<< SEA PLASTIC SAVES LIVES ~ MAIN ~ TILT FOR EARTH >>

BILL BROWN

Bill Brown, last of the pre-war Australian batsmen, has died at 95. The 1939 cricketer of the year, Brown’s unusual dismissal against India in the Second Test eight years later became almost as celebrated as his serene strokeplay:

image

Posted by Tim B. on 03/17/2008 at 05:50 PM
  1. Rudd to address the nation before 10am.

    Posted by Pickles on 2008 03 17 at 06:18 PM • permalink

  2. And so Vinoo Mankad joined the elite group - including Harry Shrapnel - whose family names became proper nouns.

    Hmmm. Also a reminder that the Indian team has not always followed the highest standards on the cricket field. In contrast to what they would have had us believe on the recent Australian tour.

    Posted by The Mongrel on 2008 03 17 at 06:20 PM • permalink

  3. Ummm, please help out a befuddled American: What the hell is this? Something akin to stepping out of the batter’s box in baseball?

    Posted by oldirishpig on 2008 03 17 at 07:16 PM • permalink

  4. Proper noun? It’s become a verb. as in “I Mankadded the smartarse”.

    Posted by ooh honey honey on 2008 03 17 at 07:40 PM • permalink

  5. #3: The closest equivalent in baseball would be for the batting team to have a runner on third leaving that base and walking towards home base before the pitch and the pitcher noticing this and then throwing to the third baseman instead of pitching.

    The main difference in cricket is that the bowler is already there with the ball, as he already has to run past the non-striker’s wicket to bowl.

    Posted by James B on 2008 03 17 at 07:42 PM • permalink

  6. #1- Jumped the gun old son, he waited ‘til the opening of question time, thus evading any questions about his links to the Chicoms for a quarter hour while he blathered with platitudes about his “old mate” Bill; funny all his pals have to be dead before they get a mention- couldn’t be so they can’t retract, could it? BTW, if I hear Kevvie come up with another anectode about “Brissie” or his “many fun times at the ‘Gabba” I’m going to reanimate the corpse of Happy Jack, and sic’ said zombie onto the smarmy, smug, earwax-gobbling headline harlot.

    Posted by Habib on 2008 03 18 at 12:11 AM • permalink

  7. #5....um....huh? Now I need some other splainin’.

    Posted by CraigC on 2008 03 18 at 01:39 AM • permalink

  8. #3 didn’t go through the whole explanation, so let’s try this: In baseball, the batter can call time and step out of the batter’s box. However, the umpire doesn’t have to grant him the time-out. There have been instances where a batter stepped out and wasn’t granted time by the umpire, and the pitcher threw strike three. Sayonara.

    Is the roughly the equivalent? Although it sounds like the pitcher, er bowler, decides on his own here. That can’t be right, can it?

    Posted by CraigC on 2008 03 18 at 01:44 AM • permalink

  9. #8 No, cricketers do that too - they can and do step away from the wicket as the bowler runs up to indicate that they’re not ready to bat.

    “Mankading” is something different.

    At any one time there are two members of the batting team on the field - the “striker” facing the bowler, and the “non-striker”, who starts each delivery at the same end of the pitch as the bowler. (Imagine baseball with only two bases - home base, and another base next to the pitcher’s mound, which always has a runner on it.)

    To score a run, the batsmen need to each run along the pitch, running past each other and exchanging positions.

    The non-striker will generally start walking forward as soon as the ball leaves the bowler’s hand, ready to start running if there is an opportunity to make a run. If there isn’t, he turns around and walks back.

    But if he starts walking and is out of his ground before the ball leaves the bowler’s hand, the bowler can - instead of bowling the ball at the striker - break the wicket at the non-striker’s end, at which point the non-striker is out. (The equivalent in baseball, I think, would be to tag a runner between bases.)

    It is considered bad sportsmanship for the bowler to do this without warning, because it is a common enough mistake for the non-striker to make.

    Having said that, if the non-striker is consistently doing it, even after being warned, it’s considered fair enough to mankad a batsman; since as the article says, a foot at the start of the run is one foot less to run when he’s trying to beat the throw to the other end. It’s the difference between an honest mistake and gaming the rules…

    There, perfectly simple. Just like everything else about cricket.

    Posted by James B on 2008 03 18 at 02:15 AM • permalink

  10. Thank you, James and Craig; that actually made sense, eventually, lol. Now, about the scoring....

    Posted by oldirishpig on 2008 03 18 at 04:07 AM • permalink

  11. #1

    Rudd to address the nation before 10am.

    I assume this was re Brown’s death.

    This is getting really strange. Not only does Rudd want to control the news he wants to read it to us too. We all knew on Monday night that Brown was dead.

    The HMAS Sydney too. It was on the morning news then Rudd pops up on TV to announce it. Rudd claimed credit because it was found with a $4.2m grant from the government - but it was the Howard government, not his.

    And another example of news control. The ABC Victorian regional afternoon show was chatting mindlessly about China and Tibet and criticisms of Rudd’s response as lacking balls. But to balance these criticisms, it pointed to China’s protests at the “prime minister meeting the Dalai Lama”. Brave PM standing up to a superpower was the inference. But it wasn’t Rudd. It was the nameless John Howard.

    Posted by Contrail on 2008 03 18 at 04:29 AM • permalink

  12. I’m not really sure how Mongrel can blame Mankad for this situation.

    Starting to run before the ball is delivered is legal, but being run out when you do so is equally legal.

    Mankad warned him once that he could see him cripping ground, and then dimissed him every time afterwards.

    Bill Brown had nobody but himself to blame for it.

    Posted by Yobbo on 2008 03 18 at 06:13 AM • permalink

  13. Alright, go ahead and admit it.

    Cricket is just Calvinball by another name.

    Posted by joe bagadonuts on 2008 03 18 at 10:12 AM • permalink

  14. Just filed the papers to change my legal name to “Ginty Lush.”

    Posted by jgm on 2008 03 18 at 10:49 AM • permalink

  15. #13 We admit nothing.

    Besides, if we wanted to make Cricket sound like Calvinball, we’d just tell the story of Joe Solomon’s cap.

    Posted by James B on 2008 03 18 at 11:19 AM • permalink

  16. I read recently that if someone appears to be speaking English but an American can’t understand them, they’re talking about cricket.
    Good observation that.

    Posted by Veeshir on 2008 03 18 at 12:39 PM • permalink

  17. Cricket is easy - all I want is somebody to explain to me the ‘blue lines’ in ice hockey!

    Posted by Apparatchik on 2008 03 18 at 05:12 PM • permalink

  18. Yes, we heard so much in his obits about about Brown being a humble gent and all, and nothing about his vociferous and petulant whining for being fairly dismissed when trying, repeatedly, to gain an unfair advantage. Anyway, cheating batsman will rejoice that the perfectly legitimate Mankad has since been banned, even while cheating subcontinental bowlers with completely illegitimate bowling actions have been declared perfectly valid.

    Posted by Jim Geones on 2008 03 19 at 07:18 AM • permalink

  19. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.