Chappell's Ashes Captains: Douglas Jardine

[@philipraiswell3570]

Jardine conjured up a plan to counter Bradman, and had the ideal bowler to implement it in Larwood. It's just a shame Larwood had to pay such a heavy price because he was only doing what his captain asked him to do. It's part of sport to look at how you can play on opposition weaknesses and do something different. I'm impressed by Chappell here.

[@anishpadhye7006]

Yeah.... The same thing was said by Boycs in his video on Harold Larwood. He said that Jardine saw Larwood bowling for Notts during a county match and was awestruck by his line and length and the pace he generated off his bowling. And as far as the uncovered Australian pitches of that era were concerned with uneven bounce and flat belters, Douglas Jardine's plan can be termed as a masterplan to counter attack Bradman and Woodfull and Co.'s Australia. But it was an utter shame that Larwood got such a heavy punishment for the Bodyline series....

[@infidelhindu]

Agree w/ Chappell here, and am impressed that he took the contrariant position here, even as an Australian, who might be expected to have a knee jerk reaction to Bodyline

[@vantheman1238]

As a Brit I love listening to Chappelli. Great cricketer, great captain and the man who took Australia to the summit of world cricket in the 1970’s.

[@Bernie8330]

Don't tell Ian Botham that.

[@robertcottam8824]

@@Bernie8330 Apart from Brexidiots, nobody gives a shite about Botham any more. He’d probably be ok with a slice of pineapple on his chops. Very fatty, though.

[@NPA1001]

Ian Chappell has always spoke his mind with honesty, now you may not agree with him but I have never heard him lie or prevaricate, and I'm English. Talks a lot of sense here.

[@philpryor7524]

Sense from the dense? He's excusing his arsehole brother, badly.

[@Bernie8330]

Great word that 'prevaricate' ... I had to google its meaning.

[@infidelhindu]

@@philpryor7524 No, he's consistent. The job of a captain is to win within the parameters of the laws of cricket. If one has issues with underarm deliveries, field placement and so on, get the laws changed. Ian Chappell is consistent and supports both 🇦🇺 and 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 using the same logic, which is what one would expect from a person who is logically consistent

[@philpryor7524]

@@infidelhindu Those without morals or ethics, triumphal and egofixated people, will agree...

[@infidelhindu]

@@philpryor7524 Those things are encoded in the laws of cricket. If one wants the bible to be a part of it, the MCC should have put it in. In these 2 cases, they actually later did outlaw them in reaction to those events

[@raghuraman_r]

When I saw 'Bodyline' series on TV, I was actually wondering what wrong did Jardine do, especially when I realised that there was no rule on bouncers then? If I were to be a captain, I would definitely follow Jardine's approach for sure. I dont why we have to mix up 'sportiveness' with 'winning'.

[@infidelhindu]

Also, in a subsequent series against the Windies, where this time Bodyline was used against England, Jardine proved his point that it can be played by batting against Martindale and Constantine and making 127. He didn't protest the same tactics being used against himself

[@Bernie8330]

@@infidelhindu Mind you, Martindale and Constantine bowling bodyline would be the equivalent of Eldine Baptiste and Bernard Julian bowling it, but yeah, Jardine certainly could take what he dished out.

[@infidelhindu]

@@Bernie8330 I'd love a fantasy Bodyline-rules England vs Windies, w/ the latter having Marshall, Ambrose, Holding and Garner, while the England batting lineup would be Boycott, Amiss, Jardine, Robin Smith, Alan Lamb, Alec Stewart and Les Ames as keeper/batsman. It should be a fascinating contest, w/ no _real_ physical injuries incurred. For bowlers, England could have Larwood, Trueman, Willis and Tyson

[@jamesbain650]

Douglas Jardine was of SCOTTISH descent and a great captain of England at cricket.He died from cancer contracted from a tick bite.He worked behind German lines in the War and was a most courageous man,He was castigated for using Larwood to nullify Bradman’s skills.He won the series 4-1.Let us praise his skills!

[@FionaMacdonald-p9p]

He only ever lost 1 test,winning 9 and drawing 5.Second most successful captain statistically.His ashes were scattered in Scotland.

[@robertcottam8824]

I’m sorry about the Scottish link.

[@FionaMacdonald-p9p]

That`s the kind of Nigel comment I would expect.What what old boy.@@robertcottam8824

[@stephenhodgson3506]

What people often ignore is that shortly afterwards the West Indies toured England and copied Jardines tactics. The difference was that unlike Bradman, Jardine never once complained.

[@barrythebloke592]

Not only that he hit his only test century against it. He was hit several times and never once flinched!

[@lonestar6709]

Jardine was hit several times, and didn't even wince. You gotta hand it to him, he was hard as nails, and took the doses of his own medicine.

[@Bernie8330]

@@lonestar6709 For balance, the West Indies bowlers were nothing like Larwood, but yeah, Jardine would not have complained had they been.

[@infidelhindu]

Actually, from what I read on the Cricinfo page on that match - 2nd test at Manchester, Jardine managed to evade both physical injury and getting out to rash shots. He was the 8th wicket to fall, while the 11th man was injured. England finished just 1 run behind Windies in that innings

[@Mark27472]

@@lonestar6709 I believe it was Hedley Verity who said he was the bravest man he ever met.

[@thefalsenumber9739]

"Cricket is battle and service and sport and art" Douglas Jardine.

[@tryarunm]

He should have added 'subservient to the need of the empire even to the extent of employing brutality when facing certain defeat against insurmountable odds.'

[@markbailey1970]

Spot on - it's about time the truth of 'Bodyline' is aired properly rather than the nonsense spouted by Australians and their misguided allies. I wish the BBC would air the 1983 40 Minutes programme when a number of those involved were interviewed - Wyatt, Allen (although he was a nob), Larwood, Bowes - though Bradman did not take part (what a surprise) - it was a very balanced programme

[@andrewmclean6216]

What was the program called, I'd like to look it up. Thanks for the heads up

[@jaketowler9290]

At the end of the day it’s clever tactics. As a captain and team you have nullify the!threats and strengths of the opposition and if Bradman didn’t play the short ball/bouncer as well as other styles of bowling then you may as well pinpoint that weakness if it’s within the rules of the game. But the fact that Larwood was ostracised after not apologising for bowling in the way that was decided by his captain is disgraceful.

[@infidelhindu]

Yeah, the apology directive should have been served to Jardine, although Chappelli is right: it was the fault of the administrators for not moving quickly to outlaw it

[@vantheman1244]

Well said Ian

[@malbarlow4991]

respect to you Ian

[@andywilley3041]

Well said Ian...... You talk a lot of sense here... I thought most aussies were anti Jardine.... This said if he'd have been an aussies perhaps others down under would judge him differently..

[@jcrawley1]

@MeZepFan Bert Oldfield wasn't quite a tailender, and when he was hit, Larwood wasn't bowling bodyline. Oldfield admitted it was his own fault.

[@Bernie8330]

Also Oldfied edged the ball, and, born in 1894, he also served on the western front.

[@studier2006]

Mr Chappell makes good points about the captaincy of Jardine and the way he used the laws of cricket to his advantage. Another point, Douglas Jardine was a SCOTSMAN who captained the England cricket team. I know Jardine was born in India to Scottish parents and all his children had Scottish names. In my humble opinion we should have had a GB cricket team, a real shame.

[@Bernie8330]

Would your great britain team also include a certain new zealander?

[@infidelhindu]

Did he have any kids? The movie showed his wife leaving him to go to Palestine as she was an Egyptologist. After that, he took part in the war behind enemy lines, and after it, lived in Switzerland until he died in 1958. Did he re-marry and have kids?

[@tryarunm]

I would love to hear what Allan Border thinks of Jardine.

[@Bernie8330]

I doubt his views would be any different to Chappelli's.

[@jcrawley1]

What Jardine did wrong was basically wear a harlequin cap and beat Australia at cricket. Aussies don't like getting beat, so they have to whinge about it.

[@ashashroff1700]

Well said Mate.

[@ashashroff6351]

Well said IC.

[@geoffreypayne6867]

The England team of 32/33 was vastly superior to Aust in terms of depth of talent..but of course Bradman was a freak who was the difference between 1930.1938.

[@simontrencher8245]

Geoffrey Payne I've never heard what you say said, but is true as far as I can tell. Australia had a good batting line up ( in addition to Bradman) but so did England. We had a great leggie in O'Reilly but our pace attack was pedestrian in comparison to Larwood , Voce , Bowes and Allen. In the 1936/37 tour of Australia, the result was 3/2 Australia with no bodyline. Chances are therefore, England could have won 1932/33 anyway...

[@Bernie8330]

@@simontrencher8245 And England would have been 3-0 up in 36/37 but for Stan McCabe's incredible 63 on the Melbourne gluepot in the 3rd, to enable Australia to reach 200. And yet, somehow the overrated Wisden, in their complete lack of wisdom, deemed Bradman's 3rd innings 270 was the greatest innings of all-time, even though he waited until the pitch had dried into a featherbed to go in with the lead already past 200. But for McCabe and Fingleton's runs and time at the crease in the first dig, Australia's second innings would have been over by the time they reached that 200 lead, and then England would have had the much improved pitch to bat on knocking off such a meagre target.

[@simontrencher8245]

@@Bernie8330 I forget who wrote the wrote the book, but I read about the 1936/37 Ashes series in my teens. Fascinating. You are correct about Bradmans 270 - he sent in the tail end/lower end batsman (as sacrificial lambs) before the recognised batsmen, to ensure the good batsmen batted on a drier/better wicket.

[@saganspirit]

He's bang-on, it's a shame that Larwood took the flak

[@mrtecsom6951]

Englands greatest captain and Englands greatest bowler

[@jair9474]

Aussies are just annoyed that the captain of England (Jardine ) proved to be tougher, braver, and smarter than their golden boy (Don Bradman).

[@vantheman1238]

Well said Sir. Bradman didn’t fancy it and could see his career would deteriorate against fast short pitched bowling. The great Stan McCabe scores a brilliant hundred in the series and Bill Voce said “why didn’t Bradman do that”. He didn’t do it because he didn’t fancy it. That being said he did average 56 in the series although Larwood got him out for fun.

[@Arjun-ej7fj]

@@vantheman1238 well Bradman avg...the best in that series among Australians....he scored a 103 in the second test...as a lone warrior...infact Bradman played very well in contrast to the others on his team( even better than Mcabe) but his performance in that series was the worst compared to his others....

[@nikunjdixit1175]

@@vantheman1238 Well, Bradman did score a matchwinning 103 in the second test against Bodyline, which was the only test Australia won in that series. And the famous injury incidents of that tour did not include him. Given that he averaged 56 on that tour, its hardly something to criticize Bradman about.

[@yeah381]

I don't think he should be conflating bodyline with the underarm incident. The underarm went well beyond anything a reasonable, rational captain would do and brought aussie cricket into total disgrace for an insignificant victory. Bodyline was a brilliant, if somewhat controversial, tactic which won the ashes and neutered the Bradman run machine.

[@aaronlaird5136]

You think bowling an underarm is more unsporting than ordering the kind of deliveries that broke men's skulls, jaws, hands, and ribs? Just imagine what the MCC would have done if the Australians went and played leg theory in England? There would have been unfettered disgust and outrage - and that would have been precisely the right response. The underarm incident was disgusting, insulting, and cheap - but it was just a one-off move, not a whole team-wide tactic involving targeting the man and not the wicket. Jardine was a born-to-rule posh prick and and a petulant snot-nose who threw out generations of sportsmanship because he couldn't stand to lose and, since the rules were subsequently changed to prevent the tactic he used, denying would be pointless.

[@philipr1567]

aaron laird "targeting the man and not the wicket" - isn't that what pace bowlers have been doing for years? It's called bowling bouncers. The point of leg theory was to bowl at the ribs to force the batsmen into playing defensive shots into the leg side. The Australian team suffered more injuries when leg theory was not being used.

[@philpryor7524]

Conflating or confucking?? Some arseholes will always support winning by filth, imagining they are on the winning bandwagon. Dickhead dreams. Bodyline, then machine gunning prisoners, why not?

[@Bernie8330]

@@philipr1567 The two most famous injuries were when the bodyline field was not in use ... However, the majority of blows to the body were when it was (in use).

[@markwilliams3826]

@@philpryor7524 i

[@7s29]

England won that series fair and square imo.

[@hallsterr]

Jardine was a badass

[@Mustaine1ify]

Nice to hear an Australian talking sense about "Fast Leg Theory" which was all within the rules. I refuse to use the B word.

[@camerongodfrey7719]

If England didn’t bowl bodyline in this series Bradman May have finished his career with an average of 100

[@Bernie8330]

Who cares, Bradman proved he had no idea against intimidatory pace bowling. If he had been born 50 years later, the West Indies would have owned him, and he would have been lucky to average 20 against them.

[@hotshot8t9]

Chappell is the best!!! :D

[@MyChristine6]

well said and very fair.

[@MyChristine6]

it happens now, however, you are restricted to how many players you can have behind square leg

[@ashashroff6351]

There is nothing wrong with the Leg Theory. I believe in it. I rather be killed or kill in a cricket pitch than anywhere else.

[@ashashroff6351]

You have two options, your stumps or your life. When that Red Round of Leather, Cork and Seam. I kill. No fears.

[@Bernie8330]

Not the averages Ian, but rather the impact of the opposition's best player/s is what you have to disrupt.

[@aniket385]

You don’t understand Test cricket man

[@Bernie8330]

@@aniket385 What a stupid clueless comment.

[@jamescranley933]

Miller and lindwall paid england back in the invincibles series though

[@nickcrowley6740]

hear, hear

[@jamesbain650]

Douglas Jardine was of SCOTTISH descent and as.capain of English cricket used Harold Larwood’s pace and accuracy to nullify the batting skills of Brahman.He worked behind German lines in the War and died of cancer from a tick bite in 1958.

[@ZulqarnaynAwan]

Its wonder how aussies were crying against short balls in 1930's but they themselves adopted the same theory in 1960's.

[@tryarunm]

It was not in the laws, Ian; Bodyline and underarm bowling were not in the laws, rather, the captains stretched the laws to the limit with those practices and by doing so, contravened the 'spirit of the game'. The spirit of all sporting contests, if you ask me. So while some of us might think those captains were smart, I would say they were devious and/or twisted.

[@Ingens_Scherz]

And in another thread, you move from your straw man "devious/twisted" viewpoint to, and I paraphrase accurately, "all English are cheats at everything they do and anyone who thinks otherwise is deluded". You, sir, are a racist and your views are therefore worthless.

[@tryarunm]

Address the issue, ludocrat, otherwise you are just a troll.

[@lonestar6709]

Yes it was in the laws. It was known as "Old Leg Theory". It just hadn't been used for years. Jardine broke no rules whatsoever.

[@tryarunm]

@@lonestar6709 the Laws do not specify tactics, i.e., types of field settings or bowling attacks, not even Off Theory. They left those to the teams.

[@craigrodgers9693]

Afraid it was in the laws. There was no limit to how many fielder's u could have behind square in those days. Perhaps u can point me to a different law?

[@petercaseybrick]

unsportsman,