PAST & PRESENT
Bowlers' union
By Ramachandra Guha
|
Bowlers are indeed the under-labourers of cricket, under-paid as well as under-appreciated ... A look at Australian cricketer Shane Warne.
|
AN ALL-TIME GREAT: Shane Warne on the first day of the Fifth Test match, in early September, between England and Australia at the Oval. PHOTO: AP
DURING their England tour of 1956, the Australian cricketers were playing a match at Scarborough when the news came that the Queen had knighted the great Yorkshire cricketer Leonard Hutton. Hutton was in the crowd, where one of the first persons to shake his hand was the Australian journalist Arthur Mailey. "Congratulations, Sir Leonard," said Mailey. "But I hope next time it is a bowler. The last bowler to be knighted was Sir Francis Drake."
This is one of my favourite cricket stories, both for its wit and the wider wisdom it contains. Bowlers are indeed the under-labourers of cricket, under-paid as well as under-appreciated. And it is appropriate to recall Arthur Mailey's remarks now, when Australia have completed another cricket tour of England. For, before he became a reporter, Mailey was a cricketer, and a rather good one. He was the first of the great Aussie wrist-spinners, this a long line starting with him and extending through Clarrie Grimmett, Bill O' Reilly, and Richie Benaud on to Shane Warne himself.
Knighthood unlikely
The Ashes series this summer has been utterly absorbing. Among its highlights was Warne's six-hundredth Test wicket. Now after Hutton, several other batsmen have been knighted, such as Frank Worrell, Colin Cowdrey, and Vivian Richards. Also an all-rounder, Garfield Sobers, and (at long last!) a bowler, Richard Hadlee. Alas, despite all he has done on the field, there is no likelihood of the Queen tapping a sword on Warne's shoulder. He will not become the second bowler to be knighted after Sir Francis Drake.
This, in cricketing terms, is something of a travesty. For Shane Warne is indeed one of the all-time greats of the game, in a class whose only other members are the Don and Sobers, and perhaps W.G. Grace and our own Sachin. He does not any more bowl the googly from the "back of the hand", but his orthodox leg-break comes in many variations — of pace, turn, flight, and bounce. He has a fine top-spinner and flipper, as well as a ball all his own — this spun from the front of the hand, which hastens off the pitch and keeps low to boot. Above all, he has superb control. Wrist spinners are notorious for bowling too short or too full, but Warne sends down even fewer bad balls than do most high-class finger-spinners.
Warne and his team-mates
Admittedly, Warne has been fortunate in his team-mates. He has been well served by his slips-first Mark Taylor, then Mark Waugh, and now Matthew Hayden. And his wicket keepers have better served him. It is always a joy to watch Warne bowl on TV, the pleasure abundantly shared on the ground itself, most of all by the man behind the stumps. "B-o-o-o-w-l-l-ed Warney!" said Ian Healey once, the words and the emotions carried to us kibitzers from a thousand miles away. "N-a-a-I-I-ce Shane!" now says Adam Gilchrist.
If Anil Kumble had such catchers to help him, he might, by now, have taken 600 Test wickets himself. On the other hand, if all Australia's Test matches against India had instead been played against England, Warne might by now have been close to 800. For our desi batsmen have given him no end of trouble. Sachin Tendulkar and Mohammed Azharuddin have butchered him; so, on one occasion in Sharjah, did Vinod Kambli. But the fellow who hit him hardest was Navjyot Singh Sidhu. On the Australian tour of India in 1998, Sidhu so damaged Warne's confidence that an obscure off-spinner named Gavin Robertson actually came on to bowl before him.
His rival, Sydney Francis Barnes
Brought up on slow bowling, reading spinners from the hand, quick on their feet, proficient in the cut, pull, and lofted shot-Indian batsmen have played Warne rather better than anyone else. Some of their Pakistani counterparts have done the job well too: both Salim Malik and Inzamam-ul-Haq have played match-winning innings' against Warne on tracks turning square. But that vulnerable heel notwithstanding, the Greeks still considered Achilles the greatest of their warriors. And, despite his less-than-brilliant record on the sub-continent, Warne is arguably the greatest bowler in the history of cricket. His only real rival for that title is the old English cricketer Sydney Francis Barnes.
Barnes was a difficult and truculent man — thus even less likely to be knighted than Shane Warne. He played before the age of television; although there are snippets of film showing him bowling in old age, these don't reveal much. But the record-books tell us that he took 189 wickets in a mere 27 Tests. And the tales of his contemporaries confirm that he had a staggering range of deliveries — off and leg cutters, in and out swingers, sent down with subtle changes of pace and trajectory. Of the many stories of his cricket and his character, there is one that both expresses his supreme self-confidence and places him — as cricketing history must — right next to Shane Warne. Asked why, in a career extending over several decades, he did not think it fit to develop the googly, Barnes answered: "Because I never needed to."
E-mail: ramguha@vsnl.com
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
