-
Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
An Australian XI That Never played Tests
- Thread starter Line and Length
- Start date
morgieb
Well-known member
Yeah Williams getting as big of a crack as he did is a bit strange. Felt a bit meh overall. At least Bracken could swing it at his best and was a gun ODI bowler.
In saying that Nicholson was also very handy. Unlucky to miss so many years through injuries but when fit he was at least at Wright's level IMO.
TheJediBrah
Well-known member
Me too. I remember getting Sachin's autograph in 1999 and everyone was acting like it was such a big deal and I didn't think it was worth the 20 minute wait in the end. I knew even less about cricket then than I do now though
stephen
Well-known member
In Eddie Gilbert - I played at the ground that was named after him. It overlooked a run down building that was fenced off. I learned that the building was an asylum in which Gilbert sadly spent many of his days.
In his action, I wonder if it's similar to Thommo or Tait's action, with the whippy sling to generate pace. If that's so then he could have been a 150+ bowler.
In his action, I wonder if it's similar to Thommo or Tait's action, with the whippy sling to generate pace. If that's so then he could have been a 150+ bowler.
stephen
Well-known member
My 5yo got all the ODI bowlers autographs in one of the unofficial ODIs before the last world cup. Except for Starc, who wasn't playing. Cummins was the friendliest towards her but she was a bit shy to talk back to him.
quincywagstaff
Well-known member
Yeah, Williams being around the Oz setup for 3 seasons as a Test option was pretty strange as his FC record is nothing flash and he never looked that promising. Amazed he actually played a Test in SL considering his limitations. Good ODI record tbf though.
TheJediBrah
Well-known member
maybe, but from what I've read he was probably a genuine chucker as well
His selection wasn't surprising at the time. He may not have had incredible stats but on his day he was fast and could get anyone out in domestic cricket. He had a bit of X-factor about him which probably thrust him ahead of more line-and-length type operators.
jimmy101
Well-known member
That's the racism of the day coming in to play bro. Gilbert, along with a few other Aboriginal players from the time were no-balled out of the game as a way to subtly discard them from the FC cricket scene.
TheJediBrah
Well-known member
That's a pretty big assumption to make
Line and Length
Well-known member
.... but a fairly accurate one by all accounts.
Starfighter
Well-known member
I've read newspaper reports from the era and that Gilbert chucked was a significantly wider held option than later writing would have you believe.
Must say that the few photographic analyses done of his action don't help his case either.
Must say that the few photographic analyses done of his action don't help his case either.
jimmy101
Well-known member
Starfighter
Well-known member
the big bambino
Well-known member
Eddie Gilbert missed his opportunity in the bodyline series due to injury iirc. He did play the tourists for Qld, took 2/93 and bowled himself out of the last 2 tests without the interference of the White Australia policy. The comparison with Tait is spot on. Gilbert was fast but would fade. In the era of timeless tests his selection would have been discounted for that good reason alone. He was only any good in Brisbane and his numbers never justified a test on any other Australian ground. From that you'd have to worry how effective he'd have been OS.
He may have deserved a game in Brisbane but Australia generally won their preceding match and, ironically, it would have been unfair if anyone was dropped to make way for Gilbert. The only real chance Gilbert had to make the test team was v SA in 31/32 and for the 4th test when Tim Wall was absent. But he **** the bed against South Australia in Adelaide and missed the next shield match in Sydney. In that game, Gilbert's team mate, Thurlow took a michelle and debuted in the 4th test after 3 or 4 seasons of solid bowling. He wouldn't have been Gilbert's only challenger either. Laurie Nash took 12 wickets against the tourists in two games for Tasmania. If you want to find someone who likely missed games because of discrimination in that era it would have been Nash not Gilbert. A better bowler and cricketer than Wall, Nash should have been our first choice pace man in the 30s. Eventually Nash was rewarded with his first cap in the 5th test after Thurlow went wicketless at Adelaide. He bowled well.
Though the speculation of discrimination is strong, I can't see where Gilbert either had the opportunity to play tests or take them when he did. While subjected to it generally, his non selection had nothing to do with discrimination at the selection table at least. I mean he did get selected for Qld.
From what I've read I don't think Gilbert was a chucker, despite the speculation of some of the batsmen he startled. I don't know how the chucking rule was phrased back then but when no balled the umpire complained about a jerkiness in the wrist. I can't find where anyone questioned the straightness of his arm let alone having such an observation upheld by an umpire. If that is the standard of the complaint then I think the umpire erred and punished Gilbert for having a supple wrist. I don't think I'm alone in reading about many fast bowlers who had an advantage in being able to give the ball extra impetus by flicking the wrist.
While his calling was unfair imo, so is the speculation Gilbert was deliberately no balled out of the game because he was black. There is no evidence for that. The umpire who no balled him, Barlow, was a notorious **** who no balled a few bowlers back then. like Halcombe who may have lost a test call up because of it. I've seen film of Halcombe and he does seem a little sus though. He also called Cotton of SA who was called twice in his career. Gilbert was only called that one time: hardly evidence of a witch hunt. He received support from Australia's premier umpire, Hele, who thought his action fair (Colman's book). He bowled for for 4 seasons after being called until his form finally caused him to be dropped by Qld. Importantly his action was passed by Barlow on a subsequent occasion.
Just like Tait, Gilbert was fast but not especially good. Though I think he was a much better bowler than Tait his career would have gravitated to the shorter formats if they were available at the time.
He may have deserved a game in Brisbane but Australia generally won their preceding match and, ironically, it would have been unfair if anyone was dropped to make way for Gilbert. The only real chance Gilbert had to make the test team was v SA in 31/32 and for the 4th test when Tim Wall was absent. But he **** the bed against South Australia in Adelaide and missed the next shield match in Sydney. In that game, Gilbert's team mate, Thurlow took a michelle and debuted in the 4th test after 3 or 4 seasons of solid bowling. He wouldn't have been Gilbert's only challenger either. Laurie Nash took 12 wickets against the tourists in two games for Tasmania. If you want to find someone who likely missed games because of discrimination in that era it would have been Nash not Gilbert. A better bowler and cricketer than Wall, Nash should have been our first choice pace man in the 30s. Eventually Nash was rewarded with his first cap in the 5th test after Thurlow went wicketless at Adelaide. He bowled well.
Though the speculation of discrimination is strong, I can't see where Gilbert either had the opportunity to play tests or take them when he did. While subjected to it generally, his non selection had nothing to do with discrimination at the selection table at least. I mean he did get selected for Qld.
From what I've read I don't think Gilbert was a chucker, despite the speculation of some of the batsmen he startled. I don't know how the chucking rule was phrased back then but when no balled the umpire complained about a jerkiness in the wrist. I can't find where anyone questioned the straightness of his arm let alone having such an observation upheld by an umpire. If that is the standard of the complaint then I think the umpire erred and punished Gilbert for having a supple wrist. I don't think I'm alone in reading about many fast bowlers who had an advantage in being able to give the ball extra impetus by flicking the wrist.
While his calling was unfair imo, so is the speculation Gilbert was deliberately no balled out of the game because he was black. There is no evidence for that. The umpire who no balled him, Barlow, was a notorious **** who no balled a few bowlers back then. like Halcombe who may have lost a test call up because of it. I've seen film of Halcombe and he does seem a little sus though. He also called Cotton of SA who was called twice in his career. Gilbert was only called that one time: hardly evidence of a witch hunt. He received support from Australia's premier umpire, Hele, who thought his action fair (Colman's book). He bowled for for 4 seasons after being called until his form finally caused him to be dropped by Qld. Importantly his action was passed by Barlow on a subsequent occasion.
Just like Tait, Gilbert was fast but not especially good. Though I think he was a much better bowler than Tait his career would have gravitated to the shorter formats if they were available at the time.
Last edited:
jimmy101
Well-known member
Interestingly the match where Gilbert was repeatedly no-balled happened to be match where he injured several NSW batsmen with his searing bouncers. Not sure if those two details are connected or not though.
"Controversy still rages over the question of possible racial discrimination relating to Eddie Gilbert's career. There seems little doubt that he was discriminated against as an Aborigine. He was escorted constantly by white bureaucrats and cricket officials and the constant slurs on his bowling style are reminiscent of similar innuendoes against the earlier Aboriginal cricketers Jack Marsh and Albert Henry." Link: Biography - Edward (Eddie) Gilbert - Australian Dictionary of Biography
Former Australian Test batsman Warren Bardsley recalled that the reason Gilbert's forbearer Jack Marsh had been kept out of big cricket was his colour.
"Controversy still rages over the question of possible racial discrimination relating to Eddie Gilbert's career. There seems little doubt that he was discriminated against as an Aborigine. He was escorted constantly by white bureaucrats and cricket officials and the constant slurs on his bowling style are reminiscent of similar innuendoes against the earlier Aboriginal cricketers Jack Marsh and Albert Henry." Link: Biography - Edward (Eddie) Gilbert - Australian Dictionary of Biography
Former Australian Test batsman Warren Bardsley recalled that the reason Gilbert's forbearer Jack Marsh had been kept out of big cricket was his colour.
TheJediBrah
Well-known member
There could very possibly have been a racial element to his "persecution", but it's a massive stretch to assume that there was nothing wrong with his action and it was all invented to drive him out. Most likely he did throw it, but was possibly treated more harshly for the transgression because of his background.
that was literally my first thought lol
Starfighter
Well-known member
For those interested:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kr8yuufzhOU the bowler at the start.
There's actually part of a slow motion analysis of his action from 1930 available. It does not paint it in a good light. https://www.britishpathe.com/video/...RONALD-HALCOMBE-FILMED-IN-SLOW/query/halcombe
I've got a single shot Cotton bowling, but can't remember which newsreel it's from. His action looks fine but the angle is not favourable. He does have the bowed, splayed front leg associated with several throwers (Meckiff, Griffith, Griffin for example) though there are enough throwers who don't.