A must read for cricket lovers- Review 'Bodyline Autopsy' by David Frith

Genius with a tactical masterstroke or villain who broke the spirit of the game?. Was leg theory acceptable or truly despicable?..These questions about Douglas Jardine and his extraordinary 'Bodyline' bowling form the crux of this superbly researched book..

Frith is an eminent historian and his sense of facts and trivia is brilliant and well in evidence throughout the book. The author has woven a superb tale around cricket's biggest controversy and the plot is presented with exceptional attention to detail.

Frith starts with talking about the significance of the series fifty years on and recollects views of one and all. He does adopt a fairly neutral stance with occasional references to how much he loathed Jardine and the tactics..He does however point that similar bowling has been on view in modern times as well referring to the intimidatory tactics of the West Indian pace barrage. The origins of 'leg theory' are brought to notice with mentions of early hostile bowling by Jack Gregory and even as early as in the 19th century...

It is however, unfair to say that this book is an attempt to describe only the series and analyse it. Frith has not only reconstructed the entire fateful tour chronologically, but also provides the reader with rare facts and information about the players, the team and the venues..

'Bodyline', as a tactic was devised to stop the run glut of the prodigy Don Bradman, and he remains the central figure in much of the discusssion..The detailed description and analysis of the tour, primarily the Test matches is a must read..Stan McCabe's surreal 187 against the hostile Harold Larwood and Bill Voce in the first Test when the Australians missed Bradman is given its due credit..Bradman's much awaited return in Melbourne and his famous first ball duck, which stunned the crowds..Frith packs in superb trivia and off field incidents such as when a man left his house in a huff on Bradman's dismissal only to spot some boys drowning and managing to rescue them..Bradman's top notch century in the second innings, with all the strokeplay which set up the win for the hosts is superbly described..

The third Test in Adelaide, which made everyone sit up and take notice of the 'Bodyline' bowling is given a great deal of focus..The injuries to Woodfull and Oldfield and the remorseless approach of Jardine are brought to light..The relations between the Australian board and the MCC deteriorated rapidly following this match and the series of messages exchanged are shown..Woodfull's 'famous quote' being leaked to the press and the accusations flying around even after half a century forms a major topic..

The last two Tests and the unsavoury incidents, though fewer than in Adelaide are brilliantly portrayed..The telegrams exchanged between the two boards are discussed..

The final part of the book deals with reactions and how the tactic and the man who propounded it- Douglas Jardine are viewed years on..With the passing away of Bradman, none of the players in the infamous series survive and the end of the book is a pleasant conclusion which focuses on how time changes people and their views (not all of them though)..

For the fantastic attention to detail, brilliant portrayal of the central characters especially Bradman, Jardine and Larwood, the facts and trivia..the superb description of the Test matches and life outside it and most of all the love for history sets this book apart and makes it a truly magnificent read-one which is a must own for any cricket lover and a fan os the game's rich history in particular..

The shining light..

I rarely seem to get time to sit and have a nice chat with my parents with this hectic schedule everyday..Today I made it a point I must try and spend some quality time with them..We started off with some random topic and digressed which is often the case..Mom told me how her memory seemed to be on the wane in recent times and she attributed this to lack of working with numbers and excessive use of the calculator..While we were thus pondering about short term memory and long term memory, mom mentioned the extraordinary ability of my granny (paternal granny) to recollect and remember the most obscure incidents from the past and her attention to the most minute of details. I have seen many people with an exceptional memory, even an elephantine memory, but cannot really think of anybody in the same breadth as my gran..It did not stop with her memory. She proved that lack of education was not a barrier for knowledge..I can vouch that almost every second fact I have known or learned in history, mythology, Sanskrit, Indian culture, Carnatic tradition and singers and so on and so forth can be attributed to her..

I was sitting in a Starbucks in California two years back when I got the worst possible news.I had known that she was ailing but could not make the trip to India to see her, talk to her and comfort her in those last days..it is a regret that will live with me for the rest of my life..She had had a premonition a week or two earlier and despite wanting to see me badly, she knew it would not be possible..she made sure she would do the next best thing though..Her voice that day on the phone was full of life..I could feel the underlying pain though..Her usual questions- did you eat?..how is job search?..hope all is well etc were followed by 15-20min on her favourite topics...The Vishnu Sahasranamam, the Mahabharata, the Gita itself and so on..I was possibly the only person around her to whom she could talk about what she loved the most..

She loved the fact that I had an affinity for Sanskrit and despite her not having any formal training in the language, her rendition of complex shlokas was impeccable to say the least..her knowledge of the scriptures, the mythology, the Puranas and many other cultural aspects was beyond belief..I was blessed for I was almost entirely raised by her and all this knowledge passed on to me..One might say that these topics lie in the domain of most people of that generation, but this would never do justice to her voracious appetite for knowledge..Be it ancient Indian history, the world war, the Indian freedom struggle, modern Indian events- she knew them all...I can vividly recall Operation Bluestar and the details of that fateful event, the various assassinations she told me about..For someone who had not even a high school education, she was fluent in at least 5-6 languages...her numerical ability was exceptional and I never once saw her use a calculator...

I wasn't present physically, but heard that people came from all over...nearly every relative and friend was present the week before she passed away..The enormous respect she commanded was visible..She taught me nearly all I know...my interest in Sanskrit-not limited to the Sahasrananam, shlokas, the Gita etc, Carnatic music- the names of the maestros- Semmangudi, Ariyakudi, Palghat Mani, MS and the other greats and their superb songs and Indian culture in general can be solely credited to her..believe it or not- she imparted most of the early cricket knowledge to me..Match scores and details I always got by virtue of a single phone call home..People still fail to fathom how she was able to grasp the nuances and details of the game and actually watch it to give me the score..

Quite simply, one of the most knowledgeable people I have ever met in my life..Her grasp of myriad topics and in depth idea of each made her truly special..In the Mahabharata, Lord Krishna asks Yudhishtira to meet and acquire all the knowledge from the omniscient Bhishma he can before the great Bhishma left the world..In a sense, I have been fortunate to have been able to at least gain a part of the encyclopaedic knowledge that my granny possessed..

Best in the shorter form..

More than 17000 runs, 46 hundreds and 93 half centuries, five scores of over 150 and innumerable man of the match awards. Surely wouldn't it be considered sacrilegious to even wonder if there can be a better batsman than Sachin Tendulkar? But cliched as it may sound, that numbers tell only half the story, it is true. When seen in the right context, i.e. when compared to the achievements of the legendary Vivian Richards, probably the only cricketer who merits the comparison with Tendulkar in one day cricket, the numbers might just tend to read rather differently.

The comparisons are made in a simple manner for most aspects. For example, if player A averages 100 and player B averages 110, B scores 1.1 points to A's 1 point. For all factors, the ratio of the parameter is taken to calculate the points. The sum of points for each factor is used to determine who has been the better player. Of course, these need not be the sole parameters to determine the best player. I would definitely look forward to useful comments and suggestions.

Games against the minnows (many in Tendulkar's time) and Zimbabwe for Richards have been eliminated from the analysis despite it being more probable for lower ranked teams to compete far better in an abbreviated format.

** accuracy to third decimal

1. The best way to judge a top class player is to see how much ahead of his peers he is in terms of his average and strike rate in ODI's. Tendulkar, in his time has averaged 43.80 and scores at 85.66 per hundred balls. This record is stupendous considering his longevity, but in an era where the batting has become a lot easier with more relaxed rules, field restrictions and flatter tracks, Tendulkar's average is 1.501 times better than the overall average runs per wicket during his time in international cricket (29.18). His strike rate is 1.093 times the average for the period of his career (78.33). The sum of these two important parameter ratios comes to 2.594.

In the period Richards played, the conditions were far tougher to score in and the rules were not as skewed in favour of batsmen as they are in present day limited overs cricket. on the flip side, the fielding was not as athletic as present day cricketers. Richards averaged 47.21 in an era when the overall average per wicket was 28.29 and his strike rate was an exceptional 90.14 when the overall scoring rate was just 72.33. The corresponding ratios for Richards come up to be 1.668 and 1.246. Overall, the sum is 2.914.

Marginally, this factor points to Richards being the more dominant batsman. He averaged higher despite an ultra aggressive game in a phase when the general scoring rate was far lower.


2. Top ODI players stand out by virtue of the number of half centuries and centuries that they score. In 407 innings, Tendulkar has 41 centuries and 87 fifties which comes up to 128 scores in the category of over 50. The number of 50 plus scores per innings comes up to 0.314. Richards scored fewer centuries, 11 in total but 45 half centuries. The number of 50 plus scores per innings comes to 0.337. Tendulkar and Richards are almost level but for a very small difference on this front.


3. Comparing the performances of Tendulkar and Richards at home, away and neutral venues throws up some very interesting results. Tendulkar averages 46.25 at home, 37.90 away and 47.21 in neutral venues. In the matches involving Tendulkar, India have averaged 36.33 at home, 29.39 away and 29.88 at neutral venues. The dominance of the batsman is calculated by summing the ratios of his average to the team average. The figure for Tendulkar is 4.142.
He has by far been India's greatest in all three scenarios. For Richards, though the figures read very different. His home, away and neutral averages are 36.59, 56.80 and 38.80 while the team performances in the same period are 40.89, 31.26 and 33.50. He was the best in away games, but his record in the West indies was below par. In this aspect, it can be said that Tendulkar handled the home pressure much better. Tendulkar's away performance though falls well short of Richards' figures but the performance on neutral grounds favours Tendulkar. The corresponding parameter for Richards is 3.870. Overall, Tendulkar has proven to be the better player in all conditions when the performance relative to the team they played in is considered. This also points to the fact that India had a much weaker batting line up for years when compared to the mighty Caribbean team.

4. As a captain, both the players did struggle to match their performances during the games when they did not have the burden of captaincy. Tendulkar's average of 37.90 during captaincy is much lower than his mark of 45.03 when not a captain. Richards averaged 38.81 and 56.80 during the phases of captaincy and when not a captain. When the ratios are calculated, Richards scores 2.313 while Sachin scores 2.000 (base score).

5. The clear indicator of how big a match winner a batsman is can be made from the difference between his averages in wins and defeats. Richards averages 57.44 in wins and 29.43 in losses which is a difference of 28.01 while Tendulkar's corresponding figure is 22.30 (55.72 in wins and 33.42 in defeats). Viv Richards probably was the greatest match winner in ODI history and this is reflected here. The score here is 1 (base score) for Tendulkar and 1.248 for Richards.

6. Batting first or chasing, both these batsmen have been superb. Tendulkar averages 44.85 and 42.72 while batting first and chasing respectively while Richards averages 48.82 and 45.36. The ratio calculation comes to 2.150 for Richards and 2 for Tendulkar.

7. The greatest measure of batsman's domination in ODI's is his performance in the World Cup and the next biggest tournament for years was the triangular series in Australia. Richards of course played in far more games down under than Tendulkar while the little master has figured in more World Cup matches. Richards averages 66.46 in 21 WC games and 46.60 in 65 ODI games in Australia. Tendulkar on the other hand averages 45.11 in 28 WC games and 37.39 in 35 games down under. The ratio calculations gives Richards a score of 2.686.
Though Tendulkar has had a huge impact in big tournaments, Richards rules the roost when it comes to performance in major games.


8. Viv Richards was widely recognised as the finest player in big games. He revelled in finals of most tournaments and rarely failed when it mattered. His average of 55.73 with one ton and nine fifties in 18 finals is quite astounding. Tendulkar's performance is awesome too with an average of 52.51 in 38 games with 5 hundreds and 10 fifties. In this case, the difference between the two is negligible.


9. In their favourite positions i.e. Richards at 3&4 and Tendulkar at 2, they average 50.68 and 50.29 respectively. Again, almost nothing to choose from.


10. Longevity factor- Sachin Tendulkar has played 442 games in about 20.5 years which is approximately 21 games a year while Richards played 187 games in about 17 years which is 11 a year. Tendulkar has endured a far heavier international workload and his ability to stay consistently at the top of his game is commendable. His score in this regard is 1.909 to Richards' 1.


11. Ultimately the man of the match awards depict the true match winning ability of a player and with ODI's being more of a batsman's game they are far more indicative.
Tendulkar has a scarcely believable 61 awards in 442 games while Richards incredibly is third in the all time list with 31 awards from just 187 games. His awards per innings is slightly better than Tendulkar and he scores 0.044 in this case.

When all the points are added, the resulting final score is

Viv Richards: 16.562

Sachin Tendulkar: 15.959

An incredibly interesting and close comparison sees Viv Richards pip Tendulkar to be the finest ODI batsman ever. Both are very nearly balanced in every regard and just a glance at the entire process shows how difficult it has been to pick the best. In the end, it might just point to the fact that Richards nicks it because he performed more often when it mattered and was also a little more fortunate than Tendulkar to be part of a more consistent and better team for most of his career.