Opening up with Arthur Morris - Part 1

It has been nearly 65 years since the famous invincible side of Australia went through 1948 English summer undefeated.  From the invincible team only two of the greats are still living. One is Neil Harvey, the pup of the invincible team and the other is the opening batsman Arthur Morris.  

Last week at the Bradman museum it was sheer privilege to meet the great Arthur Morris who Bradman regarded with Barry Richards as the best opening batsman he has seen.  Morris is now 90 years of age, the oldest living Australian cricketer. 

During the two hours I shared with him it was thrill listening to him discuss various topics from Bradman to Bombay.  I have compiled few of the answers which I thought would be interesting starting with Bradman.

When did you first meet Don Bradman ?

I was 9 years of age. My father was a school teacher in a suburb in northern Newcastle.  Bradman was travelling for a sporting organisation and was in town having a coffee at shop right next to our place.  I was outside in the front yard with no shoes and shorts and my dad said “come here and meet Don Bradman”. I went outside and said “how are you Mr Bradman”, I cant remember what Bradman said at the time. It was later on in life that I realised I had met finest cricketers and even extraordinary I played under his captaincy in 1946.

What was Bradman like as a man and as a captain ?

Bradman was very conscious of being a good role model not only in cricket but for whole of Australia.  I remember him mentioning how important it was to tour to England in 1948 after the war.  As a captain he encouraged the idea of playing against all the counties on that tour. In those days there use to be large crowds that came even for our matches against the counties. More people that came meant more money for local counties. Bradman thought this would assist in rebuilding cricket and lifestyle of people after the war.

There is so much said about the rift between O’Reilly and Bradman your comments ?

I get this question all the time since I got along with both Tiger and Bradman equally.  It is like working for a multi-national organisation there will be two people who do not get along but there objective at the end of the day is ensure the organisation grows and makes profit.  It does not mean they need to go home and spend time together after work. It was similar between Bradman and O’Rielly they had mutual respect on the field but had their own ways off the field. Both believe the other one was the best batsman or the bowler they ever played against. 

You were the first person to score 100 in both innings of first class debut match (Only two people have done it since – Nari Contractor and Ajud Ahmed) ?

I don’t remember too many details about the actual innings but I remember I didn’t even have a bat of my own and had to burrow one from St – George club cricket kit.  I played at St George club with Tiger O”reilly and he took me down the stair case of the pavilion and told me to pick out a bat I liked and use it for my first match for NSW.  It proved to be a lucky bat.

The baggy green now has become such an iconic symbol was it similar in the past ? Did all the players discuss its value and the meaning of donning the baggy green ?

No not really, it was a privilege to play for Australia but the players did not really talk about the cap in such. There was the war and then all of the sudden you were playing for Australia and you would think to yourself what am I doing here. I was also extremely delighted too when I donned my NSW cap.

More to come in Part 2 ......

Did playing for individual milestones cost India the Asia Cup ?

Letting others decide your own destiny is an accident waiting to happen. Playing for individual records instead of achieving a team objective is not deliberate accident. The implications of both are now known to the Indian cricketers, as they pack their bags and head home from the Asia cup.

It will be the second time within space of two months the team has failed to reach the finals of a multi-nation tournament. First it was the tri series in Australia and then the Asia cup. India has relied on favourable results to ensure their path to the finals. On both occasions the results have been unfavourable, resulting in an early exit. Yes, it frustrates supporters but not as much as when players in the team put individual milestone ahead of the team.

India’s first two games were good examples. Player’s individual achievements disrupted the flow of the team. It was evident from the way the batsmen batted. In their first game Gambhir and Kohli were in cruise control taking India to 1/175 after 35 over’s. Both batsmen were on 80 and 85 respectively, when India took the batting power play. In an ideal situation one should have accelerated while the other could have batted in slightly conservative fashion. But both seemed to batting in a conservative manner, only one four was hit and they scored mere 33 runs in 5 overs of the batting play. At the end of it neither had achieved their milestones. Importantly, it affected the final total.

From the outside it was so blatant the players wanted to get to their hundreds before taking risks. Gambhir who had not scored a 100 for about 14months was determined he did not miss this chance after his two 90’s in Adelaide. Once he reached the landmark he let out all his frustration. Kohli was little sub-due but the youngster has learnt after the Australian test series runs don’t come easy. 

From a distance though you had to wonder what Duncan Fletcher would have been thinking are we going to be 20 runs short? Luckily for India the Sri Lankans chased poorly and Dhoni’s batting blitz ensured the slow batting towards the milestone was made transparent. Surely, there were to be eyebrows raised and the issue needed to be rectified.

Three days later India repeated the same mistake again. They scored 34 in the power-play over’s when the score was 1/169. The culprit was the great Sachin Tendulkar and to a small extent Suresh Raina. Tendulkar case will always be justified but there was a small incident that indicated even a 50 was considered so valuable to an individual.

The last ball of the 45^th over, Raina on 49 received a knee high full toss which a well set Raina would have smashed for a boundary. Instead he simply punched it down the ground for a single. Yes, Raina could have easily smashed or mistimed the full toss if he tried to belt it but the important thing was there was no intent. Raina clearly knew he was on 49 and he wanted that milestone.

All sports are of if’s and but’s and had Raina had intent to smash the full toss then he could have hit a boundary. Additional four could have been added to the India total.  We all know how important a run can be in ODI cricket. More so it was evident how much a small milestone could change the mindset of the batsmen.

This time the team had to pay dearly for the opportunity missed by the Indian batsman. Bangladesh chased brilliantly and won the match. At the end of the day it was the loss that cost India a place in the Asia cup final.

Is it because of the Indian culture ?

Some might say the culture of the way cricket is played in India makes cricketers play for milestones. Former opening batsman, Aakash Chopra, in his book “Beyond Blue” says due to the intense competition the only way to catch the selectors eye is by an individual milestone. Chopra goes on to state a 100 in a dull draw still takes precedence over a match winning 70. If this is happening at the domestic level then it not a surprise it exists at the international level.

There is always an exception to this belief and that is the Indian captain. MS Dhoni is least concerned about milestone and rightfully he is the leader. Dhoni never shows his jubilation when he reaches a personal milestone. He simply acknowledges his peers and continues to bat accordingly to the situation the team demands.  

So when a leader is such a team player then one gets the feeling it should be rubbed upon his team mates. The likes of Raina, Gambhir and others have been under the captaincy of Dhoni for last 5 years and they still are yet to learn to put the team before their personal milestones. Clearly, we cannot blame it all on the culture if the captain is such a team man.

India’s failure to reach the Asia cup final should be blamed on individuals striving for personal milestones? We can speculate about the correct answer but watching certain stages of the first two games answered the question.

Did Mahela miss a trick ?

Mahela Jayawardena made all right decisions in the tri-series. From team composition, field placements, bowling rotations and elevating him to top of the order.  But the decision yesterday to bowl first against an injury ridden Australia team is one he may regret while on the plane to Bangladesh this morning.

After successfully chasing 271 on a couple of night ago on the same pitch the decision to bowl first seemed correct at the time.  At the toss he clearly stated there was no point alerting this long batting order and he stuck with extra batsmen, Chamara Kapugedera, over the off spinner Senanayke as he wanted to chase a total.

Mahela’s thought process would have been to restrict Australia to 260 and then chase it down with his strong batting order. Sometimes in cricket though, it is the target of 230 that becomes more difficult to chase rather than 260 plus. This is because of the mental state of the batsman and rather than the way pitch is playing.  It is also easier to bat fluently when there is nothing to lose and a fast start is mandatory chasing a score over 260 plus.

The way Sri Lanka batted in the first few over’s was a clear indication their mindset was to play strokes and the mindset had already been set after the past two matches when Sri Lanka were chasing big totals.

There was nothing wrong in the way they started but even for guys like Sangakarra and Jayawardena or any great batsman it is difficult to curb your aggressive instincts all of the sudden. Unfortunately, it only takes one ball and the batsman pay their price and that is exactly what happened. 

In contrast had Sri Lanka batted first and fell short of a target there bowling unit had proved there capable of defending modest totals. The Melbourne match was a perfect example when they bowled and fielded brilliantly to restrict the Australians.  It was lot easier for bowlers to come out of their mindset’s than batsmen. The bowlers can make a couple of mistakes along the way while the batsman cannot. 

Furthermore, the Sri Lankans were playing on same pitch from two days ago. It was getting drier as the match went on and the spinners would have an impact. The Australian middle order apart from David Hussey have not faced quality spin bowling on a track that is taking some turn, it would have been difficult for them to chase even a low score on such a wicket. Especially, without Michael Clarke the middle order was venerable against spin and Jayawardena could have exposed the batsman while defending a total.

Sri Lanka resurgence in this tournament is largely due to Jayawardena captaincy. As a captain you have more control of your team while fielding rather than batting.  Yesterday had Sri Lanka only scored 220, Jayawardena would have had more control of his team.  At the end of the he cannot control shield Maharoof from a good ball but he certainly can set a field for a bad ball.

Finally, the Australians had only chased once in this tournament and looked out of place in that match.  Shane Watson admitted at the toss they would have batted first, so electing to bowl first was ensuring the Australian were in their comfort zone.  

Playing on such a wicket was an ideal opportunity for Sri Lanka to beat the Australians and one feels Mahela missed a trick by opting to bowl first.