Who is the greatest cricketer of all time?

Since its interception, cricket has produced many great players—batsmen, bowlers and all-rounders. There are many masters of their own specialty, yet there are few all-rounders—the true cricketer. This is because excelling at every facet of the game is particularly demanding on the body and mind. However, there have been a number of fortunate souls who have been able to withstand the rigours of top-level cricket and etched their name into the list of top batsman, bowlers and on the rare occasion, fielders.

Dr William Gilbert Grace (W.G. Grace) is a name that would easily roll off the tongue of an Englishman, despite last gracing the first-class cricket field in 1908. Many argue that despite only having a mediocre record in twenty-two Tests, Grace made modern cricket as we know it. He scored 54,896 first class runs (at 39.55), scored 126 centuries and 244 fifties in 872 matches. Along with this, he took 2876 first-class wickets (at 17.92), captured five wickets in an innings 246 times and ten wickets in a match on 66 occasions. Grace was a dominant batsman in his era—as most top-quality batsman averaged around twenty, extremely low compared to today’s standards. This was because pitches were usually no different to the rest of the luscious, green playing surface, thus providing uneven and concerning movement. As a fielder, the Englishman was considered a sure catch and a good fieldsman, often in the cover and point regions.

Though Grace’s resume is indeed remarkable, there is no doubt that West Indian Sir Garfield Sobers is the greatest international all-rounder of all-time. Not only was he a great batsman, bowler and fieldsman, he had something no other great all-rounder possessed—a variety of left-arm bowling styles. Sir Donald Bradman—the greatest batsman and many believe cricketer of all-time—described Sobers as a “five-in-one cricketer” (batsman, fieldsman and three-in-one bowler). [Armstrong, p. 24] He could open the bowling with in-swingers to the right handed batmen, before bowling his two styles of spin—left-arm orthodox and wrist spin. His effectiveness as a bowler, however, was nullified by being the West Indies’ leading batsman for most of his career. Sobers averaged 72 as a number three batsman and 64 at number four, but 107 of his 160 Test innings were at five, six or seven in the order, mainly because of the need to rest from bowling. Sobers’ long individual batting efforts—including twenty-six centuries—may have also affected his inflated Test bowling average of 34 because he would often already be fatigued before beginning his bowling spell. This, and being part of a team which had two of the world’s best fast bowlers—Wes Hall and Charlie Griffith—and accomplished off-spinner Lance Gibbs at its disposal. Sobers mostly had to bowl into the wind when playing with the two faster men, before having to bowl long, defensive spells after their retirement, therefore decreasing the possibly of taking wickets.

Sobers was also a brilliant fielder and inventive captain. Leading cricket website, Cricinfo, says “His catching close to the wicket may have been equalled but never surpassed, and he was a brilliant fielder anywhere.” Former Australian captain Richie Benaud described Sobers as "the greatest all-round cricketer the world has seen". Sobers was "a brilliant batsman, splendid fielder, particularly close to the wicket, and a bowler of extraordinary skill, whether bowling with the new ball, providing orthodox left-arm spin or over-the-wrist spin,” according to the Australian. [Armstrong, p. 23] Sobers’ captaincy style also impressed many. A year after his career ended in 1974, Sobers was knighted due to his services to cricket.
Nonetheless, statistically, Sobers may not have the best international record as an all-rounder. This title could quite easily go to South African Jacques Kallis. In a career slowly coming to a close, he has played a colossal 140 Tests, 303 One Day Internationals and sixteen Twenty20 Internationals. Although Kallis will be most remembered for his batting and technique—that is about as hard to crack as his limitless concentration—the all-rounder’s workmanlike 500-plus international wickets ranks him alongside great South African bowlers. These wickets and nearly 22,000 international runs should put him in the top echelon of players, but a public perception of selfish batting seems to stop him being put in the class of great cricketers. Kallis is also a batsman who takes time to score runs—striking at 44.52 per hundred balls in Tests, significantly slower than the dominate batsman of the past fifteen-twenty years. He therefore fails to dominate a bowling attack in the vein of Sachin Tendulkar, Brian Lara, Ricky Ponting and Virender Sehwag.
There are many more all-rounders that may be considered as the best; Imran Khan, Keith Miller, Ian Botham, Kapil Dev and Alan Davidson all make a compelling case, however in my opinion, none are in the class of Sir Garfield Sobers.

Cricket’s five leading Test wicket-takers—Muttiah Muralitharan, Shane Warne, Anil Kumble, Glenn McGrath and Courtney Walsh—may not all receive the same amount of attention as cricket’s five leading run-scorers or batsman, though they are all great. Three of the five are spinners, with Shane Warne being the only leg-spinner in the top twenty-five leading wicket-takers. Warne, however, will always be regarded as one of the greatest and most famous cricketers. His many off-field misdemeanours and on-field success may never be topped. He revolutionised the art of leg spin bowling after former Australian leg-spinner Bill O’Reilly wrote how he feared “the art of leg-spinning is in danger of disappearing from the game”. [Armstrong, p. 25] Warne grew up in the eighties, a decade of fast bowling. Captains believed quicker men were far more likely to capture wickets and spinners gave away far too many runs. Nonetheless, Warne, after initially bowling medium pace as an adolescent, finished his career as the leading Test wicket-taker in 2007 (708 wickets). Another spinner, Muttiah Muralitharan, soon overtook Warne’s record and finished his Test career with 800 wickets—well ahead of the Glenn McGrath, whose 563 wickets are the most from a quick bowler.

Finally we get to batsman—and they are in abundance: Tendulkar, Lara, Ponting, Jack Hobbs, Graeme Pollock, Barry Richards, Vivian Richards, Len Hutton, Victor Trumper, Sunil Gavasker, Greg Chappell, Frank Worrell, Everton Weekes, Clyde Walcott; the list could go on and on. Bradman’s credentials are obvious as I touched on earlier in the Bodyline article, but apart from Tendulkar, the rest are extremely difficult to split; definitely not as influential as a man like Sobers, Miller, Botham or Imran Khan.

Although Bradman will go down in history as the greatest cricketer, the question is, who would be more valuable—Sobers or Bradman? I think because of his batting record alone, Bradman would have to be regarded as the greatest cricketer. But if I had to choose my own side, I would select Sobers. I came to this opinion after significant research and a personal preference for having an all-rounder instead of a one-dimensional player in my side. In Tests or a four-day first-class game, I would have to toss a coin on who to choose. Though, Sobers would, in my opinion, be more valuable than Bradman in the shorter formats of the game—ODI and Twenty—because the Australian would not have time to achieve his remarkable Test batting feats, thus nullifying his effectiveness. Even if Sobers failed with the bat, he could unleash an inspired spell of fast bowling, before cleaning up the tail with his spinners—something Bradman would be unable to do. However, I am sure you would take either player any day of the week. It is extremely difficult to compare cricketers from different generations, let alone to cricketers who have basically never played in the newest two formats of cricket (Sobers played one ODI). Though, in summary, an all-rounder gives a team more variety and stability than a player who has just one specialty.


Armstrong, Geoff (2006). The 100 Greatest Cricketers. Sydney, Australia: New Holland Publishers. ISBN 174110439-4.

The Evolution of Cricket since Twenty20, and the Indian Premier League

The fourth season of Indian Premier League (IPL) kicked off yesterday, comprising all of 74 games over 51 days. This got me thinking. The recently completed Cricket World Cup was haggled for being too long with 49 matches across 46 days. Yet the IPL has more matches and is five days longer! The difference, of course, is the IPL a Twenty20 competition, with each game lasting a little less than four hours. But surely 74 games of cricket in one tournament is overkill? The significance in countries other India is fairly low; no games are even broadcasted in Australia. Despite this, and delving deeper, Twenty20 cricket—the IPL included— has had a positive effect on the skill of players, even if it's to the detriment of the other two forms of cricket.

A new type of slow bowling has also been bred; ones who bowl with a traditional off spinners or left-arm orthodox bowlers action, but do not spin the ball. Instead, the delivery is fired in at the batsman’s legs or feet, giving them barely any length to get under.  Part-timers, especially, have been renowned for this type of bowling; yet, regular spinners such as Harbhajan Singh and Sulieman Been have begun to successfully resort to such tactics. Surprisingly, spinners have probably become the most reliable type of bowlers in Twenty20, and are extremely effective in reducing scoring rates. Of late, it has become more frequent for a spinner to open the bowling in Twenty20 cricket—and sub-continental teams have been known to open with two.

With the introduction of helmets—mainly to combat the West Indian attack of the seventies and eighties—Twenty20 has been criticised for its domination from batsmen, geared with big powerful bats which would have weighed five kilos a few decades ago. Furthermore, the playing arena has also shrunk; rarely do we now see the boundary rope pushed back a couple of metres from the fence. Even on small grounds, the rope is often brought in seven, eight, nine or even ten metres. Supposedly, spectators want to see fours and sixes, instead of the captivating battle between a spinner flighting the ball with a batsman eyeing off an 80-metre plus boundary.  Once, a batsman trying the clear the mid-wicket boundary at the Melbourne Cricket Ground (MCG) would have to strike the ball perfectly on his skinny bat to clear the fence over eighty-five metres away. Sadly, this is rarely the case nowadays. Even the MCG—which has mostly ignored the temptation to bring in the boundary rope—brought the boundary in so far on one side of the ground during Australian Domestic Twenty20 matches last season, it looked like a backwards Australian rules fifty metre arc. Admittedly, the pitches used were significantly closer to the opposite boundary than usual, but shots that commentators lauded for being so huge often bounced inside the fence. Five years ago, instead of hitting a large six, the batsman would have holed out to deep mid-wicket, and would have been crucified for playing such a reckless shot.

Despite all these on-field changes, the most significant change to cricket is the amount of money being flooded into the game—led by India. There was a day where each cricket board would make most of their revenue through ticket sales and would let the crowd enjoy their day in the sun, with beach balls, eskies, flags, blow-up figurines; however, these days are long gone. Most of cricket’s money now comes from media and sponsorship, and administrators seemingly care little about getting bums on seats—especially in Tests.  Test and one-day crowds have dwindled alarmingly since Twenty20 really cracked into the cricketing market in 2007. In 2010, crowds of only 15 and 20,000 attended ODI matches at the MCG; yet a combined 80,000 attended two domestic Twenty20 games at the venue. If the final of the KFC Big Bash had been held in Melbourne, it was predicted over 70,000 would attend. That is 10,000 more than the attendance for the first day of the Boxing Day Test earlier in the season.

Money and power is also beginning to take over the game after the formation of Twenty20 cricket—most notably with the Indian Premier League (IPL) in India. Some players have already begun to turn their back on their country and instead play for the hundreds of thousands they earn from the IPL. Three West Indians—Chris Gayle, Dwayne Bravo and Kieran Pollard—have rejected the West Indies Cricket Boards’ contract offer so they can play in a range of twenty over tournaments around the world.  Despite no more toiling eight-hour days on a furnace-like sub-continental ground lacking a cooling sea-breeze, these competitions will fill their pockets with hundreds of thousands—substantially more than if they were to play international crickt for the West Indies. Cricket’s changing, and changing very quickly, but the unanswered question is whether this change is good for the game.

Brief history of 'Chucking' - a complex issue that has been around for decades

A bowler in cricket has strict rules relating the degree the elbow is bent when a ball is delivered. Law 24, Clause 3 defines a fair delivery with respect to the arm:

A ball is fairly delivered in respect of the arm if, once the bowler's arm has reached the level of the shoulder in the delivery swing, the elbow joint is not straightened partially or completely from that point until the ball has left the hand. This definition shall not debar a bowler from flexing or rotating the wrist in the delivery swing.

In the past, it has been up to the umpire to determine whether a bowler breaches the law and would no ball the bowler if he decides the bowler threw that particular delivery. However, after biomechanical tests in the latter parts of the 1990s, the International Cricket Council (ICC) attempted to clarify the law by stating that the maximum permissible flexing of the elbow for fast bowlers was ten degrees, seven and a half degrees for medium pacers, and five degrees for spin bowlers. This was after results indicated that a bowler’s arm naturally flexes latterly when it rotates around the shoulder, thus meaning that no bowler strictly complied with the Laws of Cricket. The degree of flexing was changed to 15 degrees after the ICC tested bowlers through video footage during the 2004 ICC Champions trophy in England. It was found that ninety-nine percent of bowlers tested exceeded the maximum limit of flexing.

Many English county bowlers of the nineteenth century—after the legalisation of throwing in 1864—were believed to have unfair actions. Nonetheless, Australian fast bowler Ernest Jones was the first bowler no-balled in an international match in 1897. Englishman C.B. Fry had his career ended when no-balled on four occasions soon after. However, Australian aboriginal fast bowler Eddie Gilbert’s action was probably the most controversial pre-World War II. He famously bowled a series of hostile deliveries at Donald Bradman in a state game in 1931—knocking Bradman’s bat out of his hand, knocking him over with the next, and finally, having him caught behind from the third ball. Bradman later said, “The keeper took the ball over his head, and I reckon it was halfway to the boundary and that the balls from Gilbert were unhesitatingly faster than anything seen from [Harold] Larwood or anyone else.” In a state game in the same year, Gilbert was no-balled on thirteen occasions by umpire Andrew Barlow for jerking his wrist—something considered legal nowadays. His wrist action helped him generate his extreme pace, but the Brisbane Courier described his “whipped catapult action” as "almost a throw”. A new legislation after the 1932/33 Bodyline series outlawed intimidatory bowling in Australia, effectively ending Gilbert’s career. In twenty-three first-class matches, he took 87 wickets at an average of 29.21.

Throwing controversies became even more prevalent in the 1950s and ‘60s. Strangely, umpire Frank Chester was blocked from no-balling South African Cuan McCarthy by Lord’s Cricket Ground authorities in 1951, with President Sir Pelham Francis Warner (Plum Warner) stating “These people are our guests”. English left-arm orthodox spinner Tony Lock was often accused of throwing his faster ball—especially in the early stages of his career before he remodelled his action. Famously, in a County Championship match, Essex captain Doug Insole turned to the square-leg umpire when he was bowled by Lock and asked him whether he had been bowled or run out.

Australian Ian Meckiff had a controversial career, accused of throwing on many occasions before being no-balled four times during his only over in a Test against South Africa in 1963-64. Meckiff consequently retired after the match, leaving behind many conspiracies; some thought he was set up by the Australian Board which may have asked Colin Egar, the umpire, to no ball him. The fast bowler had an unusual action, where he generated his pace from a bent-arm action and a flick of the wrist.

Less notable bowlers were no-balled in Tests soon after. However, West Indian fast bowler Charlie Griffith—one of the most feared fast bowlers’ of his generation—caused similar amounts of controversy to Meckiff. He was twice no-balled in first-class cricket and possibly caused so much controversy because of extreme pace. In one of the matches where he was no-balled, Griffith hit touring Indian batsman Nari Contractor on the back of his head with a bouncer while playing for Barbados. Contractor suffered a fracture skull and required two emergency operations to remove blood clots from his brain. He never added to his thirty-one Tests after the incident, although afterwards Contractor said he wished he played just one more.

The most famous and controversial of all cricketers no-balled for throwing is Sri Lankan off-spinner Muttiah Muralitharan, who would later became the leading wicket-taker in both Test and One Day International cricket (ODI). He bowls with an unusual hyperextension of his congenitally bent arm. During his career, Muralitharan was no-balled three times—twice by Ross Emerson and once by Darrell Hair. And in 2004, he was reported to the International Cricket Council (ICC) for a suspect bowling action. The off-spinner was first called by Hair on Boxing Day 1995 during his first tour of Australia, and then by Emerson during Sri Lanka’s next visit in 1998-99. Many people have weighed into the debate on whether his action is legitimate; Hair, himself, labelled his action “diabolical”. Even Australia’s former Prime Minister John Howard publicly stated while in office that Murali (as he was known) was a “chucker”. In contrast, the bowler had a wide range of supporters who believed his action was legal, especially after tests showed him bowling with an arm brace that would not bend past fifteen degrees. Wearing the brace, he successfully bowled his full repertoire of deliveries, including the controversial doosra. The doosra is a ball that spins the opposite way to a conventional off-spinner and is extremely difficult to bowl without bending the elbow. Pakistani Saqlain Mushtaq established the doosra in the mid-1990s, and ever since, Harbhajan Singh, Shoaib Malik, Mohammad Hafeez and Johan Botha have been reported and investigated for an illegal action when bowling the delivery, thus proving it is very difficult to bowl the delivery legally.

Note: All quotes taken from Wikipedia

Bodyline - The series that changed cricket forever

The 1932-33 Ashes series changed cricket forever. There was no gentle half-volleys to the lower-order; no wide full-tosses when a batsmen was in the late-nineties; and finally, no mateship between teams out on the field. This was dubbed the Bodyline series; “probably the most controversial tour in history”, according to Wisden, the world's most famous sports reference book. In an attempt to unsettle and intimidate and dismiss the Australian batsmen—especially Donald Bradman—the England fast-men packed the leg-side with fielders and bowled at the body of the batsmen, leaving them no option other than to risk getting caught by playing a shot towards the eagerly awaiting fielders, or getting hit by the ball often bowled at over 140km. The English repeatedly complained that they did not get what all the fuss was about, as they believed they were using an extension of the leg-theory—something that had been used before.

Australia toured England for five Tests in 1930, winning 2-1. Before the series, Bradman had only played five Tests and his unorthodox batting technique raised doubts whether he could succeed against the swinging ball on slower pitches in England. Before the series, Percy Fender wrote:
“... he will always be in the category of the brilliant [batsmen], if unsound, ones. Promise there is in Bradman in plenty, though watching him does not inspire one with any confidence that he desires to take the only course which will lead him to a fulfilment of that promise. He makes a mistake, then makes it again and again; he does not correct it, or look as if he were trying to do so. He seems to live for the exuberance of the moment.”

However, there were still significant amounts of expectation from the former players and the Australian public. According to former captain Clem Hill, “Australia ha[d] unearthed a champion, self-taught, with natural ability. But most important of all, with his heart in the right place.” [Haigh 2008] Hill was proved correct; Bradman scored a record aggregate of 974 runs at an average of 139.14, including 334 in the Third Test. His scoring was so prolific, on the first day of the Test, he scored 309 runs. No one has since matched or exceeded these feats, and Bradman’s first-class tally of 2,960 runs for the tour was also the most by any overseas batsmen on a tour of England.

England’s captain for the 1932-33 series, Douglas Jardine, with the help of Nottinghamshire captain, Arthur Carr and international fast bowlers Harold Larwood and Bill Voice, devised a plan to combat Bradman’s run-scored, as they believed it would be tough to win the series if Bradman continued on from the last Ashes series. During a meeting in London ahead of the tour, Jardine asked the bowling pair if they could bowl a leg stump line, varying their length. They agreed that these tactics might prove effective. They recognised that Bradman looked uncomfortable when he was targeted with short balls during his 232 at The Oval in the 1930 series. He was rarely known to play the hook shot and often jolted to the leg side when he faced short-pitched bowling. A similar tactic known as the leg theory had already been devised beforehand. A bowler would bowl at the legs of a batsman and pack the leg side field, though it was often effective, it made for boring cricket and was frowned upon in cricket circles.

On the boat to Australia, Jardine kept to himself for the most part; however, he had already begun to have disagreements with Plum Warner, one of the two team managers along with Richard Palairet. Still, the England captain gave his team instructions on conduct, when to give autographs and how they needed to keep out of the harsh Australian sun. Reportedly, Jardine also told his men they had to hate the Australians in order to be victorious, and to refer to Bradman as “the little bastard”. It is believed that it was on this boat trip that Jardine had settled on Bodyline or the leg theory as his man tactic.

England first tested their new tactic in a first-class game against an Australian XI in Melbourne on November 18-22. Although Jardine was rested (replaced by deputy Bob Wardle), several balls struck Australian batsmen—angering spectators, who would become more volatile as the series progressed. This was the only time they employed Bodyline before the Test series. Bradman warned local administrators after the match that there would be trouble would be in order if these tactics continued. The Australian public also had their concerns on the form of Bradman, who averaged just 17.6 in his three first-class games leading into the Tests. He then withdrew from the First Test at the Sydney Cricket Ground, causing many to believe he had a nervous breakdown. Australia’s premier batsman had been in a dispute with the Australian Board of Control before the series because he had a contract with the Sydney Sun. The board would not allow players to write in newspapers unless journalism was their full-time profession. Bradman then threatened to withdraw from the team unless he was allowed to write for the newspaper. Nevertheless, England still employed the Bodyline tactics intermittently in their victory in the Test, much to the crowd’s displeasure. The tactics, however, did not upset everyone in Australia, and the country’s former Test captain, Monty Noble, praised the English bowling, despite administrators expressing their concerns amongst each other.
Bradman returned to the team for the Second Test at the Melbourne Cricket Ground, when newspaper employers released him from his contract. The public believing he was the one batsman skilled enough to conquer Bodyline. The teams were greeted by a record crowd of 63,993 on the first day, and Bradman came to the crease with the score at 2/67. The crowd delayed play for several minutes when they gave him a standing ovation. Despite their lofty expectations, Bradman was bowled for a first ball duck—the only one in his career. Anticipating a short ball, he moved across his stumps, though the ball did not rise as much as he expected and dragged it onto his stumps—causing the crowd to fall into stunned silence. Australia was still able to record a first innings lead, and Bradman scored an unbeaten 103 from 146 balls in the second innings. Bill O’Reilly and Bert Ironmonger then bowled Australia to victory, therefore levelling the series at 1-all. A significant portion of the public was now under the misconception that Bodyline was defeated and Australia would go on and record a series victory. However, the pitch for Test was the slowest for the series, slightly nullifying the effectiveness of Bodyline. Larwood was also suffering from problems with his boot, thus affecting his bowling.

The series reached boiling point on the second day of the Third Test in Adelaide. In front of a record ground attendance of 50,962, Australia opening batsman and captain Bill Woodfull faced an intimidating over from Larwood—the third over of the innings. The fifth ball of the over just missed Woodfull’s head en-route to the wicket-keeper, and the sixth and final ball struck the batsman over the heart. Once hit, Woodfull staggered away holding his chest and bent over in significant pain. Despite England players surrounding him and offering sympathy, Jardine yelled out “Well bowled, Harold!” to Larwood. The comment—which was later discovered to be directed to unnerve Bradman—disgusted Woodfull. When Larwood was set to deliver to Woodfull again, the field was changed into Bodyline positions. Larwood claimed that Jardine made the move, and Jardine said that Larwood requested the change. This caused the crowd to protest loudly and hurl abuse at English players. Later, Jardine wrote how he wished he did not make the field change at that moment; however, he expressed how Woodfull should have retired hurt if he was injured. Soon after, a Larwood delivery knocked that bat from the hands of the Australian captain, unsettling him further. He suffered further blows in his ninety minute innings, before he was bowled by Allen for 22.

When England tour manager, Pelham Warner, came to express his sympathy for Woodfull’s injury, the captain famously remarked:
“I don’t want to see you, Mr Warner. There are two teams out there, one is playing cricket. The other is making no attempt to do so.”
Woodfull also reportedly said, “This game is too good to be spoilt. It’s time some people got out of it,” therefore hinting that he may withdraw his team from the series in protest. The comment which was leaked to press infuriated the Australian captain because he expected his comments to remain private. Speculation ignited on who in the Australia camp leaked the comments. Most of the team blamed Bradman, though the man himself strenuously denied the claim. The team’s lone journalist, Jack Fingleton, was blamed Warner, but Fingleton denied this in his autobiography and believed Sydney Sun reporter, Claude Corbett, received the information through Bradman.

The crowd become even more agitated the next day when Bert Oldfield suffered a fractured skull from the bowling of Larwood—even though England was not using Bodyline tactics at the time. He mishit a hook, which took the top edge of the bat; Oldfield later admitted that the injury was his fault. Nevertheless, it was feared at this point, that the crowd would riot onto the field and attack the English players. Mounted police were deployed around the ground as a precaution, though the crowd remained behind the fence. During England’s second innings, Jardine batted extremely slowly for 56, and was consistently hurled abuse by the crowd who were further infuriated by his slow scoring. The Australian Board of Control for cricket sent a cable to the (MCC) in London outlying their displeasure for the tactics used by England:

Bodyline bowling has assumed such proportions as to menace the best interests of the game, making protection of the body by the batsman the main consideration. This is causing intensely bitter feeling between the players, as well as injury. In our opinion it is unsportsmanlike. Unless stopped at once it is likely to upset the friendly relations existing between Australia and England.

The MCC, however, was still of the opinion that their (England) tactics were harmless; this was supported by most of the British public. They also took offence of being called “unsportsmanlike” and wanted a retraction. The team threatened to withdraw from the remaining two Tests in protest, unless the Australian Board withdrew its unsporting behaviour accusation. Because Australian Prime Minister, Joseph Lyons, told board members the economic struggles the country would have to endure if the British public boycotted Australia trade, the board withdrew its allegation two days before the fourth Test. Jardine, himself, was adamant that Bodyline was not designed to cause injury and he was leading England in a sportsmanlike and gentlemanly manner, also saying that Australian batsmen needed to perform better. In an act of good will, Jardine sent a telegram of sympathy to Oldfield’s wife and organized for presents to be sent to his young daughters.
The controversial circumstances had no affect on the English team and they continued to bowl Bodyline for the remainder of the series, thus winning 4–1. There were no more serious injuries, though many batsmen were struck. The fourth Test saw further clashes, most notably when Jardine asked Australian bowler, Harry Alexander, to not run on the pitch because he was damaging it. Infuriated, he preceded to bowl a barrage of bounces at Jardine, before eventually hitting him to the delight and roars of the crowd

Bradman’s batting tactics also caused controversy; often backing away hitting the ball to the off side with tennis-like shots. For most, 396 runs at 56.77 would normally be classed as a very good series, but his series average was just 57% of his career mean. And although he was the leading run-scorer in the series England were satisfied that they nullified him sufficiently. The rest of the Australian batting line-up fared significantly worse, however, with Stan McCabe the only other batsman to score a century.

The series created profound changes to cricket, and is still regard by many as the most controversial series of all-time. It was voted the most controversial period in Australian cricket by a panel of the country’s more prominent cricketing identities. In a poll of cricket journalists, commentators, and players in 2004, the Bodyline tour was ranked the most important event in cricket history. Numerous authors and players released books on the series, each expressing different views about Bodyline. Remarkably, the MCC asked Larwood to sign an apology to them for his bowling in the series, something he refused because he was following orders from his upper-class captain. He therefore never played for England again.

Bodyline also caused relation difficulties outside sport. For the most part, citizens in each country preferred to boycott buying goods manufactured in the other. The North China Daily News published a pro-Bodyline editorial which claimed that Australia were sore losers. It was reported that several business deals in Hong Kong and Shanghai were lost by Australians because of local reactions. Tensions between English immigrants were also severe, with tourists and immigrants to each country being persecuted. In 1934-35, a statue of Prince Albert in Sydney had its ear knocked off and the word “BODYLINE” painted on it. Vilification towards Larwood in England became so severe he immigrated to Australia in 1950 to escape it. When the television mini-series Bodyline was aired on Network Ten in Australia, he received several threatening phone calls.

Bodyline’s effect on cricket is also everlasting. Now in Tests, a bowler is only allowed two balls an over to bounce between the shoulder and the top of the batsman’s head. Only two fieldsmen are allowed behind square leg at any one time, limiting the chance of a batsman fending a short pitched ball to a fielder behind square. There is a lot more and better protection for the batsmen. Batsman very rarely used chest guards, arm guards or thigh pads, and never wore helmets; now, nearly every international batsman wears them.

What's the go with Creatine Supplements?

Creatine, an amino acid (building blocks of proteins), is used in muscle cells to store energy for explosive and intense exercise such as sprinting. The specific name for creatine stored in muscle cells is Phosphocreatine (creatine phosphate). Intense exercise lasting approximately 30 seconds causes phosphocreatine to break down to creatine and phosphate, thus regenerating the central source of energy, adenosine triphosphate (ATP). When ATP cannot regenerate fast enough, output power is reduced because phosphocreatine becomes depleted – which is basically failing to cope with the difficulty of the exercise. However, the rate of regeneration of phosphocreatine following sprints may increase if the muscle is carrying extra creatine. This would therefore mean the body would suffer less fatigue, enhancing their athletic performance. Research has also indicated that creatine can also help with muscular growth.

The way creatine is used in the body effects what sports it is needed for most. Creatine is used and perhaps needed by athletes in sports with high intensity and minimal duration – weightlifters, sprinters, and numerous other athletic-type events are some. This does not mean athletes in sports that involve all three energy systems – ATP-PC, lactic acid and aerobic systems – with intermittent work patterns will not be benefit from creatine supplements (e.g. soccer, basketball, football, racquet sports). A person that has higher creatine levels will more than likely still have an enhanced ATP-PC system, which will give them an advantage before their body starts using the lactic energy and aerobic systems.

Evidence on whether creatine supplements are actually useful is a debatable topic and relatively new topic. Although early twentieth century documents discussed how creatine ingestion led to an increase in body mass, it was not until the early-1990s that the role of creatine as an erogenic acid became prominent. Soon after, there was a dramatic increase in creatine supplement sales. A 1998 British newspaper study found 100% of rugby league and weightlifters used the supplement. Research into the affect of creatine is quite limited and needs further research. But there is still enough evidence to show creatine supplements decreases muscular fatigue in professional athletes, thus increasing the effectiveness of the ATP-PC system. Conversely, creatine supplements do next to nothing for untrained or elderly people. Since meat is a primary source of creatine, vegetarians appear to have more benefits to supplements than non-vegetarians, because they have lower average body stores of creatine. Creatine supplements have not been well researched on women, and more information is needed to determine whether it has similar effects to what it has on men, despite it initially being believed it had the same effect.

The side effects of increased volumes of creatine in the body need to be further researched. According to a book published by, Balsom, Soderlund and Ekblom, the only side effects to daily dosages of 1.5–25g of creatine supplements a year was weight gain. However, more recent publications have shown there may be other side effects. Some athletic trainers and coaches believe creatine supplements may increase the amount of soft tissue injuries, and athletes training in hot, humid conditions may suffer severe cramps earlier. These cramps have been attributed to the fact there may be less water salts in muscle. Richard Kreider (1998), though, disputes this, and notes there had not been studies at that stage to prove this theory. Kidney and liver damage are also believed to be potential side effects.
The legal use of creatine supplements is a controversial and debatable topic. Most importantly, however, creatine supplements are not on the IOC’S (International Olympic Committee’s) banned substances list. They are therefore quite easy to access, online at gyms, pharmacies, and in some cases, the supermarket. Nonetheless, creatine supplements from the supermarket are not recommended by the majority of people posting on internet weight gaining internet pages. Prices vary dramatically, and as with most products, it is categorically cheaper to purchase creatine over the internet. You can expect to pay $20-30 for 500-1000g of the product in stores.

Although research indicates the ATP-PC system can be improved by increased amounts of creatine, the most effective way may simply be by regular physical training with short repetitions with high intensity. This would mean sprints for 8-10 seconds, but most importantly, leaving a break between sprints of 40-60 seconds. The reasons why this is vitally important is it allows the body time to replenish phosphocreatine stores in the muscle, thus preventing the body’s lactic or aerobic systems from taking over and becoming the predominant system.

In summary, creatine supplements appear to be safe and are a legal way to improve the body’s ATP-PC system for an athlete. However, the possible side effects need to be known, and athletes taking the supplement need to be aware about the amount of research conducted thus far have been fairly limited, so there may be additional consequences, especially in the long-term.

Renewable Energy in Australia and Tasmania

Renewable energy is energy that is naturally replenished from resources which include sunlight, wind, rain, wave, tides, and geothermal heat. Oil, coal and gas are fossil fuels which produce carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas which is widely believed to contribute to global warming. About 21.3 billion tones of CO2 are produced each year through the burning of fossil fuels. Carbon Dioxide and other gases keep the Earth habitable by naturally trapping solar heat in the atmosphere. However, Earth’s natural processes can only absorb roughly half this amount, leaving a net increase of 10.65 billion tonnes of atmospheric carbon dioxide each year. According to most scientists, this causes Global Warming, which is a term to describe the increase in the average temperature of Earth's near-surface air and oceans since the mid-20th century.

The industrial revolution of the 18th and 19th centuries saw a significant increase in CO2 levels in the atmosphere. Before this period, levels were between 260 and 280 parts per million (ppm); now, human activities have increased this to roughly 380 ppm, an increase of thirty-four per cent. The world is evolving at an unforseen rate, and climate change is become one of the biggest worldwide agendas. Earth's temperature has risen by around 0.7°C over the past 100 years, and is projected to increase by 1.0°C - 6.4°C over the next ninety years. Ice caps have lost 40% of their thickness over the past forty years, causing sea levels to rise at a rate of 1.8mm per year between 1961 and 2003. This rate increased to 3.1mm in the ten years to 2003. By 2100, levels are expected to rise by 18-59cms from now, with the possibility of a 100cm rise not out of the question if glaciers and ice sheets continue to melt at an alarming rate.

Mean surface temperature change for the period 2000 to 2009 relative to the average temperatures from 1951 to 1980
The use of fossil fuels creates other by-products which are pollutants, and include sulphur dioxide, soot and ash, which change the properties of clouds. These by-products absorb solar energy and reflect sunlight back into space, thus meaning that less reaches Earth’s surface. This phenomenon is called Global Dimming, and was first publicly coined by an English scientist, Gerry Stanhill, in Israel. When published in 2001, his research was met with sceptical responses from other scientists; it was not until Australian scientists confirmed the findings that global dimming became an issue. It is probable that the environmental issue will mask the affect of global warming—especially during the day—however, the increase in cloud caused by the dimming process will trap heat during the night, acting as a sort of blanket.

Despite Australia being very susceptible to the impacts of climate change—and seeing profound environmental effects during recent decades—just 4% of its energy in 2006 came from renewable sources. It does, however, want to increase this to 20% by 2020, and under former Labor Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, Australia committed to reducing carbon emissions to at least 60% below their 2000 levels by 2050. As the world’s population continues to grow, energy consumption is also increasing, and along with the environmental impact of fossil fuels, they take millions of years to replace, therefore meaning that we need to find an alternate form of energy—the obvious solution is increased use of renewable energy.

In developed countries such as Australia, a significant increase in renewable energy is practical. Instead of looking at the ground for our energy needs, we should turn out attention to the sky, where if captured through solar energy, the sun produces enough energy every hour to power the world for a year. Solar energy is harnessed light and heat from the sun, and there are two different methods used to produce solar energy. One is Photovoltaic, which are cells that are converted to direct current electricity. Photovoltaic is extremely reliable and can be expected to live up to 25 years. The second is solar thermal (or heat) energy, which uses mirrors reflected onto thermal collectors, which is then used to heat. However, as with other renewable sources, the main drawback to solar is cost. Solar thermal energy is currently two times the cost of gas fired generation, and Photovoltaic’s are up to four times more expensive. Also, to work at their most efficient level, solar panels need to be cleaned regularly. The Australian Government offer rebates on some solar systems, while Aurora energy, a Tasmanian Government-owned electricity distribution and retail company, offer a buy back on solar power connected to the grid in the state.

In contrast to the rest of Australia, the country’s smallest state, Tasmania, generates up to 91% of its energy from renewable hydro and wind power—giving the island state a clean, green image. The other 9% is from four gas-fired power stations which produces about 830,000 megawatt hours of electricity. This non-renewable source is used because a lack of rain affects (meaning dams are low) affects the amount of hydro-electricity produced, and wind power is not always reliable because the right conditions are needed for power to be generated. Still, the state’s greenhouse gas emissions are low, producing less than 0.05 tonnes of greenhouse gases per megawatt hour of electricity generated in 2009—18 times less than the Australian state average. Tasmania is home to two operating wind farms and twenty-nine hydro-electricity power plants in seven different catchment areas.
Wind turbines work by turning blades of large windmills which then generates electricity. Although wind power in Tasmania produces 480,000 megawatt hours (notably less than even gas), it is expensive, costing $70 per megawatt hour to produce—significantly higher than the $35 per megawatt hour for a coal-fired plant, and $40 per megawatt hour for a gas-fired plant. Tasmanian wind farms are located on the north-west coast (Woolnorth Wind Farm) and King Island (Huxley Hill Wind Farm), while another is currently being constructed at a cost of $400 million at Musselroe Bay in Tasmania’s north-east. The Woolnorth Wind Farm is owned by Roaring 40s, and has 62 wind turbines which has a generating capacity of 140 megawatts. A three stage project, Woolnorth was fully completed in May 2007, and is considered one of the best wind farms in the world.

Hydro-electricity was the first form of renewable energy to be used in the state, when the Duck Reach Power Station was opened on the South Esk River in Launceston during 1895. It provided the city with electricity, and was the first publicly owned hydro-electric plant in the Southern Hemisphere. Hydro-electricity is created when gravitational potential energy from water initially stored in lakes or dams, is turned into kinetic energy when it flows through the pipes and into the power station which is connected to a generator that makes electricity. Hydro is much more reliable then solar, wind or wave power, but is much more expensive to build, and sites for the construction of hydro dams are difficult to find. The Great Lake in the Midlands (Australia’s largest natural freshwater lake), and Lake Gordon in the south-west of Tasmania, contain more than 80% of the water storage for the state’s 29 power stations.

Tasmania’s eagerness for hydro-electricity has, however, seen one of the world’s rare inland beaches destroyed. Lake Pedder was previously a natural lake, located in the south-west of the state, and in the warmer months when water levels were lower, Pedder revealed a pink quartzite beach, which took ten minutes to walk across. Though, in 1972, three dam walls were built around Lake Pedder, thus trapping the flows of both the Serpentine River and the Huon River. This caused a giant lake impoundment to be formed, so as to top up the larger Lake Gordon (situated nearby), where the power station is located. At the expense of generating capacity, alternatives were suggested to this development, even by the Federal Government, but Tasmanian leaders did no bow to opposition of their Gordon River Power Scheme. The demise of the original Lake Pedder may have helped stimulate public outcry that eventually stopped the damming of the Gordon River. Set to be called the Franklin Dam, the Tasmanian Government proposed a hydro-electricity dam capable of generating 180 megawatts, but after significant protest, Australian Prime Minister, Bob Hawke, tried to stop the proposal, resulting in a legal battle between the Federal and Tasmanian Government. The High Court ruled in favour of Bob Hawke’s Government in 1982, and the development was stopped.

Along with wind, hydro and solar energy, there are two other main forms of renewable energy—Geothermal and Biomass. Geothermal is steam from the ground which then turns turbines and then produces electricity. There are two different types of geothermal energy: one is when the earth supplies steam from the ground, the second is pockets of heat below the surface that can be used to heat water into steam. In either case, they both turn turbines to make electricity. Biomass energy, also called bioenergy, is energy that is produced from plants, wood, wood sludge and plant materials. There are numerous ways to produce Biomass energy: Methane gas (e.g. from landfills and sewage treatment plants), Dry agricultural products (e.g. sugar cane wastes), Municipal mixed wastes (e.g. Houses hold garbage and pruning’s), Forestry products (e.g. remnants from sawmills and forestry operations).

Although Tasmania is Australia’s coolest state (with Hobart averaging 8-17°C and Launceston 7-18°C), global warming has seen the state have an increase of 0.8-1.0 over the past fifty years—in line with the rest of the country. Rainfall has also declined up to 20mm per decade in the north-west and south-east, while increasing by between 5-15mm per decade in notoriously wet parts of the south-west. A detailed report by the CSIRO, Hydro Tasmania and Tasmanian Partnership for Advanced Computing, indicates that annual rainfall in the west and central areas is set to increase by 7 to 11%; decrease by around 8 % in the north-east; and increased winter and early spring rainfall for the entire state by 2040. Temperatures are expected to increase by 0.33%, with warmer minimum temperatures in winter and late spring and early summer throughout the state. The study also found that sea levels around the state will rise by between 20 and 60cm by 2095. As we see an increase in wind-powered energy in Tasmania, the amount of wind produced in the state is important. However, speeds are only expected to increase marginally—with the biggest increases in winter, early spring, early summer, and particularly in the north-west in late autumn.

These affects could be devastating for the state, as it’s strongly export related—exporting 9.3 million tonnes of freight to mainland Australai, and 8.7 million tonnes overseas. These manufacturing industries that supply our exports, use significant amounts of energy—and with and emissions trading scheme, electricity prices will increase, causing problems in this sector where Tasmanian industries have little capacity to pass on costs to customers because of the competitive international markets in which they supply. Agriculture is likely to be affected as some crops may no longer be suitable to grow in certain areas, but may become viable in other regions. The increasing water temperatures may cause fisheries to be affected the most out of all industries. These changing conditions are expected to affect aquaculture production—especially Atlantic salmon—and Tasmanian fish species may migrate to areas where water temperatures are cooler. Positive implications, nonetheless, may mean that warmer water fish species migrate further south to waters surrounding Tasmania.

Research indicates that the best two renewable sources for Tasmania are hydro-electricity and wind—our two current forms of energy. However, many households are beginning to be fitted with solar panels, thus harnessing energy from the sun. But because Tasmania has low sun intensity in the cooler months, not much energy is produced during these months.

Before construction of the Woolnorth Wind Farm, research was undertaken to see if the area was the windiest in the state, results found the location on the north-west coast to be as such, and was therefore constructed there. Its location is in the path of prevailing westerly winds, and the farm produces energy in air that a nearby air monitoring station records as the cleanest in the world. In 2002, a monitoring tower was built to determine the wind potential of a proposed wind farm site at Musselroe in north-east Tasmania. Results were encouraging, and the farm was given the all-clear for construction. These areas are obviously the best locations for wind turbines in the state—far better than calmer places in more inland areas and the south-east.

Hydro-electricity dams—Tasmania’s biggest source of energy—are located or connected to high rainfall locations on the western side of Tasmania, as eastern Tasmania has significantly less rainfall. Although the construction of Musselroe will see more wind energy produced, Hydro will remain the state’s largest source of energy for a long time to come, because of the amount of rainfall western Tasmania receives, and the number of hydro-electricity power stations already constructed and works efficiently. Research by Choice Magazine stated that it could take up to 45 years for solar panels to pay for themselves in Tasmania, so solar panel introduction into Tasmanian homes is not as viable as other locations in Australia. Tasmania’s population is not expected to grow as much as the rest of Australia’s, and only reach 550,000 in 2050 before declining, therefore meaning it does not need to produce a great deal more electricity than it currently does. Global Warming, however, might mean that the usual climatic conditions in the state might change over time and hydro-electric dams might have to move to locations better suiting future weather conditions. In summary, hydro, wind and solar are all suitable forms of energy for the state, but solar would not have a big capacity in the cooler months. For the best amount of wind energy to be produced, wind farms would have to be located on the coasts where they are today. Fortunately, Tasmania is already in a good place with its renewable energy production, it is the Australian mainland that has a long way to go.