Talk:Douglas Jardine

Tactics

To see the tactics of Jardine in a fair light, it is worth noteing that there are various ways of getting a batsman out on a cricket pitch apart from bowling him out. This was what struck Jardine while watching the reels of Bradman playing. Instead of bowling the Australians out, he figured out a way to catch them out - a very fair and ingenious tactic. The ball was not pitched at the head: it was pitched elbow high, to the chest... the only way to deal with the delivery was either to pop a catch, or to get out of the way. Perfectly fair. - unsigned comment by 61.17.134.172 on 24 April, 2006]

to see it from jardine's point of view, and to use his quote "our bowling was too good to hook", it pretty much sums it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chetta (talk • contribs) 09:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

after the australian series, jardine played in india, and the west indies. in the latter nation he was the target of the same balling that the australians resented; he replied by scoring his first test century —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chetta (talk • contribs) 09:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

It may have been fair under the letter of the rules of cricket at the time, but it was outside the spirit of the rules, and outside the rules as they stand today, which were changed precisely to prevent this sort of dangerous tactic happening again. You can apologise for Jardine all you like, but the facts tell the story. -dmmaus 23:23, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Bowling average in text does not equal bowling average in info-box. 203.122.226.234 14:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

This has been rectified in the latest round of edits BartBassist (talk) 10:16, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

The Harlequin cap

Much is made about Jardine wearing the cap, and how Australians disliked it at as sign of superiority. Percy Chapman also habitually wore one and he was a very popular player when he played in Australia, and also won a series 4-1 against an Australian team that included Bradman. Phanto282 13:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

No refs

Esp for some of the out and out statments such as the one concerning the Adelaide Test —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.255.55.74 (talk) 03:02, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Hatred of all things Australian

"It was whilst batting for Oxford University v the 1921 tourists that many think his hatred of all things Australian developed. The Australian captain Warwick Armstrong refused to allow play to continue past the scheduled end of play time with Jardine 96 not out, and set to make a century against them."

The article is asserting that Jardine hated Australia, her cricket team, her people, her funnel-web spiders, etc, because he never got the chance to make a first class 100 against an Australian XI?. That strike anyone else as being ludicrously petty? I'm glad there's a fact/unverified tag there, because if it's true, then that marks Jardine as a marvellously spiteful little person. Peter1968 (talk) 12:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

"Jardine was well known for his dislike of Australian players and crowds and was unpopular in Australia, particularly for his manner and especially after the Bodyline tour. On the other hand, many players captained by him regarded him as an excellent captain; not all regarded him as good at managing people" Could be true - who knows, but this paragraph and its assertions are unsubstantiated by reference, and are, therefore, hearsay I'm afraid Captain McVitie (talk) 17:38, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

It is not referenced as it is in the lead. The "assertions" are referenced in the main body of the article. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I think it was Warner who said of him: "When he sees an Australian cap, he seems to go mad." (I don't guarantee the exact wording.) If a citation could be found for that, it would be worth adding (if it's not already there). JH (talk page) 21:12, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Bodyline and Australia

Surely the claim that the current Australian cricket team is a master of employing bodyline bouncers (without the corresponding fielders) is POV and missing the point. Firstly, Australia can't bowl dangerous head-high balls over after over because there is a restriction on the number of bouncers per over. Secondly, whatever tactics the current team employs, it is a far cry from the intimidating and anti-spirit of the game tactics of bodyline - bodyline was specifically designed to prevent the batsmen scoring and was deemed unfair, hence the rule changes to prevent it happening again. There is a difference between playing hard and playing against the spirit of the game and the Australian team is surely innocent of the latter. I've deleted the offending section because of this.Wikischolar1983 (talk) 11:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

TV series

I have removed some information about who played Jardine in the TV series as I do not feel it is relevant to the article about the man. What do other people think? However, if the information does go back, it needs a reference. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:37, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Douglas Jardine/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: -- BigDom 19:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Just the few points below that need addressing, especially the one about the word "barracked" which is majorly overused here. Couple of minor MoS points, such as the punctuation needing to be outside quote marks. All comments addressed quickly and appropriately.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Some of the finest referencing I've ever come across on Wikipedia.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Extremely detailed without becoming tediously overindulgent

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Just the one image, but it is suitably licensed. It doesn't have ALT text or a caption, but that is a problem with the template not the article.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Pass with congratulations

Comments

General points

• Sometimes "Bodyline" is capitalised in the article and sometimes it isn't. Examples: "Jardine persisted with Bodyline tactics" versus "at least twice about that bowler's refusal to bowl bodyline". I don't know which is technically correct, but it does need to be consistent throughout the article.

Capitalised them. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

• Very unclear: from what I read in the article it appeared that he played his last Test in Feb 1934 and was the England captain until he resigned in March 1934 so I can't understand why in the lead and the succession box at the bottom it says he was the captain until 1933-4. I think this is confusing and misleading and I imagine others will find it hard to understand as well. Why not just say he was the England captain from 1931 to 1934?

Generally, when something occurs in an English winter, the cricket season is called (e.g.) 1933-34, 1967-68, etc. I've changed the lead to say 1934 but in the box, I think it's best left as 33-34. Would a note help? --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I think a note would be best. Being English, I had an idea what you meant but anyone unfamiliar with cricket would be stumped by this one. BigDom 07:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:43, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

• The words "barracked" and "barracking" are used quite a lot of times throughout the article, to the point of being repetitive. Any chance some of these can be substituted for other words?

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

• When you have quotes at the end of a sentence, the punctuation should go outside the quotation marks, even if it is inside in the source. Example: old-fashioned amateur."[43]

Not quite clear on how far to go with this. I've changed some of them, but the MoS says here that it shouldn't always go outside. Which others do you think should go outside? --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

To be honest, I hadn't read that before. I was just going off a comment someone gave me at a previous GA review. What you've done looks fine to me. BigDom 07:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Lead

• Instead of "joined the army" you should write "joined the Territorial Army" to avoid ambiguity.
• I think "a paper manufacturers" should just be "a paper manufacturer".

Both done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Early life

• "at an average 66.46" -> "at an average of 66.46"

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

First-class career

• Link to Surrey CCC the first time you mention it

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

• "an injury sustained playing village cricket" - is it possible to include who he was playing village cricket for? It would just add a bit of context, that's all.

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

• he replied "It's ******* mutual." - Wikipedia is not censored. I doubt he replied with 7 asterixes, so if the actual word he used is available that should be what is written here. If the source has it how it is now however, then this point is null and void.

Various versions of the story, but the original version is asterisked and that is the version the source gives when quoting it. Other sources do use "fucking", though, and if it's a problem, it would be easy to find one that does. However, they are probably later versions of the story. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I think it would be more accurate to use one of the sources that does have "fucking" in, just to avoid any ambiguity. BigDom 07:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:49, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Style and personality

• I don't think "could" should be italicised.

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

• There are a lot of bowlers who he had problems against, so I was wondering whether or not the sources discuss bowlers who he enjoyed particular success against.

Not really. I was trying to get across the idea that most bowlers did not trouble him and only three or four gave him problems. I've tweaked it a little, but if it's still not clear, I'll try again. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Fine now. BigDom 07:26, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Overall, this is a very well written and articulate piece, and there are just the few minor points above that need to be addressed. Once these have been sorted, I will gladly pass this as a GA. -- BigDom 22:05, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the review so far. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

English or Scottish?

The Scotland national cricket team article claims Jardine was Scottish. He was born in India and had Scottish parents. Is there any reason to call him English other than the fact that he played for England, which wasn't unusual for Scots before they had a proper team of their own? Fricasso (talk) 13:27, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

He was certainly an English cricketer; to call him a Scottish cricketer would be wrong. And Scotland had a first class cricket team which regularly played first-class matches, and played touring teams and county sides in most seasons. As to whether he was Scottish rather than English, I don't think anyone but he could say; he wanted his ashes scattering in Scotland, regularly visited there, but lived in England most of his life. Who knows? But he was not the only Scottish England cricket captain. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:22, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how it would be wrong to call him a Scottish cricketer if he actually was Scottish. His nationality isn't determined by which team he played for. Eoin Morgan is still Irish, even if he does play for England, and his article does not refer to him as an English cricketer. If Jardine was, in matters unrelated to cricket, a Scot, then surely he should be called a Scottish cricketer who played for England. Calling him an English cricketer would just be misleading. Fricasso (talk) 14:58, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree, especially if he considered himself to be Scottish (which wanted his ashes scattered there suggests). It might be best to say that he was a Scottish cricketer who played for England. JH (talk page) 20:28, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Body line

How to beat Bradman 2001:8003:1C62:E00:9D1D:C10C:DC07:DC0A (talk) 00:34, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Prolific?

What exactly is a ‘prolific’ batsman. Does it imply that Jardine ‘produced’ many runs? Odd use of word. 193.119.91.190 (talk) 07:31, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it means he scored a lot of runs. If doesn't strike me as odd. It's quite often used by cricket writers with that meaning. JH (talk page) 08:42, 25 December 2024 (UTC)