History Extension Major Work- The 1932-33 Bodyline Series

Jack Fingleton disagrees. He believes Jardine asked his bowlers to aim at the batsmen’s bodies with the intent to injure them. “There was nothing half-hearted about Voce’s bowling. He bowled with studied intent to hit the body”. Fingleton played many courageous innings in which he received multiple blows to the body. “Most of Voce’s deliveries, if they did not meet a rib in transit, cleared the leg stumps, or a space outside the leg stump, by feet. A blow on the ribs would be followed by a precisely similar ball” By the Second Test all the Australian batsmen had been hit hard and so often that they all believed that Larwood was aiming for them instead of the stumps. Vic Richardson mentions “I took guard a foot outside the off stump and Larwood’s deliveries still came straight at me”.

Statistics show that in previous test series’ normally self assured batsmen such as Bill Woodfull and Bill Ponsford were scoring respectable batting averages. In the 1930 ashes series in England, Ponsford scored 330 runs for the series at an average at 55.00 (including two 50s and one 100). He had a high score of 110 in this series. Similarly, Woodfull scored 345 runs at an average of 57.50 (including three 50s and one 100). He had a high score of 175 in this series. In the West Indies tour of Australia in 1930-1931, Ponsford scored a massive 467 runs for the serries with a high score of 183 and at an average of 77.83 (including one 50 and two 100s). During the South African tour of Australia in 1931-1932, Woodfull scored 421 runs for the series, with a high score of 161 and at an average of 70.16 (including one 100). Yet, during the 1932/33 ashes series both of these batsmen had series averages under 35. Woodfull had scored 305 runs for the series with a high score of 73 not out at an average of 33.88 and Ponsford had totalled a mere 141 runs for the series with a high score of 85 and at an average of 23.50. Another player to consider is the middle order batsman Alan Kippax. In the 1930 ashes series in England Kippax totalled 329 runs for the series with a high score of 83 and an average of 54.83 (including four 50s). Kippax also achieved good results in the during the West Indies tour of Australia in 1930/31 where he scored 277 runs with a high score of 147 and at an average of 46.17 (including one 50 and one 100). This was then followed up by another useful performance during South Africa’s tour of Australia in 1931/32 where he gained a total of 162 runs with a high score o 67 and at an average of 32.40. In the 1932/33 Bodyline series Kippax’s average dropped to 13.50. With a high score of 19 and a total of 27 runs for the series, this demonstrates the extent of which the effect of ‘bodyline bowling’ had on the Australian batsmen.  

On the English side, run scoring was not an issue. Since Australia had produced such a weak bowling line-up and the LBW (leg before wicket) rule worked against leg spinners such as Bill O’Reilly and Dainty Ironmonger wickets were hard to come by and the English built up difficult totals for the Australians to chase. Players such as Wally Hammond, Bob Wyatt and the Nawab of Pataudi Snr. all managed respectable series averages. Wally Hammond gathered a total of 440 runs for the series with a high score of 112 at an average of 55.00. Bob Wyatt collected a total of 327 runs for the series with a high score of 78 and at an average of 46.71. Nawab of Pataudi Snr. also contributed with a total of 122 runs, a high score of 102 and an average of 40.66.

This issue of the ‘bodyline bowling’ tactic has sparked a great deal of interest from players and spectators alike. It could be said that even without ‘bodyline bowling’ the English would have won anyway and that ‘bodyline bowling’ wasn’t necessary in order to defeat Australia. When looking at the Australian line-up one can see that the majority of bowlers selected with the exception of Tim Wall, were spin bowlers such as Bill O’Reilly and Clarence Grimmett. On Australian wickets in a dry summer the prevailing lbw rule made it difficult for O’Reilly, Grimmett or Ironmonger to alter the course of the test series. It is clear that the Australian side had a definite lack in pace, whereas in the English line-up accurate medium-pacers such as Maurice Tate and the leg spinner, Thomas Mitchell were cast aside for the faster bowlers such as Bill Bowes, Harold Larwood, “Gubby” Allen and Bill Voce. Both sides had competent batsmen; however it was this clear lack in bowling strength on the Australians part that lead some to believe that the Australians weren’t as good as first thought. Thus, raising the question, was ‘bodyline’ necessary?

Harold Larwood believes it was. In an interview with Harold Larwood, interviewer Norman May asks the question – Who was bodyline intended for? To this Larwood replied – “It was put on for Bradman and Bradman only!!!” Larwood believes the only way to combat Don Bradman was through the ‘bodyline bowling’ tactic.

The statistics disagree. Evidence that shows the use of ‘bodyline bowling’ was pointless. ‘In Brisbane…Larwood clean bowled Bradman’ and his figures from the test series show that of his 33 wickets taken, 12 were clean bowled and a further 4 were leg before wicket. This shows that ‘bodyline bowling’ did not succeed quite to the extent as Jardine had hoped. Also, “Gubby” Allen ‘played in all five Test matches and captured 21 wickets at 28 with orthodox methods’. These figures further emphasise the fact that even without ‘bodyline bowling’ Jardine and his men still would most likely have won the series anyway.

Another view on the Bodyline series was that it was the field placings that made all the difference rather than the bodyline attack itself. The 1932/33 series can be compared to that of the 1954/55 series in the way that Leonard Hutton dismissed medium pacer Alec Bedser and favoured a faster paced attack in the likes of Frank Tyson. Both Hutton and Jardine preferred a fast-paced attack to intimidate batsmen however, the difference between this ashes series and the Bodyline series is the field placings. Leonard Hutton used an orthodox field instead of a heavily packed led side field. The issue is that when captains have formidable pace attacks at their disposal they use them, the difference in the case of the Bodyline series was that fast bowlers and leg theory when combined with a combined with a packed leg side field denied the batsman the opportunity to defend himself or score runs. As such a loop hole in the rules was used to contradict the spirit of the game.

Bill O'Reilly said of Bodyline "What we saw in Australia in 1932-33 was something quite different, and really you could only say that the intention was to scare the daylights out of the batsman, and to put him off his natural game. There was no doubt in our minds that when they put those five men close in on the leg side they were trying to hit the batsman…” Author, Jack Pollard believes ‘there is nothing wrong with captains scheming to expose a rival batsmen’s weakness, but Australians have always argued that in devising the tactics to counter Bradman Jardine endangered all the Australian top-order batsmen’s good health with an attack that was intended to maim’. George Hele, who umpired all five Bodyline Tests, said “my constant dread was that a batsman would be killed”

When asked if the English side achieved there aim of “curbing the run-getting activities of Bradman” Larwood’s reply was – “as far as we [the English cricket team] are concerned it [fast leg theory] did fail”, this was later backed up when he said “he still averaged 56 which is not bad for a test”. In contrast to this “all the England bowlers achieved fair successes but the greater gratification lay in the dismissal of Bradman for low scores in four successive innings”. However, ‘the extent to which Larwod and the Bodyline fields subdued Bradman was demonstrated by Bradman’s Sheffield Shield performance that summer’. Bradman played just three matches yet he scored a massive total of 600 runs at an average of 150.

The personalities of the leading figures in British and Australian cricket played a crucial role in the events of Bodyline, and none more-so than Douglas Jardine. To carry out the plans set by the MCC required a leader so ruthless and so formidable that any attempts to throw this leader off his game would fail miserably. Hence the reason the MCC appointed Douglas Jardine as captain of England. As Captain, Jardine quite rightly considered his only goal to be not friendship, but to regain the Ashes for England, and he was uncompromising in his pursuit of victory. To his team, he insisted on a policy of hate; all Australian opponents were to be hated and Bradman was not to be referred to as “Don” or “Bradman” but only as ‘the little bastard’. The origin of the Ashes lay in English humiliation at the hands of Australia in 1882, and the 1930 Ashes series in England was consistent with this tradition. Jardine wanted to avenge this defeat and he knew that to be successful he had to target Don Bradman. 

The captain of the Australian side, Bill Woodfull was another leading personality of the series. He believed that although the tactic employed by Jardine was well within the Laws of Cricket it was not considered to be in the spirit of the game and therefore was unethical. His physical courage and dignified leadership as his men were repeatedly struck won him many admirers, when he refused to employ retaliatory tactics. Woodfull remained defiant throughout the entire series. Even when he himself was struck and had to be removed from the field, he still had the audacity to declare to an apologetic ‘Plum’ Warner “There are two teams out there. One is playing cricket and the other is not”. On the other hand, not everyone believed the way Woodfull approached the series was the right way. Vic Richardson believed that if Woodfull had allowed his bowlers to retaliate to ‘bodyline bowling’ then the Australians would have won the series.      

Jardine’s intent was to win not at all costs but within the rules. He succeeded in this aim. The genuine hero in the eyes of many of the series was the Australian captain, Bill Woodfull. Woodfull, a man of quiet dignity and integrity refused to exploit the rules, as Jardine had, when he saw it as against the spirit of the game. This research has exposed the fact that the Bodyline series like any event in history has a complex web of cause and effect. The ultimate irony as evident from the statistical evidence and a close assessment of the relative merits of both sides is that even without ‘bodyline bowling’ the MCC may well have prevailed. Bradman was a batting genius, but even Bradman could fail.

Bibliography

World Wide Web:

A History of Cricket, , date accessed 29 December 2006

Baggy Green, www.cricinfo

Bodyline, , date accessed 27 December 2006

CricInfo Australia – Past Series, , date accessed 23 June 2007

Douglas Jardine, , date accessed 27 December 2006

Harold Larwood, , date accessed 29 December 2006

Lords, , date accessed 3 January 2007

Marylebone Cricket Club, , date accessed 3 January 2007

The Ashes Since 1877, , date accessed 9 January 2007, 25 May 2007

Books:

Cashman, Franks, Maxwell, Sainsbury, Stoddart, Weaver, Webster. ‘The A-Z of Australian Cricket’ 1997

Frith, David. ‘Bodyline Autopsy: The full story of the most sensational Test cricket series’, ABC Books, Sydney, NSW, 2002

Harte, Chris and Whimpress, Bernard. ‘A History of Australian Cricket’ André Deutsch, London, 2003 

Mason, Ronald. ‘Ashes in the Mouth: The story of the Bodyline Tour 1932-33’ The Hambledon Press, London, 1982

McHarg, Jack. Bill O’Reilly: A Cricketing Life – The Authorised Biography, Millenium Books, Newtown, NSW, 1990

Pollard, Jack. ‘The Bradman Years: Australian Cricket 1918-1948’.The Book Company International, Sydney, NSW, 1995

Pollard, Jack. ‘The History of Australian Cricket’, Pelham Books, 1992

Newspaper Articles:

Lane, Daniel 2 December 2006, ‘Larwood’s Legacy? A fine player and true gentleman’, Sport section

Sydney Morning Herald, 8 February 2004, ‘It just wasn’t cricket’ 

Letter Transcripts:

Allen, George ‘Gubby’ Oswald, 12 January 1932, written to his father

Allen, George ‘Gubby’ Oswald, 18 January 1932, written to his father

Cassette Tapes:

May, Norman and McGilvray, Alan. ‘Bodyline’ Side 1: Interview with Harold Larwood, Side 2: Interview with Vic Richardson, Broadcast November 4 1982.

---

Annotated Bibliography:

I found a cassette tape in Gordon library which had interviews from Norman May and Alan McGilvray. May was interviewing Harold Larwood and McGilvray was interviewing Vic Richardson. I found this source very useful as although it was an old tape it was still very clear. The two interviewers gave direct questions which were easy to follow and the interviewees answered them, giving as much detail as they could recall. These interviews were very useful to me as both men being interviewed were very involved during the Bodyline series and their obvious biases associated with the Bodyline series assisted me when it came to forming my debate. Also, both men were on opposing teams so their opinions gave me a better idea of how the two teams responded to specific events that unfolded during the series. However, the reliability of this source can be questioned. The interview was broadcast on November 4 1982 and the Bodyline series occurred in 1932, therefore over time these player’s perspectives of the events could have changed as they heard different sides of the story from other players and spectators or they may have forgotten simple details that could have possibly been vital in expressing their own opinions towards the series and their opposing team.

I used the website CricInfo Australia, formerly know as . This website allowed me to access all player biographies from the Bodyline series as well as the batting statistics I needed for my debate. These statistics were useful as they were accurate and did not rely on someone’s opinion and I could get a definite answer from them. The statistics I got from this site also allowed me to compare other statistics such as the English batting statistics which also helped in my essay. One visible strength of this website was that it was included all statistics available from the matches and even included the oppositions figures. A weakness however was that these records were not able to tell me the match conditions that may have affected the players in the match. These match conditions include the hardness of the pitch, the temperature at ground level and the number of crowd attendance. Each of these factors could have impacted on the players and affected their concentration levels during the game thus altering the game itself.

I also used a book by David Frith called ‘Bodyline Autopsy: the full story of the most sensational Test Cricket series: Australia vs. England 1932-33’. Just as the name suggests this book gives the “full story”. The author remains as unbiased as possible. Frith includes comments from leading personalities of both the English and Australian cricket teams as well as including various umpire reports, comments made by journalists and even spectator accounts. By providing me with all these different perspectives I was able to form a much wider view on the Bodyline series rather than just having a strictly Australian or English perspective. Strengths visible in this book include the fact that Frith has included a vast amount of footnotes and an extensive bibliography which shows the amount of research he did to make sure his work was as precise as humanly possible. In order to achieve this, Frith has used a wide range of sources from personal accounts to modern day historians. One possible weakness that can be seen throughout the book is that even at the end Frith refuses to offer his own opinion of the Bodyline series so it remains unclear where he stands with the 1932-33 Bodyline series.

---