bloke. "I'm sorry, Bertie," he said to Oldfield right away. "Not your fault, Harold," replied Oldfield.
Rugby 2003 = the best side won. Congrats there, too.
A beer would be good. I think you've been unlucky in this series so far. In the 1st test, you let us off the hook even though Strauss wasted a couple of extra minutes sending the Physio on. In the 2nd test you had a few desicions go against you ie the catch off Ponting in my opinion touched the floor. Brett Lee is injured. McGrath was injured last time you were here which helped us win that series. At the moment I think you are in a transitional phase. What do you think?
1st test: No matter how many runs you make, if you can't get bloody Panesar out right away at the end you don't deserve to win. Seriously.
2nd test calls? Ah, over time, half the close ones go your way and half go to your rival -- it evens out. Personally, I don't like it when losers gripe about the umps, except for the few egregious cases.
Luck = skill + effort MOST of the time.
Transitional? Only time will tell but right now all I see is inconsistency, especially with the bat.
Forget Warne to Gatting as "Ball of the Century" The ball of the Century was Larwood to Bert Oldfield or John Snow to Jenner in 70-71. Nothing as sweet as taking an Aussie's fking head off
Evidently, it's hard for some people to be on the losing end for so long so their only way of dealing is to toss out a little dose of hate. Like this post.
BTW, England has just beaten Oz in the 2nd test by completely outplaying them with bat & ball. Flintoff's 20-plus over spell & getting 5 for 80-odd was one of the best sustained efforts I've ever seen. Congrats to the Poms!
Ashes series are always great and hard-fought with a ton of history behind them.
haha i love watching the old black & white footage and the commentators. Just put on your poshest pom accent and say "yes indeed, the England players fear for their lives as the Australian crowd start throwing sandwiches on to the pitch".
the difference is the windies did it to intimidate and "work" the batsman over larwood did it because dumbass jardine didn't have a clue on how to get bradman out.
As far as I'm concerned Jardine was the only captain and larwood the only bowler to truly tame Bradman, which makes them greats of the game. And this video shows that, bodyline or no bodyline, Larwood was particularly tasty - brilliant action, and those deliveries must be around the 92 mph mark.
i dont see why people cant have a swing at bodyline like all thats gunna happen is u get hit with a cricket ball but i spose they didnt have helmetts but nowadays u see people gettin hit with cricket balls all the time
This old footage from almost 80 years ago shows how different the 'culture' of cricket was back then.
Notice how there is virtually no celebration at all by the bowler and his teammates when a wicket falls, even when it's Bradman's. Very different from the back-slapping and jumping around of today.
Larwood's nickname was 'Loll' as he was always eating hard lollies (candy).
It's surprising that Jardine, a 'gentleman amateur', never considered it ungentlemanly to bowl at batsmen's heads.
I've read a lot re 'bodyline' & its backstory but don't recall a mention of Jardine's religious affiliation.
A good guess would be the Anglican Church/Church of England, if he were religious at all.
Jardine was well-educated and 'properly-bred' & was of sufficient means that he played as an amateur. He & a few other 'thinking heads' devised 'bodyline' specifically to counter the run-making ability of Bradman, the scoring prodigy of the day. It worked in that England won the series handily.
In the 70s as a cricket-crazy kid in Oz I saw this very documentary on TV & was riveted by the sheer drama of it. Had all kinds of archetypal characters, a 'good vs. evil' battle, & ultimately developed into an international incident with heads of state exchanging rhetoric.
I read "The Larwood Story" (his autobiography) 3 times & had it virtually memorized.
I can't think of a set of incidents in the history of any sport that are as dramatic & polarizing as 'bodyline' series was in 1932-33.
I don't know if 'handily' is the most appropriate adverb. That England had to stoop so low in order to beat the Australians speaks rather more highly of the Australians than it does anything else.
Many cricket pundits state that Stan McCabe's innings in the first test at Sydney was one of the greatest ever.
With Larwood, Voce and Bowes bowling very fast at his upper body and to a packed leg field, McCabe fearlessly cut and hooked his way to 187 not out. He actually told his parents, who were in attendance that day, not to come onto the field if he got hit.
All these decades later it's hard for us to imagine just how volatile the mood was on the field and among the spectators then.
By the way, the bowler in slo-mo at 2:40 is not Larwood but Gubby Allen, Australian-born, who emigrated to England and ultimately played for them.
Allen was a 'gentleman amateur' and, as he was not 'paid' to play cricket, he could not be compelled by Captain Douglas Jardine to bowl fast-leg theory.
Larwood and Voce were blue-collar boys and cricket was their only source of income. They felt they had no option but to do Jardine's bidding.
Larwood's delivery was once timed by stopwatch (the 'tech' of the day) and the velocity was determined to be 96 mph (154 kph), however accurate or inaccurate.
He said that whenever he wanted to send down a real scorcher, he took a pinch of 'snuff' (ground tobacco) from his pocket and inhaled deeply while walking back to his mark.
Many well-known batsmen in county and test cricket said he was the fastest they ever faced.
Ray Lindwall said he modeled his own action after Larwood's.
I didn't mean to bore anyone with all the postings but the "bodyline" series of 1932-33 was one of the most dramatic sport events of all time, for any sport. It changed cricket forever after.
At the time, leg theory was not against the rules though there is little doubt it posed a clear ethical dilemma -- using Larwood and the others to bowl directly at the upper bodies of the batsmen with a packed leg field.
In the last test, Larwood broke a bone in his foot and had to finish the over rolling the ball underarm to the batsman (I forget who it was), who just patted the ball back to him. He never fully recovered his peak form after that.
Larwood emigrated to Australia and said he never received a harsh word from any Australians.
Despite the stigma of "bodyline", he was one of the all-time greats, known for his almost perfect delivery action.
Bill Bowes and Gubby Allen were the other two pacemen for England. Allen, I believe, was an amateur sportsman, and refused to bowl leg theory, despite Captain Douglas Jardine's requests to do so.
After hitting Oldfield in the skull, Larwood ran up to him and said, "I'm really sorry, Bertie." Oldfield said it wasn't Larwood's fault although he did suffer a hairline fracture of the skull.
Larwood said, "I only ever bowled really fast once, and that was in Australia in 1932-33."
Larwood was a coal miner in Nottinghamshire before he made it in county cricket. He credited much of his upper body bowling strength to the strong back he developed working in the mines.
He was under 5'8" (172 cm), very short for an express speed bowler. He'd skid balls through with the wind at his back while the left-handed Voce, well over 6' tall, liked to bowl from the opposite end to get more swing.
My great grandfather used to go to school with Larwood and I remember him telling me he used to practice his bowling for hours on end down alleyways of the terraced housing of the Nuncargate area of Kikrby-In-Ashfield where he grew up.
Also how when playing locally on the field near Nuncargate he used to take a run up to the crease through a gap in the hedge, it was that long, imagine that coming towards you!
Gentlemen, stop this nonesensical fight between Aussies and the English. Shall we appreciate cricket objectively as a sport, for God's sake.
And before you start cursing me, I'd like to add that this is coming from a bloke that's neither British nor Aussie.
By the way, was Harold Larwood quicker than Snow/Willis. He might have been the quickest English bowler ever. I believe Devon Malcolm and Frank Tyson would be up there too.
Whats your problem with Australia ?. Someone just doesn't hate another person for no reason. Whats your problem mate ?. What happened ?. I think you are jealous. You are jealous with what we have done as a people, that those stinking fucking scumbag criminals were sent to that discusting wild island to rot. Rot they didn't. They changed that "sandpit" to one of the greatest and most prosperous countries of today.
yeah we had too many crooks over here so we rounded them up, stuck them in cages like animals and shipped them liked a crate of bananas to this sandpit to fight amongst themselves..they then began breeding and produced the filthy pigs now representing the cheating aussie cricket team you see nowadays...who are despised worldwide for their cheating tactis and poor sportsmanship. You cant blame the aussies, blame their forefathers and their criminal perspective on life which is prevalant today.
Not every Australian's ancestors were convicts mate. Anyway just because we absolutely smashed u in the 2006-2007 Ashes series u accuse us of cheating and then we win the World Cup without losing, our 4th and 5th batsmen hardly got to bat because we had already won in that time. Pommy basted
agrees with openfold...I love watching Larwood bowl, a beautiful action and scary to face. The chucking controversy was instigated by Bradman, who played a clip of Larwood bowling, but showed it in reverse (i.e so it appears he is bowling left arm) and said to the ICC "what do you think of that?" (from Jack Fingletons excellent book on Vic Trumper)
Look at Larwood's bowling action ... at the point, when his right hand is about to do the "catapult" action and follow it through all the way when the right hand reaches the hightest point ... it is the classic "Chucking" ... a pre-mediated, "hesitant" and deliberated motion, to ensure the cricket ball does the work of the cannonball. A most un-gentlemanly and unsportsmanlike performance.
Both teams suck and broke the spirit of the game. When I first heard about it I thought it was actually quite smart, but full on bouncers when people arn't even wearing helmets is far too much, some of those players got struck quite bad.
Interesting juxtaposition....Aussies whingeing on again about Bodyline, and Aussie commentators giggling when Lillee tries to decapitate an equally helmetless Viv Richards. Hypocrites.
Yes, though what Viv Richards had done to the Aussies, apart from outplay them, I don't know...and Telectroscope, you're talking bollocks. That is not chucking...but one of the best bowling actions in history
Jardine was playing as a professional in a sport that back then was more a social sport, but it was still sport with rules. He did what every sportsman does, he expploited the rules and its something that would have been done at some stage. And just as the underarm ball was, it wasnt illegal to do and as with this, the officials rightly changed the laws. And no one today can critise what happened then because there isnt one single team who can say they play within the spirit of the game anymore
This was legal bowling!! cant see the problem witht the theory... nobody ever wanted to hurt anyone you can gaurantee that... it was devised to prey on the batsmans weakness. You can see the players were very distressed to see the batsman get hurt!
Lots of the wickets in the series fell to balls that were barely above stump high.
Larwood was extremely fast... would love to see him in todays era of accurate speed guns!!
Nonsense. The ball that hit him was a slower ball and pitched fuller than the previous delivery ( which had gone for 4 through the covers ) bowled to a conventional field. The fact was he intended to cut then changed his mind and attempted a pull, unfortunately he lost sight of the ball and nicked it onto his temple - obviously the worst possible place to be struck. Oh and FYI, he was a keeper who batted at 7 with an average of around 24 IIRC, no great hitter but hardly a bunny either.
Harold Larwood never played for England again after this series - after he took 'Bodyline' back to English county cricket. They didn't fancy it so much on the receiving end.
Funnily enough Don Bradman never forgot this series - the 1948 Australian side with fast bowlers Ray Lindwall and Keith Miller massacred the English cricketers in every game they played.
bitchschtick 2 weeks ago
that type of bowling is dirty.
GoldStandard619 1 month ago
WTF @4:20!!! The sound!!!!......Thanks for putting it in though:)....You understand the difference right? It's the line and the field placement. Lillee is trying to scare him so he'll play back to a fuller one, Larwood (Jardine, really) was trying to get batsmen out with the short ball on leg stump. If you were good enough (and Viv was on more than one occasion) there was the chance of a four or a single off Lillee's short one, that wasn't the case with Jardine's field.
mcnesta80 1 month ago
I absolutely agree with mwhite4324 here. After watching this whoever can say Bradman faced mediocre bowling and gave away. This is just Larwood we are talking about and then there were a few more. We've already seen a few videos of Tendular misjudging some bouncers from Broad and Anderson. Nothing as fiercely fast and furious as this we see in the video that Bradman faces. The DON was really the DON
farazzubair 1 month ago
Lol and people say that the standard of bowling bradman faced was shit
mwhite4324 3 months ago
Funny how the Australians were crying over a genius tactic. Not so great when you're on the recieving end of it eh Aussies? Atleast this was an actual tactic though, as opposed to a cheap underarm ball.
SelasSolaris 3 months ago 2
@SelasSolaris well said mate i agree australia always make excuses whenever they lose!
Stephend83 1 month ago
Mr david gover it's a shame to say not bowling bodyline.
sanjeewakaru 3 months ago
This video is worse than death.
JmanHunsman 4 months ago
My God he was quick
ianxharvey 5 months ago
lol look at the umpires
kjbarca10717 6 months ago
Is that John Major commentating?
sonofecthelion 6 months ago
@sonofecthelion David Gower. :P
Stokie09123 6 months ago
Larwood was from Nottingham and in mines there ..lived in Sydney in Kingsford ...my son watched the movie in the part where Harold hurt his foot...7years old....in Ipswich in Qld....so he wrote a letter ro him asking about his foot ..some 50 years on..a letter came back answered by him/or his wife inviting him to visit when next in Sydney..we did in 1981-2..left him with the Larwoods for some hours he has never forgotten this ..now at 36..Harold and the DON were good friends
michaeal053 7 months ago
Why is Ian Chappell dressed as a pilgrim at the end?
bongo155 7 months ago
its quite silly to compare don to any other cricketer of our era. or vice versa. the game has evolved manifold to garner any chance of a comparison. no helmets, no body protection, no rules to stop bouncers every ball. but then again the game has a lot of subtle changes, such as the lbw rule. back in the dons era only ball pitching in the line of the stump and hitting them was given out. it clearly cut chances of getting lbws through off spinners, inswingers n the cutters.
bajwasupreet 8 months ago
Larwood, his body toughened in the Yorkshire coal mines, was arguably the fastest ever and had tremendous skill to boot. His length and line were uncanny. In nets, he used to pitch the ball time and time again on a coin.
madmax8903 8 months ago 3
@madmax8903 - try Nottingham
oshawaxpress 6 months ago
@oshawaxpress OK, my bad, Nottingham coal mines.
madmax8903 5 months ago
Sir Donald Bradman is the greatest of all ,though being an indian i would rate him above sachin ,infact sachin is no where near him,truly inspiring figure
proudindian4u 10 months ago
@proudindian4u completely agree wid u. sachin is good but nowhere near the Don. Don had 6 years of his career taken away by the war. Don belonged to the era of bodyline... Today cricket is a much more batsman friendly game with rules restricting bowlers to just a bouncer an over.
thefetishkingfarts 10 months ago
Bradman still averaged 56.57 that series with a 1st innigs duck in his first game in the 2nd test playing with an illness, to a ball that keeped low due to a low standard quality of wicket in comparisson to today's roads that remain uncoverd during tests. If he had a helmet & a chest guard cricket gloves (not garden gloves) & an arm guard & inner thigh guard & a state of the art bat like players these days have, Bradman could & would've dominated this series too..
dosh228 10 months ago
Bodyline, yeh it probaly will hurt if the bowler bowled quick, Larwood and other bowlers only bowled up to 60 mph back in those times
shiv100p 11 months ago
@shiv100p No 60mph bowler will bowl short all time.Any batsman will find easy to play short balls from slow bowler.And human being havenot evolved so much that u can say batsman of that era will get hurt after being hit by balls of 60mph or bowlers of today will bowl faster with same action
007dalal 8 months ago
@shiv100p That's absolutely stupid. There are guys at my amateur cricket club that can bowl at 70+mph. You don't think guys back in the 1930's were capable of bowling faster than amateur's today? Don't be so daft. Even through the grainy footage available you can see that Larwood was bowling faster than 60. You're an armchair fanboy and know nothing of the game.
Henchberg 7 months ago
The only serious injury, Oldfield's fractured skull, came from an edge off the bat from a non-bodyline delivery!
As Larwood said - "When you hear 50,000 Aussies shouting at you, you know you've got 'em worried".
One of the fastest ever bowlers- AND lethally accurate!
adventussaxonum 11 months ago
how is he a legend ???? the only way england could bradman out was ball at him if i was an pom i would be disgraced
Hodgeisdaman 1 year ago
My little dachshund is called Larwood, he has four short legs and his balls swing both ways.
ChazsmateIII 1 year ago 7
@ChazsmateIII Oldie but a goodie
mcnesta80 1 month ago
Harold Larwood...just watching....makes me feel so humble....the guy was a Master
jagdpanther1944 1 year ago
wtf happened at 4:21 ??????
eh? what?...
luckyphilster 1 year ago
@luckyphilster know what you mean! Changing the subject though, doesn't Ian Chappell look like a priest.
widlad7 1 year ago
I met Harold Larwood on 1977 when I lived in Nottingham on the road named after him.We held as street party for then Queens Jubilee & he & his wife were invited as guests oh honour.He came and chatted to us all , I was 19 & knew about the series and what happened .I asked him why he had gone to Austarlia & he said he liked the people & the country,but was too much of a gent to say why he could not settle back here after the series.I cannot believe how that small wiry man bowled so fast.
hartforp 1 year ago
@hartforp wow!! that's amazing.
widlad7 1 year ago
I met Harold Larwood on 1977 when I lived in Nottingham on the road named after him.We held as street party for then Queens Jubilee & he & his wife were invited as guests oh honour.He came and ahatted to us all and as I was 19 I knew about the series and what happened .I asked him why he had gone to Austarlia & he said he liked the people and the country,but was too much of a gent to say why he could not settle back here after the series.I cannot believe how that small wiry man bowled so fast.
hartforp 1 year ago
Was it Larwood, when practising for the famous Bodyline series, would hit a spot no wider than an old english penny EVERY ball ??
manangel10 1 year ago
Context is important here - the bat ruled the ball at that time. The ball was made smaller in 1928, the stumps were made bigger in 1932 and in 1935 the off-side LBW was changed to help bowlers. Captains had to work hard to give their bowlers a chance - leg theory allowed England to exploit their greatest resource, the pace of Larwood. The Aussies weren't up to the challenge, but it's the only sporting challenge they've ever whinged about. And Jardine was a great batsmen and captain.
mcs1hr 1 year ago
gr8 video........till yesteday i thought that thompson was the fastest ever........but now after seeing this video iam sure that larwood was the fastest ever.....some say that he had been clocking 130mph...iam a strong beleiver of it
crisspyman 1 year ago
Those who say England were well within their rights to bowl bodyline have to agree that Australia were well within their rights to bowl underarms against New Zealand.
colesguy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@colesguy - " Those who say England were well within their rights to bowl bodyline have to agree that Australia were well within their rights to bowl underarms against New Zealand."
- Maybe, but I know what I'd rather face!
adventussaxonum 11 months ago
From these angles, you can see how Larwood's front leg was collapsed rather than classically braced. There's a lot of similarities between Larwood and Shaun Tait. Also note how that back foot drags. There must have been unbelievable stress on his right ankle.
HeartfeltDawn 1 year ago
what it boiled down to was that jardine was a winner,something we lack in sport now. i cant wait for the ashes to start. should be close this time.
nufc2smb 1 year ago
(cont.) There was nothing 'unfair' in the English actions. A case could perhaps be made that it was outside the spirit of the game as it stood then but that's another whole thing. For we Aussies to complain about the 'Bodyline' series today when we took intimidation with Lillee and Thomson to the very limits of the rules in the 70's is really a bit hypocritical. 'Bodyline' may have been shocking at the time but the English were well within their rights to use it as the laws stood then.
Biggus63 1 year ago
As an Aussie I have to say the whole 'Bodyline' thing has been hyped out of proportion. The English played within the rules of the game as they stood then, just as we did in 74/75 with Lillee and Thomson, and the Windies did in the 80's. Remember it took the underarm bowling incident in the early 80's to have that loophole written out of the laws and until the law against more than 2 fielders behind square on the leg side was brought in 'Bodyline' was perfectly legal,
Biggus63 1 year ago
@Biggus63 there is difference between bodyline and bowling of windies in 80s .It was more than 2 feilders on square leg whic h made the differnce
007dalal 1 year ago
@007dalal -Plainly. If you had read my post thoroughly you would have noticed that I mentioned that. The point I was making was that Bodyline was legal at the time, so the only valid issue one could take with it was that somehow contravened the 'spirit' of the game.
Biggus63 1 year ago
looks like the aussies have always been whining bullies- eager to dish out anything and call it tough cricket but unable to take a dose of their own medicine. man talk about a legacy. 1st this in 1932 and right upto sydney 2008.
mrksprkns 1 year ago
Comment removed
rohanmarkjay 3 months ago
@rohanmarkjay It's another whinging pommie!
Busususu 2 months ago
i hate the bloody bodyline
Loonie1970 1 year ago
@Loonie1970 hey..bodyline has been so hyped up throughout the years..the actual fact is that the theory was just a theory until the THIRD test..that was the only test in the series when this theory was ACTUALLY employed..even then england won it grandly..and the australians satisfy themselves by blaming the leg theory for the series loss..thats coz except bradman and mccabe, everyone was a loser..lol
tahashoeb 1 year ago
i was surprised to learn that douglas jardine, the england captain, averaged nearly 50 in tests yet only played 22 times for england, probably as a result of the controversy over ''leg theory''.
055697 1 year ago
whining fucking aussies even then
shitmacher 1 year ago
Entitled 'In Quest of the Ashes' it is Jardine's own self-written account of the tour. Some of the infomous incidents are dealt with in a matter of fact way and Plum Warner is only mentioned once in the book. It is a great book though and well worth getting hold of. It is available at amazon.
widlad7 1 year ago
Can some one tell me who was the first person to deploy bodyline tactics?
was it Jardine or Larwood?
yebet 1 year ago
@yebet neither of them, it was an old tactic but it was Jardine's idea for this tour. Try to get a copy of Jardine's book, it is very interesting.
widlad7 1 year ago
@widlad7 Douglas Jardine: Spartan Cricketer?
Im assuming you have read it. If so, tell me a little about it before i get hold of one.
yebet 1 year ago
@yebet I've left a message about that under the Bodyline!!! film clip-sorry I have just realised I didn't reply to yebet.
widlad7 1 year ago
Border in his playing days was asked about Bodyline and he said that facing West Indies these days, EVERY match is bodyline.
AIMANALI 1 year ago
it was ok for australia to bowl bouncers at us in the twenties with gregory and mcdonald a, it all got blown out of per portion because of poor old donald bradman, he was scared shitless of it and with his connections with the press made sure they printed in the newspapers all the behind the scene stories.
it finished harold larwood no wonder he emigrated to oz after the way the mcc treated him.
fingersmolloy 1 year ago
Comment removed
ourvic 1 year ago
Larwood bowled so beautifully, one of the best actions you will ever see
harrysboy 1 year ago 2
larwood was clocked at bowling over 100mph but back then there speed test was different. but still the fastest bowler ever.
jrulez16 1 year ago
@jrulez16 Actually Larwood was timed by stopwatch at 96 mph, though with a human element in the calculation (pressing go-stop while watching delivery) we can't know how accurate it was.
Many batsmen of the day stated he was the quickest they'd ever faced, though Bradman reckoned Aboriginal Eddie Gilbert had a yard on Larwood. Gilbert operated from a very short run-up and his action was considered suspect by some.
windigo44 1 year ago
Stan mccabe...the baddest man ever to don the cap
p1nkAcid 1 year ago
A heroic innings by McCabe.
andmarkcg 1 year ago
Very disappointing video.
Bodyline or Leg-Theory was one of if not the most influential series of test cricket EVER. There is so much to the story that it really is and continues to be a fascinating and very dominate period in cricketing folklore.
Disturbed to see personal views brought into the stroy some forty years on with Lillie and Richards. 1 star
microastronomy 2 years ago 2
I've seen full vid. This is only a sliver and tack-on at end w/ Lillee/Viv was not part of original.
However, you are 100% right about impact of 1932-33 bodyline series.
Poms were deathly afraid Bradman would score 2-300 every innings, so fast leg theory was hatched in desperation.
Only Gubby Allen (among Pom bowlers & an Aus ex-pat) refused to use it.
Caused strained diplomatic relations between Aus & Britain.
IMHO best insight is in "The Bodyline Story" by Larwood himself.
windigo44 1 year ago
Check out where the first ball pitches, may be deceptive but looks about quarter of the way down!
ashliski 2 years ago
now with such equipment we have these days three fielders should be allowed behinf square on the leg instead of 2 & picthes should be made faster & greener.Then ICC doesnt need to worry about the health of test cricket-It is stupid administrators who are killing test cricket,the most beautiful formof game,by making placid pitches & putting more & more restrictions on bowlers-the day batsmen are fearful of plonkin down on front foot test cricket will be back on its feet
rajgillrajgill 2 years ago 3
If batsmen is hesitant and takes his eyes of ball it is likely that ball will hit. Most who got hit were scared and let ball hit. Sunil Gavaskar was so small and played West Endies fast bowling very well..
peacemaker185 2 years ago
Okay maybe not. He's got a sidearmish/diagonalish kind of action.
OttawaRocks 2 years ago
Upon seeing the bowling my own eyes (from the video), I think Larwood's chucking. What do you guys think?
OttawaRocks 2 years ago
He seems similar to Shoaib whose wicket taking deliveries were all chucks..
peacemaker185 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
England win a test match at Lords for the first time in 75 years. Andrew Strauss is the next Donald Bradman.
football0698 2 years ago
I'll agree with you when Strauss has the same average.
thegranddilligaf 2 years ago
yes personally body line is bad and yea its banned from the game....but....i would lyk to see any new fast bowler of thiz generation to take the risk of using it again for just 1 last time....and i swear it would make headlines all over the world that....BODY LINE IS BACK....!!! now that would be awesome right....???
chandler4bing 2 years ago
It is unlikely,as the laws regarding the number of fielders allowed behind square on the leg side were ammended following the bodyline series.I would like to see the laws regarding short piched bowling relaxed in test matches.
shiveringflower 2 years ago 2
Mitchell Johnson used it in the series against india this month. He bowled a coupla bouncers on the leg side at Ishant Sharma. Other than that his bowling was crappy.
Frunze87 2 years ago
i hate bodyline bowling if they didn't do bodyline bowling maybe don bradman average would be over 100 because of the bodyline bowling he got out on 0
adsonkool 2 years ago
My grandfathers aunt married Larwood. He emigrated to Australia and died there. He told me some stories of him, cannot believe his bowling skills
harryohharry13 2 years ago 14
I can`t believe that a man of 5ft 8` could sling a ball down like Larwood could!
In computer analysis taken from old film of Larwood bowling he was bowling at over 90mph...the speed people like Freddie and Lee are bowling at these days!
Cricket must be one of the only sports where speed (from a fast bowler)has not improved over the decades,or fast bowlers become "better". Larwood would probably still be World class even today.
TangerineGray 2 years ago 19
@TGray
Very interesting post.
I played baseball & softball for many years & have observed that pitching (our equivalent of bowling) speed has not increased today despite our players being much bigger & stronger than yesteryear's players. Strangely, the strike zone is smaller when it should have been increased. In cric the wickets should have been increased as well because the players are so much taller than they were in the past. If they had been the game would be a lot better I think.
1400deadwood 2 years ago
@TangerineGray With the straight arm action rule, it probably is hard for bowlers to bowl faster. Accommodate jerking or flexing the arm and the speeds will increase.
duhduh666 1 year ago
@TangerineGray Larwood was a remarkable bowler. Some of the reports I've read of him are amazing, and I'm sure you are right, he would be world class today.
Tragic how he was treated by the England authorities. Whilst in my opinion Leg Theory was a disgrace, Larwood only did what his captain asked of him, and that's who should have taken the blame for such unsporting conduct.
PaulMJohnson 1 year ago
@PaulMJohnson larwood wasn't in trouble for leg theory, he was in trouble for his infamous bodyline bowling, for injuring many australian batsmen and partially for cracking bert oldfield's skull. but whatever did happen, larwood was still a brilliant bowler
and from what i know, leg theory was bowling on a slightly outside leg-stump line, to infuriate the batsman and force him to play a rash shot. leg theory wasn't harmful to the batsman, it was just boring to watch and was considered cheap
xk8erbxg 1 year ago
@xk8erbxg Leg theory & bodyline are one & the same. Was used in county cricket to a limited extent, then refined & executed in Aus to keep Bradman in check.
Leg theory/bodyline has a bowler of at least fast-medium pace (Larwood, Voce, Bowes) pitch shortish balls at your ribs. Your choices were either to duck, take a hit to the body, or hook to a packed legside field.
It worked: Bradman's average in 1932-33 was half his career average & England won the Ashes back 4-1.
windigo44 1 year ago
BTW England capt Douglas Jardine knew that without Larwood he couldn't have pulled it off. After the dust settled & the team had sailed home, Jardine sent HL an ashtray inscribed: "To Harold for the Ashes--1932-33--From a grateful Skipper."
MCC later made HL an outcast after he refused to sign a prepared letter of apology. He wouldn't be anyone's scapegoat for bodyline.
windigo44 1 year ago
@TangerineGray Well Marshall, Gough, Waqar, Lindwall and a few other genuinely quick bowlers were under 6 feet tall. I don't think height is an important ingredient. Some guys skid onto you while some others get true bounce due to their height.
Imrankniazi 1 year ago
@TangerineGray 10 ppl who agree to it have not seen BRETT LEE, SHOIAB AKHTAR, SHANE BOND, SHAUN TAIT . .
shashankrajkodesia 1 year ago
@TangerineGray , Very true. I seriously think Holding was perhaps the quickest and deadliest of all.
sskgrs 11 months ago
@sskgrs Holding was a beautiful bowler....although being English myself and a teenager at the time,I maybe didn`t appreciate 'the whispering death' quite as much as I should have done!
Still on the Larwood theme.Harold Larwood was the pro at my hometown club (Blackpool) after WW2 and he had a newsagents shop in the town until he emigrated with his family to Aussie in 1950.
A plaque has been erected at Blackpool CC to commemorate this fact and his daughter came over to unveil it,which was nice.
TangerineGray 10 months ago
Please see related vid:
"Bodyline - MCC Cricketers Sail For Australia"
Shows England about to board ship for Oz in 1932.
They had no idea of the firestorm of controversy that lay ahead - resulting in strained diplomacy between nations & the changing of cricket forever after.
Note how short Larwood is, but strong as an ox - an ex-coal miner from Notts. Bill Bowes (in glasses) was a giant at 6'4".
Gubby Allen was ex-Australian.
And tell me Jardine doesn't look like Count Dracula.
windigo44 2 years ago
I am from Oz, by the way, but have no problem offering kudos to England when they outplay us.
"Cricket" is a game but also an attitude -- fair play & sportsmanship.
Bodyline WAS within the rules at the time but was unethical by most standards. As was Greg Chappel's decision to bowl underarm on the last ball to the Kiwis.
Larwood was under 5'8" and could make the ball skid very quickly off the wicket. His stock ball was the outswinger but he could often get the ball to cut back sharply.
windigo44 2 years ago
You are spot on windigo. I admire your sportsmanship. I made my earlier comment to wind you Aussies up, but your Sporting reply put me to shame. We have been put to the sword by some great Aussie sides, on rare occasions when we do beat you (as in the Rugby world cup Final 2003), than who can blame us for being over zealous. You have a young side, I am very impressed with Peter Siddle, he has lots of agression and I reckon one day he will be as good as Dennis Lillie. Good luck my friend :o)
headache1956 2 years ago
No worries, mate.
I am about your age. I remember John Snow cracking Jenner on the nut. I loved watching Snow -- he was easily the best bowler for either side in that series. I was ticked off when the idiot drunk Oz fan grabbed Snow by the arm and abused him.
Larwood was an awesome player and a decent bloke. "I'm sorry, Bertie," he said to Oldfield right away. "Not your fault, Harold," replied Oldfield.
Rugby 2003 = the best side won. Congrats there, too.
Let's have a beer sometime.
windigo44 2 years ago
A beer would be good. I think you've been unlucky in this series so far. In the 1st test, you let us off the hook even though Strauss wasted a couple of extra minutes sending the Physio on. In the 2nd test you had a few desicions go against you ie the catch off Ponting in my opinion touched the floor. Brett Lee is injured. McGrath was injured last time you were here which helped us win that series. At the moment I think you are in a transitional phase. What do you think?
headache1956 2 years ago
1st test: No matter how many runs you make, if you can't get bloody Panesar out right away at the end you don't deserve to win. Seriously.
2nd test calls? Ah, over time, half the close ones go your way and half go to your rival -- it evens out. Personally, I don't like it when losers gripe about the umps, except for the few egregious cases.
Luck = skill + effort MOST of the time.
Transitional? Only time will tell but right now all I see is inconsistency, especially with the bat.
windigo44 2 years ago
Forget Warne to Gatting as "Ball of the Century" The ball of the Century was Larwood to Bert Oldfield or John Snow to Jenner in 70-71. Nothing as sweet as taking an Aussie's fking head off
headache1956 2 years ago
Evidently, it's hard for some people to be on the losing end for so long so their only way of dealing is to toss out a little dose of hate. Like this post.
BTW, England has just beaten Oz in the 2nd test by completely outplaying them with bat & ball. Flintoff's 20-plus over spell & getting 5 for 80-odd was one of the best sustained efforts I've ever seen. Congrats to the Poms!
Ashes series are always great and hard-fought with a ton of history behind them.
But bodyline was pure drama.
windigo44 2 years ago
Aussies. Still moaning after 70 odd years.
doktorskum 2 years ago 3
haha i love watching the old black & white footage and the commentators. Just put on your poshest pom accent and say "yes indeed, the England players fear for their lives as the Australian crowd start throwing sandwiches on to the pitch".
ivangrozny27 2 years ago
it would of been better if it was the west indies doing this to england.
Sanath340 2 years ago
we got plenty of it in 1980's
Even Viv Richards, said he would not have liked to face his own West Indian attack all day
ie. Holding, Marshall, Roberts, Garner/Croft etc etc
So FUCK off will you Sanath, wherever you come from-English HATER
darkmossie633 2 years ago
the difference is the windies did it to intimidate and "work" the batsman over larwood did it because dumbass jardine didn't have a clue on how to get bradman out.
Sanath340 2 years ago
quite wrong
"Bodyline" was aimed at the ribs, and Jardine found a weakness in Bradman
West Indies bowlers in the 1980's went for the THROAT and the HEAD delivery-a lot more cynical and dangerous in days without protective helmets
Even V.Richards said he would not have liked to face that sort of onslaught throughout an entire days cricket
Holding was a fantastic bowler, poetry
in motion I must say, "whispering death"
was his nickname I believe
watch him bowling at Brian Close
darkmossie633 2 years ago
As far as I'm concerned Jardine was the only captain and larwood the only bowler to truly tame Bradman, which makes them greats of the game. And this video shows that, bodyline or no bodyline, Larwood was particularly tasty - brilliant action, and those deliveries must be around the 92 mph mark.
jcrawley1 2 years ago 2
fuck aussies
harrowrdboy 2 years ago
Larwoods action is a thing of beauty .
aks73 2 years ago 3
the aussies are still moaning about leg theory.
grincher2006 2 years ago
cos it was potentially lethal
irishgodfatherchris 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I love when the dude got his head fractured. =]
RyuuHatake 2 years ago
it's a pity there is not that much footage of this series but still a great video to watch
sachintendulkar23 2 years ago 3
i dont see why people cant have a swing at bodyline like all thats gunna happen is u get hit with a cricket ball but i spose they didnt have helmetts but nowadays u see people gettin hit with cricket balls all the time
paramoreistheshiz 2 years ago
they dont like it up em
DAZZLE69BAYONETS 2 years ago
Comment removed
mlteyt 2 years ago
Comment removed
mlteyt 2 years ago
Comment removed
mlteyt 2 years ago
lets just edit some footage together and call it bodyline eh?! 1 star
charliebad 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Warne is an ordinary bowler and got only tailenders at the expense of McGrath. His name is Mr TAIL-ENDER,
Warne took duiretics, which is a masking agents for drugs. He took duiretics because he took drugs and to cover it.
Warne is a cheat and a chucker.
He got away from chucking because He is an aussie, white and a racist.
Warne took diuretics, which is a masking agents for drugs. He took diuretics because he took drugs and to cover it
stj1003 2 years ago
This old footage from almost 80 years ago shows how different the 'culture' of cricket was back then.
Notice how there is virtually no celebration at all by the bowler and his teammates when a wicket falls, even when it's Bradman's. Very different from the back-slapping and jumping around of today.
Larwood's nickname was 'Loll' as he was always eating hard lollies (candy).
It's surprising that Jardine, a 'gentleman amateur', never considered it ungentlemanly to bowl at batsmen's heads.
windigo44 2 years ago 2
What religion/denomination did Jardine belong to?
thelonedissenter 2 years ago
I've read a lot re 'bodyline' & its backstory but don't recall a mention of Jardine's religious affiliation.
A good guess would be the Anglican Church/Church of England, if he were religious at all.
Jardine was well-educated and 'properly-bred' & was of sufficient means that he played as an amateur. He & a few other 'thinking heads' devised 'bodyline' specifically to counter the run-making ability of Bradman, the scoring prodigy of the day. It worked in that England won the series handily.
windigo44 2 years ago
windigo44 - thanks for the comments.
Have a read a lot of Cricket History? :)
thelonedissenter 2 years ago
In the 70s as a cricket-crazy kid in Oz I saw this very documentary on TV & was riveted by the sheer drama of it. Had all kinds of archetypal characters, a 'good vs. evil' battle, & ultimately developed into an international incident with heads of state exchanging rhetoric.
I read "The Larwood Story" (his autobiography) 3 times & had it virtually memorized.
I can't think of a set of incidents in the history of any sport that are as dramatic & polarizing as 'bodyline' series was in 1932-33.
windigo44 2 years ago
I don't know if 'handily' is the most appropriate adverb. That England had to stoop so low in order to beat the Australians speaks rather more highly of the Australians than it does anything else.
Zarathustra06 2 years ago
Many cricket pundits state that Stan McCabe's innings in the first test at Sydney was one of the greatest ever.
With Larwood, Voce and Bowes bowling very fast at his upper body and to a packed leg field, McCabe fearlessly cut and hooked his way to 187 not out. He actually told his parents, who were in attendance that day, not to come onto the field if he got hit.
All these decades later it's hard for us to imagine just how volatile the mood was on the field and among the spectators then.
windigo44 2 years ago
Two facts..
Don Bradman said: There were two teams out there today, and only one team was playing cricket. And this was on Friday the 13th!
Hughesyhfc 2 years ago
actually it was the Australian wicket keeper Bert Oldfield who said that after being hit on the head.
im doing a case study on bodyline:)
sailtheseaofcheese 2 years ago
Sorry to disagree, but it was the Australian captain, Bill Woodfull who made the remark. Listen at 3:38.
daveclarkdrums 2 years ago
"There are two teams out there, one is playing cricket. The other is making no attempt to do so."
It's impressive that McCabe managed to score a century off of this tactic.
Hartman4Guiness 2 years ago
Riveting footage.
titsmcgee852 2 years ago
Again, sorry to monopolize the commentary here.
As a cricket-obsessed teenager in the 1970s I read all I could about the sport, especially the 'bodyline series.'
To this day, the details of it are still clear in my memory.
windigo44 3 years ago
By the way, the bowler in slo-mo at 2:40 is not Larwood but Gubby Allen, Australian-born, who emigrated to England and ultimately played for them.
Allen was a 'gentleman amateur' and, as he was not 'paid' to play cricket, he could not be compelled by Captain Douglas Jardine to bowl fast-leg theory.
Larwood and Voce were blue-collar boys and cricket was their only source of income. They felt they had no option but to do Jardine's bidding.
Back then, the aristocrats called the shots.
windigo44 3 years ago
At 2.40 or so look how the umpire moves! Wouldn't be allowed now!
headofwords 3 years ago
Mate ever heard of the back foot bowling rule? That's why he is moving like that.
mkmkhi 2 years ago
I know the tape might be speeded up but Larwood still looks seriously fast.
headofwords 3 years ago
Larwood's delivery was once timed by stopwatch (the 'tech' of the day) and the velocity was determined to be 96 mph (154 kph), however accurate or inaccurate.
He said that whenever he wanted to send down a real scorcher, he took a pinch of 'snuff' (ground tobacco) from his pocket and inhaled deeply while walking back to his mark.
Many well-known batsmen in county and test cricket said he was the fastest they ever faced.
Ray Lindwall said he modeled his own action after Larwood's.
windigo44 3 years ago
I didn't mean to bore anyone with all the postings but the "bodyline" series of 1932-33 was one of the most dramatic sport events of all time, for any sport. It changed cricket forever after.
At the time, leg theory was not against the rules though there is little doubt it posed a clear ethical dilemma -- using Larwood and the others to bowl directly at the upper bodies of the batsmen with a packed leg field.
windigo44 3 years ago
In the last test, Larwood broke a bone in his foot and had to finish the over rolling the ball underarm to the batsman (I forget who it was), who just patted the ball back to him. He never fully recovered his peak form after that.
Larwood emigrated to Australia and said he never received a harsh word from any Australians.
Despite the stigma of "bodyline", he was one of the all-time greats, known for his almost perfect delivery action.
windigo44 3 years ago
Bill Bowes and Gubby Allen were the other two pacemen for England. Allen, I believe, was an amateur sportsman, and refused to bowl leg theory, despite Captain Douglas Jardine's requests to do so.
After hitting Oldfield in the skull, Larwood ran up to him and said, "I'm really sorry, Bertie." Oldfield said it wasn't Larwood's fault although he did suffer a hairline fracture of the skull.
Larwood said, "I only ever bowled really fast once, and that was in Australia in 1932-33."
windigo44 3 years ago
No, tasty.
calzoid71 2 years ago
Larwood was a coal miner in Nottinghamshire before he made it in county cricket. He credited much of his upper body bowling strength to the strong back he developed working in the mines.
He was under 5'8" (172 cm), very short for an express speed bowler. He'd skid balls through with the wind at his back while the left-handed Voce, well over 6' tall, liked to bowl from the opposite end to get more swing.
windigo44 3 years ago
My great grandfather used to go to school with Larwood and I remember him telling me he used to practice his bowling for hours on end down alleyways of the terraced housing of the Nuncargate area of Kikrby-In-Ashfield where he grew up.
Also how when playing locally on the field near Nuncargate he used to take a run up to the crease through a gap in the hedge, it was that long, imagine that coming towards you!
StagnumPI 2 years ago
Fucking Poms cant win a fair game
666satansnumber 3 years ago
Gentlemen, stop this nonesensical fight between Aussies and the English. Shall we appreciate cricket objectively as a sport, for God's sake.
And before you start cursing me, I'd like to add that this is coming from a bloke that's neither British nor Aussie.
By the way, was Harold Larwood quicker than Snow/Willis. He might have been the quickest English bowler ever. I believe Devon Malcolm and Frank Tyson would be up there too.
Imrankniazi 3 years ago 2
wtf was 0:43..
cram2481 3 years ago
this was a brutal match ffs
truepatman 3 years ago
dude, ppl are taking this pom thing far too seriously...
masterchief9064 3 years ago
Whats your problem with Australia ?. Someone just doesn't hate another person for no reason. Whats your problem mate ?. What happened ?. I think you are jealous. You are jealous with what we have done as a people, that those stinking fucking scumbag criminals were sent to that discusting wild island to rot. Rot they didn't. They changed that "sandpit" to one of the greatest and most prosperous countries of today.
iceborn21 3 years ago
This shows how evil minded and crooked the poms are.
123market456 3 years ago
yeah we had too many crooks over here so we rounded them up, stuck them in cages like animals and shipped them liked a crate of bananas to this sandpit to fight amongst themselves..they then began breeding and produced the filthy pigs now representing the cheating aussie cricket team you see nowadays...who are despised worldwide for their cheating tactis and poor sportsmanship. You cant blame the aussies, blame their forefathers and their criminal perspective on life which is prevalant today.
maxlogica 3 years ago 2
Not every Australian's ancestors were convicts mate. Anyway just because we absolutely smashed u in the 2006-2007 Ashes series u accuse us of cheating and then we win the World Cup without losing, our 4th and 5th batsmen hardly got to bat because we had already won in that time. Pommy basted
JIGGA299 3 years ago
agrees with openfold...I love watching Larwood bowl, a beautiful action and scary to face. The chucking controversy was instigated by Bradman, who played a clip of Larwood bowling, but showed it in reverse (i.e so it appears he is bowling left arm) and said to the ICC "what do you think of that?" (from Jack Fingletons excellent book on Vic Trumper)
jagdpanther1944 3 years ago
Look at Larwood's bowling action ... at the point, when his right hand is about to do the "catapult" action and follow it through all the way when the right hand reaches the hightest point ... it is the classic "Chucking" ... a pre-mediated, "hesitant" and deliberated motion, to ensure the cricket ball does the work of the cannonball. A most un-gentlemanly and unsportsmanlike performance.
telectroscope 3 years ago
This was the notorious series. Nice to see on video.
sonofthedestroyer 3 years ago
Both teams suck and broke the spirit of the game. When I first heard about it I thought it was actually quite smart, but full on bouncers when people arn't even wearing helmets is far too much, some of those players got struck quite bad.
daspinguru 3 years ago
Interesting juxtaposition....Aussies whingeing on again about Bodyline, and Aussie commentators giggling when Lillee tries to decapitate an equally helmetless Viv Richards. Hypocrites.
openfold 3 years ago
openfold, have you ever heard of revenge?!
nbb1603 3 years ago
Yes, though what Viv Richards had done to the Aussies, apart from outplay them, I don't know...and Telectroscope, you're talking bollocks. That is not chucking...but one of the best bowling actions in history
openfold 3 years ago
no it isnt it was plain dirty, bowling like that at people with no protection!! if bradman hadnt existed the dirty poms wouldnt of used the tactic
nbb1603 3 years ago
Revenge against West Indies for Bodyline. You are a moron. Are you Australian?
nigkingoi 3 years ago
ok nigkingroi you are sounding like a pom
nbb1603 3 years ago
And you, an idiot.
nigkingoi 3 years ago
Actually nbb1603 you are a 'pom' because all Aussies are the descendants of British Prisoners sent to a hot island to rot.
pete667 3 years ago
noo nott all, we can be descendants from anywhere
nbb1603 3 years ago
Jardine was playing as a professional in a sport that back then was more a social sport, but it was still sport with rules. He did what every sportsman does, he expploited the rules and its something that would have been done at some stage. And just as the underarm ball was, it wasnt illegal to do and as with this, the officials rightly changed the laws. And no one today can critise what happened then because there isnt one single team who can say they play within the spirit of the game anymore
tigerrish 4 years ago
bodyline ! Just not Cricket.
kamaz123456 4 years ago
more fun to wtach..and i bet to play.
itsovabliss 4 years ago
This was legal bowling!! cant see the problem witht the theory... nobody ever wanted to hurt anyone you can gaurantee that... it was devised to prey on the batsmans weakness. You can see the players were very distressed to see the batsman get hurt!
Lots of the wickets in the series fell to balls that were barely above stump high.
Larwood was extremely fast... would love to see him in todays era of accurate speed guns!!
dynamite1976 4 years ago
thats sooo cheap oldfeild is a tail ender and they still bowl bodyline and gets hit in the head
jimmyrizza 4 years ago
Nonsense. The ball that hit him was a slower ball and pitched fuller than the previous delivery ( which had gone for 4 through the covers ) bowled to a conventional field. The fact was he intended to cut then changed his mind and attempted a pull, unfortunately he lost sight of the ball and nicked it onto his temple - obviously the worst possible place to be struck. Oh and FYI, he was a keeper who batted at 7 with an average of around 24 IIRC, no great hitter but hardly a bunny either.
chefzappa 3 years ago
fuk thats dirty as
y the fuk wuld u even reort 2 dat
i thought the under arm bowling was bad
fukn trying 2 nock the cunt out
lary911 4 years ago
brett lee bowls at the batsman nearly every ball
togphags 4 years ago