OT: What book are you reading at the moment?

taipan wrote:Niv.

BTW Taipan I have read all the Peter Robinsons. His good mate whose South African, Deon Meyer also writes some riveting crime stuff set in Cape Town. I also like Margie Orford's novels which are set in CT too. A couple you might want to look up if you haven't yet.

Currently I'm reading Sadie Jones' latest novel which is based around a group of young arty farties in London in the seventies. And for work I have had to re-read 'Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?' which is great fun.

Tink I'm about up to 12 in the Peter Robinson's.

taipan wrote:Tink I'm about up to 12 in the Peter Robinson's.

I've also watched the first two series on tv.

BTW are you signed up with Good Reads?

taipan wrote:BTW are you signed up with Good Reads?

Negative.

Find it useful.

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/20361869-weeks-in-naviras

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1059065.Niv

Yes, I'm aware of it. It does look useful but I regularly read reviews too so am constantly apprised of the new offerings. Just wish I had more time to read more books!

The reviews are useful but the best feature is the tracking of books you have read, and those you want to read.

Three more extracts from Ian Peebles' autobiography ("Spinner's Yarn", 1978), which I've meant to put up for a while.

Peebles was a fine writer, I think. The modern phrase is "a triumph of style over substance". Whereas in Peebles' case I think it's style with substance - with poise, and a generally light touch, too.

1

"Cricket, being a game subject to so many variables of weather, soil, light and character, apart from its infinite intrinsic variations, produces a wealth of curiosities. Its statistics in themselves are an unending fascination to the devotee, and it must be some measure of the game's scope that scores produced by eleven players can vary between nought and 1107. If further evidence of the violent fluctuation in cricket fortunes be required, it may be recalled that Victoria, the makers of that record score, were all out in the return match against New South Wales, a few weeks later, for 35 ..."

(p182)

2

"There was the apt and occasionally ferocious wit of George Macauley [of Yorkshire], whose interests were quick off-spinners and classical music. [...] I thought I knew all the Macauleyisms until I had the inestimable pleasure of sitting next to Wilfred [Rhodes] on his ninetieth birthday. [...] [Wilfred] recalled taking the field in 1923 after reading about the disastrous fire which had completely destroyed Madame Tussaud's wax works. In Macauley's two opening overs, his slips - Holmes, Sutcliffe and Kilner - each dropped a sitter, at which the bowler addressed them from thirty yards away: 'When Madame Tussaud wants a set of bluddy slips,' he bawled, 'I'll know where t'find 'em.'

(p155)

3

"Doubtless every man thinks that his particular sphere of interest attracts people of special quality and character, but I am convinced that in the case of cricket this is true. The physical nature of the game would support this contention. It is the most subtle of the active ball games, and widest in its scope and variety, and certainly as susceptible to climatic influence as any other game. It contains all the psychological strains of golf, the nervous suspense, the call for firm decision under pressure - and with time to dither. Normally a reasonably safe game in the physical sense, it can be tough and dangerous. Anyone who doubts this can volunteer to open an innings against the Australian or West Indian fast bowlers, or put his hand to a nice full-blooded hit to mid-off on a keen April morning."

(p211)

rotzdem Ja zum Leben sagen: Ein Psychologe erlebt das Konzentrationslager

Fortunately for me, the English translation.

Is it less harrowing in English?

Doubt it.

An interrogator once pointed out to [Eddie] Paynter that his average of 83 [in Tests v Australia] owed much to the 216 not out he made at Trent Bridge in 1938 [the first innings of the First Test of that year], when he went in at 244 for 3.

'Oh ay', said Paynter, 'ay, it were mostly due to that 216.'

He paused, and added, 'Still, they 'ad to be made, tha knows.'

Alan Gibson, "Growing Up With Cricket", p137.

Been dipping in and out of (among other books - a bad habit of parallel reading) a great little book: "Cricket - The Great Captains" (ed. John Arlott, first publ. 1971). 8 tributes of around 16 pages each by different writers.

Bill Bowes' encomium of DR Jardine is a thought-provoking study by one of the four Yorkshire players who were the skipper's staunchest and most wholehearted followers during the "war".

It contains a lot of gems of first-hand experiences and views. Here's one - not Bodyline-related!.

There's very little new under the sun!

"My next meeting with Jardine was in the Champion County match against the Rest of England at the Oval in 1931, by which time I was playing with Yorkshire. 'D.R.' with a century in his second innings saved the game for his team.

But he was 'let off' by Yorkshire all-rounder Emmott Robinson. Emmott, in the middle of his delivery action, while swinging his arm over to bowl, stopped and stood with the ball poised over the bails while Jardine advanced at least four yards up the pitch. Jardine turned in amazement to see Emmott standing ready to run him out.

'Nah then, hev I to do it?', Emmott demanded. 'Tha's bin pinching a yard or two every time ah've bowled. If tha does it it ageean, assall do thi.' (*)

'D.R.' said nothing With his head held high, just as he walked off the field at Brisbane, he walked majestically back to his crease at the Oval. But he did not offend again."

(*) translation for non-Yorkie readers: "If you do that again, I'll do yer"

Just finished Red Mars. Hell of a read if a bit long. Now planning out how to get there in time to get involved in the martian revolution, sounds like it will be fun.

(Calling in ... with my head ducked down and collar up ...)

I've already praised Ian Peebles' writing above - and also his crafty, significant book titles ...

One of the cricket books I read over the summer was another by Peebles, written in the 1960s. In the decade of a chucking epidemic in cricket - some would prefer to think of it as a calling epidemic. Ian Meckiff (Aus), Geoff Griffin (SA), Charlie Griffith (WI) were among the highest-profile cases, but there were several 'incidents' for example in the English county game too.

The book is - as ever - nicely titled. "Straight from the Shoulder. 'Throwing' - its History and Cure".

That last word tells you the book is also "straight from the shoulder" in frankly proposing a way out of the morass, and an endless debate as to what constitutes an illegal action.

I was struck by Peebles' usual fairness, his characteristic stylish qualities, - and also how the book has not aged. (Point #3 below might seem to be way out of date in an age of varying degrees of flexion - but I'm not sure it is.)

Here are a few of Peebles' main points (my summary, hence my responsibility):

1. It is vital not to set about vilifying/demonising "chuckers".

For two reasons: a) this creates far more heat, and mutual recriminations, than light or a solution; b) the vast majority of throwers sincerely believe their deliveries are legal

2. Few bowlers "throw" much of the time.

Filming shows that the "throw" almost always arises from  a special effort ball: an extra strain to bowl at faster than usual speed (or with extra or unusual spin). Physiologically, it typically derives from an excess or premature twisting of the chest towards the batsman in the delivery stride.

3. Most [1960s] contemporary proposals to solve the problem still desperately seek to define and outlaw what is a "throw" - and fail in the attempt.

Instead, legislation should seek to define a (legal) BOWL. The arm should be required to be extended straight at the elbow from the horizontal behind the body to the point of the delivery of the ball. Failing this, "no-ball" should be called.

4. Note: Flexing of the WRIST at any point should be considered entirely legitimate (against some critics' carping).

5. Various other solutions that have been proposed - such as to legalise throwing in any way, shape or form - are disastrous to cricket, for a variety of reasons (which Peebles explains very clearly).

Peebles treats his subject thoroughly and seriously, but not solemnly, pompously or heatedly. He writes with a characteristic light touch, elegance and - either delicately understated, or neatly satirical, dismantling - humour.

The foreword by Don Bradman also makes for interesting reading to this day.

Whaddup P? Nice to see you. Hope you're flexing it good and proper. Glad you've busted in.

On topic: the new Bernard Cornwell book is good - he always is. Heard they're making a big series out of it 'to rival Game Of Thrones'. I doubt it could do that, what with it being realistic and all, but nevertheless, good times for us Cornwell fans.

It left a void when I finished, so I got back into the Steampunk. The Somnambulist was my first stop, which was pretty decent - though his high brow prose left me wondering the point at times, but was pretty eloquent.

Now I'm onto Whitechapel Gods, which is pretty freakish.

Brass Monkey wrote:Whaddup P? Nice to see you. Hope you're flexing it good and proper. Glad you've busted in.

On topic: the new Bernard Cornwell book is good - he always is. Heard they're making a big series out of it 'to rival Game Of Thrones'. I doubt it could do that, what with it being realistic and all, but nevertheless, good times for us Cornwell fans.

It left a void when I finished, so I got back into the Steampunk. The Somnambulist was my first stop, which was pretty decent - though his high brow prose left me wondering the point at times, but was pretty eloquent.

Now I'm onto Whitechapel Gods, which is pretty freakish.

Interesting Dan. Always related Cornwell with. Sharpe. Might have to look at his other series.

Read this last week.

http://www.amazon.com/State-Emergency-Were-Britain-1970-1974-ebook/dp/B0050N7H3U/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1415729129&sr=1-1&keywords=dominic+sandbrook

Unfortunately the two before are not available on ebook and the next one is ridiculously priced.

If your summation of point 3 is correct, it's a pity people may think it has aged.

Bradman wrote:If your summation of point 3 is correct, it's a pity people may think it has aged.

Lost me.

Sorry. Was looking at PCS' original post and some comments on chucking.

Re-reading 'The Battle of Coral' by Lex McAulay.
The defence of fire bases Coral & Balmoral during the Vietnam War was one of the biggest actions by Australians & lasted 26 days. Real hollywood blockbuster stuff but all you hear about is Long Tan.