Talk:Sid Barnes

message: Anyone prepared to do a chart based on retrospective world rankings for Barnes's career? Also, does the existing chart for his career performances look clunky to anyone else? Can't put my finger on what's wrong with it... except the blue line indicator for such a short career might be based on fewer recent innings. --Dweller (talk) 12:20, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, I'll do it.  What's the link to the icc retro figures again? The Rambling Man (talk) 13:15, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: here Wonder who number 2-6 were? Here's the list when he peaked at number 7 -  Given the nature of the ratings, his short career would count against him... early career innings are penalised, to prevent flash in the pan players seeming to be top of the ratings after 1 Test, etc. On that basis, maybe leave it out? Or for balance include it? I think it's misleading. --Dweller (talk) 13:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Charts 

message: A few new photos now at commons:Category:Sid Barnes, including a nice one as a 16 year old. —Moondyne 14:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very nice work.  Cool.  The Rambling Man (talk) 14:19, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Photos

message: I think its pretty obvious it was in protest, this supports it, by saying that he asked to be 12th man, this was also repeated in: The Fifty Greatest by Inside Edge of ACP Publishing, 2001.
I have a series of 6 images from the article above, which show Sid batting, the best one is probably of him going forward into a defense or off-drive. The second best is probably him in the position of waiting for the ball to be delivered. The issue with the images is that they appear to be of him in later life and in non-match conditions. They are PD, because they are pre-55.
might also be worth noting that (from magazine above):
* he had a stamp made of his autograph.
* he got into cricket because his elder brother Horrie offered him a sixpence a time to bowl at him.
* father died of typhoid four months before his birth
...Hope this helps. Twenty Years 02:47, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you could upload the images to the commons category mentioned above, that'd be muchly appreciated. —Moondyne 02:57, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  12th Man incident 

message: Spelling of the bloke's name varies here and at Keith Johnson. --Dweller (talk) 10:32, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Raith or Wraith 

message: This is in the article referring to the concession of the libel case: 
"Shand commented to the court, “... seldom in the history of libel actions has such a plea failed so completely and utterly.”[23]"
Barnes' own book, It Isn't Cricket, says these words were spoken by Raith's barrister, Smyth, as part of his address to the jury, and not by Jack Shand. Smyth went on to ask the jury to be lenient in the amount of damages they awarded: "All I ask is that there is not reflected against my client by your verdict the contempt that you and every decent citizen must feel for those members of the Board who, upon such silly, trivial grounds, excluded Barnes from the Australian eleven... My client foolishly, as it turns out, believed that this Board was an impartial body of cricket administrators. You can well imagine what Mr Raith thinks of those gentlemen now." 
Barnes' book was published a year after the libel trial and acknowledges Shand's help in its preparation. A lot of the coverage of the trial reads as if it was taken verbatim from court notes. Johnlp 09:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. It's an error: it was Raith's counsel who said it, not Shand. Neither of the sources used indicates if Barnes was awarded any money, so I assume the apology was sufficient. There was a feeling that Barnes put Raith up to write the letter as a device to get the Board into court although, of course, Barnes denied having met Raith, who Haigh describes as an "historically elusive figure".
Phanto282 12:24, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Interesting ... there is one source that says Barnes originally sued for ₤1000 which was probably a legal requirement; the tone of Smyth’s summation and the absence of damages would point to Raith being put up to writing the letter. Haigh quotes Bradman as saying that it was a set up. Now, why didn’t the Don appear? It seems he supported Barnes as a selector, but then he quit as a selector for 52-53 and was replaced by Ridings, who was captain of SA during the twelfth man incident after Barnes was passed over for the 1st  Test. Perhaps Barnes knew he was gone and wanted to make a protest to Ridings...
Phanto282 15:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My source, Rick Smith's biography of Barnes, has Smythe quoted as "[Raith] agrees to pay the plaintiff's costs", which seems to be the only financial implication of the case. Bradman was excused from appearing in court due to his son having been diagnosed with Polio.  It was revealed that Oxlade, Cush and Bradman were the only votes opposing his exclusion. -- Mattinbgn\talk 19:57, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who said what? 

message: For information:
Have copied up to /including the Libel case. Will finish off when I get a bit of time. I'll check through the refs afterwards too. One point from a quick glance - I don't like the stats analysis section much. There are 2 big graphs without much text to explain them. In particular, what is 'fall off', and how can I see it from the graph? –MDCollins (talk) 16:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'd agree - what fall off?  That graph isn't my cup of tea... The Rambling Man 16:56, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Copy edit

message: *The lead is not very engaging for a potential FA; I suggest a rewrite to mention the libel case, how he presented himself as from the wrong side of the tracks but in reality had a relatively comfortable upbringing (relative to the times) which illustrates his contrary nature, and Barnes’ partnership with Morris.
*I disagree with saying his nickname is “Suicide Sid” and then linking this to his ultimate fate. I've said elsewhere that it was some artistic licence on behalf of the writer for the ADB, who is Brian Stoddart, an academic at LaTrobe Uni: perhaps you could email him. I have never seen it referenced elsewhere. Stoddart doesn't specifically say that it was his nickname.
*I have a copy of the famous essay by Ray Robinson where he calls Barnes the Artful Dodger of cricket. This is apt because in his business dealings, Barnes was, as the English say, a wide boy. Robinson also describes Barnes’ style and technique in depth; the section on this is a bit short at the moment and doesn't mention how his game changed after the war. Suggest I add some quotes from this?
*The statement about Tommy Andrews instilling a love of the game in the young man is a bit flowery…artistic licence again?
*The “Life outside of cricket” section is a bit light on and repeats earlier info. I read Smith’s book quite a while back where he writes about Barnes’ depression in later life. Unfortunately, I no longer have it, but I noticed that another editor cited this book. I think a para or two in this area would give context to his death. It is no less a tragedy to suffer major depressive illness and suicide than to die from TB (Archie Jackson) or fall off a cliff (Stan McCabe, who was suspected of suiciding but this is rarely mentioned because of his standing in the game).
*The graphs in the Stats section don’t make much sense, nor does the phrase “had he played one more innings at the same average, he would be generally recognised as having the second highest average of all time” in the lead. The 20-innings qualification for batting averages is arbitrary, who decided the cut-off point? I understand what you mean but the reader not familiar with the game won’t. Anyway, is his average that important if he only played 13 Tests?
*Surely Barnes is the inventor of the silly point and/or short forward square leg positions?
Phanto282 01:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions

message: In a strange decision, the New South Wales Cricket Association deemed the matches to be not of first-class status and Barnes was denied his maiden century again.
*It is "strange" only if this was the only match (or one of the very few) matches against WA that were not given fc status. A listing of WA's fc matches from CA shows that the last NSW v WA match before the war was in 1934/5. So, if there were more matches in this period and none of them were given fc status, it wouldn't be strange.
:Earlier games played against South Australia and Victoria by the touring WA team were considered first-class and the NSW team included several first-class players.  I will add to the article.
* "Barnes was denied his maiden century again" gives the impression that Barnes and the rest of the people were under the impression that it was an fc match but were told afterwards that it wasn't. If it was known beforehand that it wasn't fc, "denied" won't make sense. Just wanted to be sure that it is no.
:The source isn't clear on this, but a quote from the book reads "Sid was angry at being denied a maiden century".
* In that paragraph there are three "maiden first class centuries" in four lines. 
:Agree, this needs fixing
Re "His batting average of 63.05 in Test cricket places him as one of the finest batsmen in cricketing history", IMHO, 13 Tests is too small a sample for a bold statement like that. There are several batsmen who had bright starts and then fell away (like Jimmy Adams who was at 80+ till his 16th Test). Tintin 06:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Agree with Phanto's comments, and also feel it is a bit light on the details of his actual Test career. Have done a bit to add some material to the 1938 tour section, and will look to do more on the 1945-46 and 1946-47 series too. A continuing theme throughout his autobiography is the need to earn money and maybe some more on this side of him would be good: he turned down the tour of South Africa in 1949-50, for instance, because it would only bring him £450 and he would need to pay his own expenses, and he played Lancashire League cricket in 1947 despite worrying that other Australians who had done so were never selected for Tests again. His first two children, by the way, were called Helen and Sid jr. Johnlp (talk) 22:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have read the story of him turning down the 49-50 RSA tour but I wondered how he would be considered seeing as he played only one f-c game in 48-49 (Bradman's testimonial). Likewise, the stint in the Lanc League was apparently cut short (by the club? by Barnes? both?) but I haven't read why. Barnes went on the 45-6 NZ tour when they were paid a quid a day, and the NZCC offered a bonus, which the Aus Board refused! Does he write about this and did it affect his attitude later on? I guess there are two major 'what if?' points about his career: (1) Aus really needed him, even as late as the 53 tour when Hassett had to open (2) he had the opportunity to change the relationship between the Board and the players, but decided on a stunt instead.
Phanto282 (talk) 11:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding material 

message: The author of the obituary used in the article is listed as :Gideon Haigh.  As Barnes' obituary would have been included in the 1974 Wisden, it is unlikely that Haigh wrote the obituary (unless he was an unusually precocious child).  Looking at the source it is perhaps more likely that the section in cricinfo is cribbed partly from the Wisden obit freshened up slightly by Haigh at a later date.  The actual Wisden obit can be found here.  There does not seem to me to be too much difference between the two versions but I am not sure who the author is. -- Mattinbgn\talk 16:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no author noted in the actual book (in some Wisdens, there is an author credited with all the obits, but not the 1974 edition). I think Haigh should be removed as the author, as he patently wasn't the original, even if he tidied it up for one of the anthologies. BTW, I've filled in more details of Tests etc outside The Invincibles series, and they could probably do with a copyedit. Johnlp (talk) 16:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I have taken his name out but it still doesn't look right.  Someone with a bit more of an idea about citing Wisden may be able to fix.  Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 09:56, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cricinfo obituary

message: While there is probably some things that still need doing and there are some cite tags that need removing it may be time to list at :WP:GAC.  Any problems would be able to be fixed while it was waiting for a reviewer and some fresh eyes would help propel the article to FA status. -- Mattinbgn\talk 10:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can we hang fire with this please? Two reasons - first, I'd like to go to peer review first and secondly because I'd like to go straight for FA. --Dweller (talk) 14:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess coming from WP:AUS, I was thinking of this challenge - Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 27#Australian GAs.  It is now on 90 and this article would help to make it to 100 before the end of the year.  That said, I am happy to go along with the flow. -- Mattinbgn\talk 23:25, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it time for GA? 

message: Further to the message above, could everyone as a priority try to deal with the remaining  tags, so that this can go to PR? Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 14:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wanted to add a couple more things about his conversion to an opener in the 1946-47 series: there is a bit in the autobiography about (if I remember correctly) his reluctance and how Bradman persuaded him to do it. It seemed to make quite a difference to his batting style - having been a bit of a dasher before, he knuckled down and became, if anything, rather dour. I'll try to get to it this evening. If there are any other citations that need the autobiog, then shout: having dug the thing out I might as well use it! Johnlp (talk) 15:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 's done now Sir. Oh, JohnIp, the simulated hailstorm is mentioned in his autobio which would be a better source than the slightly decrepit waybackwhen Daily Telegraph article I found.. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great stuff. Please post here when all done, Johnlp. So, he started out as a biffer? Did he turn into a fully fledged blocker? --Dweller (talk) 15:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Added the couple of things I wanted to put in and changed the reference from the Telegraph to the autobiography: perhaps someone could just check over it, please. I think Barnes was a biffer by his own estimation, but it always seems to me to be remarkable when you look at scoring rates of 50+ years ago how slowly most batsmen scored in terms of runs per 100 balls (though the over rates were much much faster then). Somewhere else in the Barnes autobiography there's a paragraph about how it's a batsman's duty to score centuries, but after reaching 100 it's up to the individual how fast they go, with the inference being that his preference was to score a lot of fours and sixes. Anyway, within a year of becoming a Test opener he's being barracked at Melbourne for slow scoring inthis match, when he was battling to win back his Test place. Johnlp (talk) 22:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

text: I'll do a copyedit and then take to PR. And that is a sourced nickname, for his fielding. --Dweller (talk) 10:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Peer Review

message: Was there any reason it was deleted? Blnguyen  (bananabucket) 23:57, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I commented it out when I was copyediting. Feel free to put it back, but the whole section was just a bit dodgy and not really analysed as it was described. Feel free to add it back but it needed a re-write. Hope that explains it... –MDCollins (talk) 10:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with both perspectives. It should be in, and the section can be much better written. A statistical analysis is a good idea on cricket biogs as the figures can be rather dry without context. Also, some era context can be gained using retrospective world ranking figures, as we did for O'Reilly. I'll try and get that cracking. --Dweller (talk) 12:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhat surprisingly, Barnes's highest ranking was 7th. () My guess is it was so low because the LG Rankings are geared to diminish early performances... given he only played 19 innings, much or all of his career will have been undervalued. As (IMHO) a highest ranking of 7th in his own time misleads as to his value on the world stage in his own time, I think we should omit the world rankings. Consensus? --Dweller (talk) 12:55, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

text: NB (This link) makes it clear that the rankings value his performances at just 70% of their full value. If he'd played one more Test innings, that'd have jumped to 85%. A shame. --Dweller (talk) 13:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graph 

message: The above was a redlink in this article.  I have created a rather ordinary stub in case it was used as a reason to oppose in FA but it could do with some work if others have access to better source material. Cheers, Mattinbgn\talk 10:22, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Aubrey Oxlade]] 

message: I have copied and refactored some of the comments from the FAC page here for ease of review and to allow some comment from me rather than have comments left by a range of contributors on the FAC, where I think Dweller is best to respond.
Hurricanehank
*It seems a little too long, or perhaps the last paragraph could delve a bit more into his personal history.
:*I am unsure what is meant by "too long" especially when there is a request for more information on personal history.  Perhaps this is a request for a different balance between the cricket and personal sections.  If that is the case then I am not sure I agree; the cricket can be a bit dry, but without the cricket he would not be notable. -- Mattinbgn\talk 22:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Size-wise, we're fine. WP:SIZE makes it clear that <60K is fine and we're at 55K. I think he means the balance could be better and I agree with Matt on this. It's like the obits for WWII war heroes that are 75% about their war record and 25% about what they did since 1945. No-one would write the obit if they hadn't won their VC or whatever. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: *Agree, and will reword. -- Mattinbgn\talk 22:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: *Agree, but I am having trouble with a non-POV version. -- Mattinbgn\talk 22:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Done. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: *I don't understand the advantage of this. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: *Fixed one, will check the others. --Mattinbgn\talk 22:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

text: *I would be loathe to add more to the captions on the images.  The FA criteria specify that captions should be succinct.  The graphs could perhaps have more context included. -- Mattinbgn\talk 22:46, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thanks. I'll take another look at the graphs and get back to the FAC. --Dweller (talk) 11:52, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm comfortable that all the captions are sufficiently explicatory, especially as the text often elaborates on greater meaning for them. To do it the other way round would be illogical. --Dweller (talk) 12:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  FAC comments 

message: I changed the img chart to a template with links.  I think this is an improvement, even if it is a bit bigger.  I'm not too bothered though if people prefer the smaller graph.  —Moondyne 14:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Chart as template

message: The infobox uses NSW and New South Wales in the born and died, shouldnt it be either:
* "New South Wales" used in the Born paramater and NSW be used in the Death parameter OR
* Both be New South Wales or NSW. Seems odd to me. 58.161.171.89 (talk) 01:19, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Improvements

message: I have removed two categories that were added within the past 48 hours - relating to Drug-related suicides and Suicides in Australia - on the basis that the inquest evidence was inconclusive. I have left in the category of Drug-related deaths, on the basis that that doesn't seem in dispute. Perhaps others might have different views? I'm mindful that Barnes' offspring are still alive. Johnlp (talk) 21:38, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cats 

message: A discussion about the conflicting dates of birth in the Lead and infobox is currently under way at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket#Sid_Barnes_on_the_main_page --Dweller (talk) 09:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth date 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Sid Barnes. 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/20110408184025/http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/sportinggreats/ to http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/sportinggreats/
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) 18:25, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've read the article and checked its content with the modern Featured Article criteria. I can see no glaring problems and the article looks in good shape. Checking history leads me to believe the article hasn't had substantial content additions or changes, and has been maintained to a greater or lesser degree by interested editors. The talk page was checked and no outstanding issues found.
Problems seen;
* Some dead reference links
* a copyrighted photo is in use.
Desertarun (talk) 20:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020]]