Talk:Harold Larwood

message: It seems that history has not been kind to Harold Larwood. He has been portrayed as a villain in most articles, though he was only obeying the orders of his captain. He had no other choice if he had to stay in the team. Coming from an improvished background, he was extra-ordinarily talented and was perhaps the only bowler who could restrain the great Sir Don. We should judge him in a more rational manner and he could be a great inspiration for modern quicks.
:Larwood was a hero in England (as was Jardine). It was only really in Australia that he was the villain - and Sir Don's proof that Larwood was a chucker is kind of interesting:) jguk 16:45, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment

message: Sorry - I don't know how to present quotes but:
"By the end of the series in 1932-33, the MCC Lords willfully celebrated the return of the Ashes back to England, but not for an instant did they realise the fury, the fatality and the dangers which it caused (simply because, while sitting in England, they could not see what damage this strategy was causing on the fast pitches of Australia). However, in 1933, Bodyline was used during the West Indies tour of England. There the MCC Lords saw with open eyes, perhaps, for the very first time that 'Fast Leg Theory' or 'Bodyline' as per the Australian Press, was not the same tactic so far very commonly prevalent in English County Cricket, but, rather, an extremely lethal, provocative and indimidating premeditated plan of attack used by one man, Captain Douglas Jardine, to satisfy his personal vendetta and grudge against Australians. Concerned about the souring diplomatic relations between England & Australia as a result of this, the MCC Lords reprimanded him and asked him to sign a Letter of Appology to the Australian Crick Board & Players. He refused, on the basis that he, as a professional cricketer, was obliged to follow the directions of his captain, whose responsibility the tactics were. Larwood never played cricket for England again, returning to Nottinghamshire where he played until 1938."
This is extremely opinionated, using words such as "willfully celebrated", "personal vendetta" etc.  Also what exactly is/are MCC Lords? The whole thing could do with copy-editing for style as it's very hard to read and doesn't really make sense.  Saintmesmin (talk) 10:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: *"The Australians described the method as "unsportsmanlike", and during subsequent efforts to heal the breach" - "the breach" isn't explicit here; you have the Aussies complaining a little but nothing on the English reaction.
:*Rephrased for clarity
*"In April 1923, with oversized kit acquired for this purpose,..." - c'mon lad, let's get you some oversized kit, you won't impress the county selectors wearing kit that fits.
:*Yes, it reads slightly oddly. I've removed it. 
*"Iremonger's regime of diet and exercise he gained weight and a few inches in height" - really? Did Iremonger rack him?
:*I wouldn't be surprised; Iremonger was apparently a ferocious old git. But it was probably just the exercises.
*"The Lord's Test was drawn, with neither side coming near to winning" - odd phrasing
:*Not really, though perhaps a bit informal. A draw in cricket might mean that one side came within a run or two of winning, but was denied. Or it may be one of those tedious matches where neither side can claim the advantage and, as they say, honours were even. But that's an even worse sporting cliché. 
*"One of his victims in the match was Bill Ponsford, the Australian Test opening batsman, who let slip his opinion that Larwood was "not really fast". This, according to Ponsford's future Test team-mate Jack Fingleton, was a serious misjudgement." - this sounds like Larwood was then out for revenge. Is the serious misjudgement letting his opinion be known or the assessment of Larwood's speed?
:*According to Fingelton, Ponsford was targetted for making known his opinion that Larwood wasn't really fast. I have rephrased to make this clear.
*His omission from international cricket in 1930-1 seems a bit odd when he's top of the bowling averages and otherwise playing well and there's no explanation. Is this all down to the performance against Bradman in 1930? 
:*The sources don't specify why Larwood wasn't chosen for the 1930–31 tour, but one can surmise. He had been battered by Bradman; he wasn't fully fit (he missed one 1930 Test through illness); in those days, Tests against South Africa were not thought of primary importance and leading players were often rested. I suspect there were elements of all these reasons in the decision not to pick him for South Africa.
*The "Prelude to bodyline" and "Australian tour, 1932–33" sections drift away from Larwood a little in places - it's colourful but I'm not sure all the detail belongs here. On the other hand it does flow nicely through these two sections.
:*I think it is necessary, especially for the uninformed reader, to have background information on the prelude and on the tour itself, otherwise there is no clear context for understanding Larwood's bowling and the reactions it caused. I'll look again, but I'm not sure that I can, or should, pare it down much.
*" In 1982, the 50th anniversary of the bodyline series was celebrated with much publicity" - is celebrated the right word? Commemorated, maybe?
:*That's a much better word.
*"Timing technology was primitive in his day, but various tests indicated speeds of between 90 and 100 mph (140 to 160 km/ph)" - some comparison to other fast bowlers would be helpful here. Is that fast? 
:*I'll add a footnote based on speed measurements using electronic technology. 90 mph is very fast, 100 mph exceptionally so; there have been very few reliable measurements of bowling at this speed.
Very easy read for a cricket article on a cricketer who doesn't seem to have much going on outside of cricket - all the tedious statistics and obscure jargon is worked in nicely without disrupting the flow. Yomanganitalk 23:42, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: One more

message: This was added to the article before its appearance as Today's Featured Article on 14 November. Unfortunately the image does not comply with the public domain criteria as expressed in WP:PD. The relevant policy reads as follows:
Photographic reproductions, as a form of derivative work, may inherit the copyright of the original work. If that artwork is in the public domain, then so is the photograph.  If, however, the depicted work is copyright protected, then, although there is no independent copyright on the photo itself, it cannot be considered to be in the public domain as the original rights holder still has the authority to control how reproductions of his work, including photographs, are made and distributed. The same applies to digitized images.
The statue is a recent work, and its copyright belongs to its creator, Neil Andrew. Furthermore, although the image page includes the information "Author tagged this as PD-Self" there is no evidence that either the sculptor or the photographer, Andy Gilmour, has had any imput into the page, which was uploaded and tagged by an editor only identified as "Steinsky".  
When preparing this article in 2012 I wanted to include this image, but regretfully desisted because of the copyright implications. Equally regretfully I am removing it now. Brianboulton (talk) 11:29, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Larwood statue image

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Harold Larwood. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160311005822/http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/averages/batting_bowling_by_team.html?id=52%3Bteam%3D1%3Btype%3Dseries to http://stats.espncricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/averages/batting_bowling_by_team.html?id=52%3Bteam%3D1%3Btype%3Dseries
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:44, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified