[VIDEO] Brian Close versus Michael Holding 1976

[Savak]

I wonder why doesn't this encounter get talked about very often. This was a 45 year old guy past his prime, no helmet, no thigh pad, no elbow guard, no chest guard and he had to deal with a ferocious absolutely prime Michael Holding where he coped loads of bouncers, short pitched deliveries in the body, ribs for his 50 runs and Holding could not get him out.

There were photographs of his bruises all over his chest and stomach. Viv Richards called him the bravest and toughest player he ever saw and was amazed at how calm he was smoking a cigarette in the dressing room and having a cup of tea after a very painful cricketing accident

<iframe width="952" height="714" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KXsfEdJ_G5w" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[MenInG]

That was brutal from Holding!

 

[Robert]

Close was so hard. He would deliberately walk into the line of the ball to show he wasn’t scared. Played for England in the forties, fifties, sixties and seventies. Had a big role in the emergence of Botham at Somerset.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Michael Holding is a hypocrite. He used every loophole back in the day to hurt batsmen with bodyline bowling. Now he is commentating and calling everyone else soft. Mohammed Shami is faster than him. In the 1980s Bumrah, Shami would have floored plenty of West Indian batsmen.

 

[Junaids]

Again, context is everything!

Tony Greig’s infamous comment before the series about making the West Indies grovel was based upon “Closey and a few others”.

The background is that in 74-75 the Lillee and Thomson express attack had emerged and now the West Indies had Roberts (measured in match conditions at 159.4) and Holding, who was even quicker.

Such pace had last been faced a decade earlier: Wes Hall, the chucker Charlie Griffith and Fred Trueman were all 150+ bowlers at their peak.

So Greig went back to very old batsmen like Brian Close and John Edrich who had faced those express bowlers at their peak. And to be honest, they did have some success.

(Incidentally, it sounds like John Edrich is himself nearing the end of his own innings).

 

[Junaids]

Michael Holding is a hypocrite. He used every loophole back in the day to hurt batsmen with bodyline bowling. Now he is commentating and calling everyone else soft. Mohammed Shami is faster than him. In the 1980s Bumrah, Shami would have floored plenty of West Indian batsmen.

To be fair, Holding was measured in 75-76 - so before his peak - at 153.2K in match conditions, using 500 frame per second technology.

So he was extremely quick.

 

[sweep_shot]

It was quite brutal.

Close faced those balls with no helmet! That was insane.

 

[Robert]

Michael Holding is a hypocrite. He used every loophole back in the day to hurt batsmen with bodyline bowling. Now he is commentating and calling everyone else soft. Mohammed Shami is faster than him. In the 1980s Bumrah, Shami would have floored plenty of West Indian batsmen.

That isn’t Bodyline, which refers to a fielding strategy.

Word was that Close came in for the tea break shaking, spat blood into the sink, knocked back a double whiskey to calm himself and went back out to face Holding and Roberts.

 

[Bhaijaan]

To be fair, Holding was measured in 75-76 - so before his peak - at 153.2K in match conditions, using 500 frame per second technology.

So he was extremely quick.

That isn’t Bodyline, which refers to a fielding strategy.

Word was that Close came in for the tea break shaking, spat blood into the sink, knocked back a double whiskey to calm himself and went back out to face Holding and Roberts.

My dear brothers, I am referring to well documented episode of West Indies bowling beamers at Indian batsmen in the 1970s/80s. Holding was the biggest culprit during those incidents.

I know some other posters will still say that it was a matter of Indians having a weak batting and just crying over some fast bowling but i.am.one of those who will claim.our oast batsmen had more resilience and fighting nature than current lot.

I admit to have a long time bias against Holding for the above.

 

[Bhaijaan]

India had a quality batting line up in the late 70s-80s. Gavaskar was a batting giant and then Gundappa Vishwanath and Amarnath wete very resilient batsmen. Later Vengz emerged in 80s.

We could have won a few more tests and series against WI and Pakistan.

Pakistanis also resorted to bowling beamers to save face in few tests

Indian batting of today is nowhere in coparison

 

[Junaids]

My dear brothers, I am referring to well documented episode of West Indies bowling beamers at Indian batsmen in the 1970s/80s. Holding was the biggest culprit during those incidents.

I know some other posters will still say that it was a matter of Indians having a weak batting and just crying over some fast bowling but i.am.one of those who will claim.our oast batsmen had more resilience and fighting nature than current lot.

I admit to have a long time bias against Holding for the above.

I actually spoke about this with Clive Lloyd as a teenage boy in the 1980’s.

I can’t remember his exact words, but this is what it approximated to:

“We went to Australia in 75-76 and Lillee and Thomson were brutal towards us, and the crowds were hostile and racist.

We lost 5-1, but we discussed it and decided that we needed to toughen up and learn to handle pace and to give us much as we take.

We didn’t target India with beamers. We bowled at them what Australia had just bowled at us. And they were shocked and they considered it unsporting, and we smelled the same fear that Australia had smelled in us.

When we went on to England we still only had two really fast bowlers. And it was actually Pakistan a few months later who were the first to face us with four quicks, once we had added Croft and Garner. And then came Packer and it was just normal - and on terrible pitches too!

I see why India were shocked and disgusted. But the game had changed, and we were a proud team, and we weren’t going to refuse to change with the times.”

 

[Bhaijaan]

I actually spoke about this with Clive Lloyd as a teenage boy in the 1980’s.

I can’t remember his exact words, but this is what it approximated to:

“We went to Australia in 75-76 and Lillee and Thomson were brutal towards us, and the crowds were hostile and racist.

We lost 5-1, but we discussed it and decided that we needed to toughen up and learn to handle pace and to give us much as we take.

We didn’t target India with beamers. We bowled at them what Australia had just bowled at us. And they were shocked and they considered it unsporting, and we smelled the same fear that Australia had smelled in us.

When we went on to England we still only had two really fast bowlers. And it was actually Pakistan a few months later who were the first to face us with four quicks, once we had added Croft and Garner. And then came Packer and it was just normal - and on terrible pitches too!

I see why India were shocked and disgusted. But the game had changed, and we were a proud team, and we weren’t going to refuse to change with the times.”

Wow you talked to my cricketing hero as a teenager.

Clive Lloyd such a giant and revolutionary.

Too bad we played the Windies during our very bad bowling phase. Our bowling line up of now would have provided a much needed balance even if Windies were to still hammer us.

I want to Shami in current form vs Richards

 

[Robert]

My dear brothers, I am referring to well documented episode of West Indies bowling beamers at Indian batsmen in the 1970s/80s. Holding was the biggest culprit during those incidents.

I know some other posters will still say that it was a matter of Indians having a weak batting and just crying over some fast bowling but i.am.one of those who will claim.our oast batsmen had more resilience and fighting nature than current lot.

I admit to have a long time bias against Holding for the above.

IIRC there was an incident with a wet wicket where several Indians could not bat in the second dig due to injuries sustained in the first. The umps should have called that match off.

 

[Robert]

It was quite brutal.

Close faced those balls with no helmet! That was insane.

Nobody wore helmets then. I think the first was worn by Amiss later that year.

 

[MenInG]

Close was so hard. He would deliberately walk into the line of the ball to show he wasn’t scared. Played for England in the forties, fifties, sixties and seventies. Had a big role in the emergence of Botham at Somerset.

think that deserves some sort of medal!

 

[Saj]

Michael Holding is a hypocrite. He used every loophole back in the day to hurt batsmen with bodyline bowling. Now he is commentating and calling everyone else soft. Mohammed Shami is faster than him. In the 1980s Bumrah, Shami would have floored plenty of West Indian batsmen.

Do you even know what Bodyline is.

 

[Saj]

They breed them tough in Yorkshire. Look at him he doesn't want to show he's hurt to the opposition.

Just watching this clip makes me wince. Some tough cricketers back in the day, gladiators who didn't give an inch.

 

[Savak]

Brian Close also didn't have the best refined technique or talent, he just got through this spell based on pure courage, toughness and character

 

[Bhaijaan]

Do you even know what Bodyline is.

Yes

 

[SensiblePakFan]

jeezus christ that mustve been painful.

 

[Saj]

Yes

I don't think so.

Michael Holding to Brian Close was not Bodyline.

 

[Bhaijaan]

I don't think so.

Michael Holding to Brian Close was not Bodyline.

It was when he was throwing beamers and 6 bouncers an over at Indian batsmen without helmet.

 

[Saj]

It was when he was throwing beamers and 6 bouncers an over at Indian batsmen without helmet.

Maybe they needed to man-up and toughen-up.

I think only those who want to have a cheap dig at Holding will accuse him of Bodyline bowling.

 

[Robert]

It was when he was throwing beamers and 6 bouncers an over at Indian batsmen without helmet.

Still not Bodyline, which refers to a fielding strategy with four leg slips, two silly mid-ons and two men back for the hook.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Maybe they needed to man-up and toughen-up.

I think only those who want to have a cheap dig at Holding will accuse him of Bodyline bowling.

Those who want to defend Holding for the beamers and 6 bouncer overs at batsmen with no helmet clearly do not know anything of ethics of a gentlemen's sport.

 

[Saj]

Those who want to defend Holding for the beamers and 6 bouncer overs at batsmen with no helmet clearly do not know anything of ethics of a gentlemen's sport.

Man-up. Let the umpires decide what's allowed and what isn't.

No point crying over a few bouncers and crying bodyline when it isn't.

Take it like a man, like Brian Close did.

 

[Savak]

There can be no justification for a 20 year old fresh raw bowler bowling unlimited bouncers at 90-96 mph to a 45 year old batsman without a helmet or protection. Extremely poor sportsmanship and inhuman conduct from Holding. Close could easily have been seriously hurt or even killed like Phill Hughes

 

[Bhaijaan]

Man-up. Let the umpires decide what's allowed and what isn't.

No point crying over a few bouncers and crying bodyline when it isn't.

Take it like a man, like Brian Close did.

No amount of manning up on our side can justify the wrong doings of Michael Holding.

Cricket is a game of gentlemen and West Indies adhered to great standards of professionalism but there were instances which I mention without shame where they were clearly wrong.

India has come a long way from that. No one is crying over anything. If just criticism of Holding rubs anyone the wrong way so be it.

Who is Brian Close anyway? Jimmy Amarnath had the greatest test series ever by a batsman against Windies quartet. We have our own champions of resistance

 

[MenInG]

No amount of manning up on our side can justify the wrong doings of Michael Holding.

Cricket is a game of gentlemen and West Indies adhered to great standards of professionalism but there were instances which I mention without shame where they were clearly wrong.

India has come a long way from that. No one is crying over anything. If just criticism of Holding rubs anyone the wrong way so be it.

Who is Brian Close anyway? Jimmy Amarnath had the greatest test series ever by a batsman against Windies quartet. We have our own champions of resistance

I sometimes feel that some fans have an axe to grind with Michael Holding in general. This could be due to his comments on IPL in the past.

 

[MenInG]

There can be no justification for a 20 year old fresh raw bowler bowling unlimited bouncers at 90-96 mph to a 45 year old batsman without a helmet or protection. Extremely poor sportsmanship and inhuman conduct from Holding. Close could easily have been seriously hurt or even killed like Phill Hughes

Did anyone ask Close to play a Test match? What nonsense is that.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Still not Bodyline, which refers to a fielding strategy with four leg slips, two silly mid-ons and two men back for the hook.

You are referring to Bodyline Ashes series.

I am mentioning this term in a general sense where bowlers and opposition teams bowl to target/hurt the batsmen using loopholes in the system.

There was a fine line about not bowling bouncers at tail enders. Please remind me who crossed that line and why do we have new rules in place now?

 

[Bhaijaan]

I sometimes feel that some fans have an axe to grind with Michael Holding in general. This could be due to his comments on IPL in the past.

My dear brother, I have already clarified my bias.

 

[Saj]

No amount of manning up on our side can justify the wrong doings of Michael Holding.

Cricket is a game of gentlemen and West Indies adhered to great standards of professionalism but there were instances which I mention without shame where they were clearly wrong.

India has come a long way from that. No one is crying over anything. If just criticism of Holding rubs anyone the wrong way so be it.

Who is Brian Close anyway? Jimmy Amarnath had the greatest test series ever by a batsman against Windies quartet. We have our own champions of resistance

Ah yes gentlemen like Sunil Gavaskar who wanted his team to walk off after being given lbw in Australia.

Pakistan took on the brute force of the great West Indies teams in Test series and never once whined or moaned or threatened to walk off the field. They fought fire with fire.

West Indies took on Lillee, Thomson, Imran etc and got on with it without crying.

Some just want to criticise Holding because he's not a BCCI cronie I guess.

 

[Saj]

Still not Bodyline, which refers to a fielding strategy with four leg slips, two silly mid-ons and two men back for the hook.

Exactly.

He has no clue what Bodyline is.

Look at the line of the deliveries.

 

[Bhaijaan]

Ah yes gentlemen like Sunil Gavaskar who wanted his team to walk off after being given lbw in Australia.

Pakistan took on the brute force of the great West Indies teams in Test series and never once whined or moaned or threatened to walk off the field. They fought fire with fire.

West Indies took on Lillee, Thomson, Imran etc and got on with it without crying.

Some just want to criticise Holding because he's not a BCCI cronie I guess.

You're going somewhere else with this Saj. Nothing can be done about that.

Gavaskar is a gentleman. What is your point?

If Holding commented in IPL, he would still be wrong for bowling beamers and BODYLINE.

 

[Saj]

You're going somewhere else with this Saj. Nothing can be done about that.

Gavaskar is a gentleman. What is your point?

If Holding commented in IPL, he would still be wrong for bowling beamers and BODYLINE.

Going nowhere, I'm staying on topic. You are the one who brought in the moral high ground issue of India moving on and how cricket is a game of gentlemen.

I'm simply explaining to you that you have no clue what bodyline is, that you have no right to hold the moral high ground when the likes of your 'gentleman' Gavaskar wanted his team to walk off the pitch and not continue the match after he was given lbw.

I think we all know why the likes of you don't like Holding, despite all the nonsense that you cover it up with.

 

[umarf76]

I wonder why doesn't this encounter get talked about very often. This was a 45 year old guy past his prime, no helmet, no thigh pad, no elbow guard, no chest guard and he had to deal with a ferocious absolutely prime Michael Holding where he coped loads of bouncers, short pitched deliveries in the body, ribs for his 50 runs and Holding could not get him out.

There were photographs of his bruises all over his chest and stomach. Viv Richards called him the bravest and toughest player he ever saw and was amazed at how calm he was smoking a cigarette in the dressing room and having a cup of tea after a very painful cricketing accident

<iframe width="952" height="714" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KXsfEdJ_G5w" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Quoted from Wikipedia about Brian Close:
According to Imran Khan, Close once stood his ground when fielding at short leg when a batsman played a pull shot, the ball hit him on the forehead, rebounded and was caught at cover. Khan commented: "We are not all bullet-headed Yorkshiremen, however, and I don't recommend copying Close.

What a beast!

 

[Robert]

There can be no justification for a 20 year old fresh raw bowler bowling unlimited bouncers at 90-96 mph to a 45 year old batsman without a helmet or protection. Extremely poor sportsmanship and inhuman conduct from Holding. Close could easily have been seriously hurt or even killed like Phill Hughes

Close wasn’t scared.

The umps warned Holding so that was that.

The background to this was the England skipper’s comment that he would make WI grovel, spoken in a South African accent, which really revved the bowlers up.

 

[Robert]

Quoted from Wikipedia about Brian Close:
According to Imran Khan, Close once stood his ground when fielding at short leg when a batsman played a pull shot, the ball hit him on the forehead, rebounded and was caught at cover. Khan commented: "We are not all bullet-headed Yorkshiremen, however, and I don't recommend copying Close.

What a beast!

I read that. It bounced off his head and he yelled “Catch it!”.

He carried on fielding with blood pouring out of him. “We have to get another wicket tonight” he growled.

 

[MenInG]

Close wasn’t scared.

The umps warned Holding so that was that.

The background to this was the England skipper’s comment that he would make WI grovel, spoken in a South African accent, which really revved the bowlers up.

This incident mentioned in the documentary.

 

[Markhor]

This incident was featured in Fire in Babylon.

What makes that spell more dangerous is that there was some uneven bounce in that pitch.

 

[Saj]

Close wasn’t scared.

The umps warned Holding so that was that.

The background to this was the England skipper’s comment that he would make WI grovel, spoken in a South African accent, which really revved the bowlers up.

Yes Tony Greig.

Words that he went on to regret.

 

[Junaids]

Close wasn’t scared.

The umps warned Holding so that was that.

The background to this was the England skipper’s comment that he would make WI grovel, spoken in a South African accent, which really revved the bowlers up.

More than that.

Close was a Rhodes Boyson style Yorkshire Tory. In the four years prior to the 1976 West Indies tour he had led one rebel tour to Rhodesia and two to Apartheid South Africa.

So the West Indies were really riled up by him.

By the way, “Fire in Babylon” misleads viewers into thinking that the photo of the bruises was from 1976.

It wasn’t. That’s what Hall and Griffith did to him in the 1963 Lords Test - the one where Colin Cowdrey came in as the last man to secure the draw that Close’s gutsy 70 had set up. The two knights - Sir Wes Hall and Sir Charlie Griffith - were at least as fast as Roberts and Holding, and it was Greig’s respect for that which made him recall Close in 1976.

 

[Robert]

More than that.

Close was a Rhodes Boyson style Yorkshire Tory. In the four years prior to the 1976 West Indies tour he had led one rebel tour to Rhodesia and two to Apartheid South Africa.

So the West Indies were really riled up by him.

By the way, “Fire in Babylon” misleads viewers into thinking that the photo of the bruises was from 1976.

It wasn’t. That’s what Hall and Griffith did to him in the 1963 Lords Test - the one where Colin Cowdrey came in as the last man to secure the draw that Close’s gutsy 70 had set up. The two knights - Sir Wes Hall and Sir Charlie Griffith - were at least as fast as Roberts and Holding, and it was Greig’s respect for that which made him recall Close in 1976.

Those weren’t actual “rebel tours” in the 1982 sense though - I thought they were just club level events?

 

[Junaids]

Those weren’t actual “rebel tours” in the 1982 sense though - I thought they were just club level events?

True, but the Rhodesia tour was viewed as absolutely beyond the pale due to UDI.

It’s as if Tasmania unlawfully seceded from Australia, and installed a pro-Chinese government with only people of Chinese ethnicity allowed to vote, and then a former national captain - equivalent to Steve Smith - led an unauthorised tour there, while the majority Australian population wasn’t allowed to vote.

 

[Savak]

Michael Holding the coward. Still couldn't get a 45 year old batsman out while in his prime

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Its always difficult to look at things that were deemed acceptable in the past with modern eyes....I remember when I was younger thinking that this was the height of fast bowling and being impressed at Holding.

Now, I see it as almost thuggish and excessively brutal. No better than a dirty studs up tackle in Football. There was no intent here to take wickets. It was pure thuggery from Holding and I think it would be nice to see him apologise for it.

Thankfully the game has moved on and the threat of real physical pain from fast bowling has subsided. A bouncer can be enjoyed now as a genuine battle between bat and ball rather than the one sided affair this spectactle was.

 

[Savak]

Its always difficult to look at things that were deemed acceptable in the past with modern eyes....I remember when I was younger thinking that this was the height of fast bowling and being impressed at Holding.

Now, I see it as almost thuggish and excessively brutal. No better than a dirty studs up tackle in Football. There was no intent here to take wickets. It was pure thuggery from Holding and I think it would be nice to see him apologise for it.

Thankfully the game has moved on and the threat of real physical pain from fast bowling has subsided. A bouncer can be enjoyed now as a genuine battle between bat and ball rather than the one sided affair this spectactle was.

Holding would have been smashed in the modern T20 era

 

[speed_thrills]

What a hero Brian Close is. Despite being hit all over,, he stood his ground.

Holiday was well in the rules to bowl in such manner to him but its not him who came out winner in this battle.

 

[ishtiaq_ctg]

Holding would have been smashed in the modern T20 era

Forget about T20 era, he chickened out of cricket as soon as Helmet & Bouncer rules came in effect all around the world.

 

[Bewal Express]

Forget about T20 era, he chickened out of cricket as soon as Helmet & Bouncer rules came in effect all around the world.

Really? Maybe your dateline needs a bit research

 

[Bewal Express]

Holding would have been smashed in the modern T20 era

By who? Great fast bowlers adapt and he would have adapted.

 

[Bewal Express]

There can be no justification for a 20 year old fresh raw bowler bowling unlimited bouncers at 90-96 mph to a 45 year old batsman without a helmet or protection. Extremely poor sportsmanship and inhuman conduct from Holding. Close could easily have been seriously hurt or even killed like Phill Hughes

It was and is part of the game. England shouldn't have picked Close if they feared for his safety. And the Aussies did the same to England and the Windies in 75 and 76.

 

[Varun]

By who? Great fast bowlers adapt and he would have adapted.

Knowing his personality, he would have whined his way out of his career.

Would be found trundling in some Abu Dhabi T10 game.

 

[Bewal Express]

Knowing his personality, he would have whined his way out of his career.

Would be found trundling in some Abu Dhabi T10 game.

The problems with you Indians is that anyone who criticises the BCCI is seen as an enemy of Ind because you slavishly follow the BCCI. Holding was a brilliant bowler, one of the fastest ever and better than any Ind bowler to play the game to date. He hates IPL as do many of us, and I don't see a problem.

 

[Hitman]

The problems with you Indians is that anyone who criticises the BCCI is seen as an enemy of Ind because you slavishly follow the BCCI. Holding was a brilliant bowler, one of the fastest ever and better than any Ind bowler to play the game to date. He hates IPL as do many of us, and I don't see a problem.

You guys definitely had a problem when he called out Saeed Ajmal for chucking before he was officially banned. There is a particular thread dedicated to it.

 

[OMB]

Se of us are very fortunate and so is Close too that he survived without any debilitating injury or even death. It could have been a lot different for the defenders of holding otherwise.

Not taking away from the fact that Holding was a greatly skilled bowler.

That spell was more than regular aggression and I don’t buy this justification that since Grieg or aussies challenged WI, Holding was right to go and cause hurt. Find something better please.

 

[Varun]

The problems with you Indians is that anyone who criticises the BCCI is seen as an enemy of Ind because you slavishly follow the BCCI. Holding was a brilliant bowler, one of the fastest ever and better than any Ind bowler to play the game to date. He hates IPL as do many of us, and I don't see a problem.

I don't care for the BCCI, and much less the IPL.

But I recognize a gold digger when I see one. This particular specimen has dug his way into the ground to such an extent that there's no comeback outside of being a poster boy for BLM on Sky, sort of as a flavour of the month.

 

[Junaids]

What a hero Brian Close is. Despite being hit all over,, he stood his ground.

Holiday was well in the rules to bowl in such manner to him but its not him who came out winner in this battle.

As I wrote last year, Brian Close was, let's say, "no enemy of Apartheid". He had views about non-white people which were normal for a white Yorkshireman born in 1931. (My mother is a white Yorkshirewoman born in 1941. When she married my father, who was born in Dacca in 1940, the only member of the Yorkshire side of my family who attended the wedding was her brother's wife).

Brian Close was as hard as nails, but he was an old-fashioned dyed-in-the-wool bigot, whose racial beliefs would make Ollie Robinson look like Nelson Mandela.

When Holding bowled that spell to Close there was no moral high ground for Close to take.

And believe me, that spell to Edrich and Close won the series. When the England team realised that the series was not going to be won by the bravery of the old soldiers who had resisted 155K spells by Griffith and Hall 13 years ago, the whole series fell apart for them.

In the first two Tests the old guard of Edrich, Close and Steele ensured that the lowest England innings was 250 all out.

But gradually the pace assault of Roberts and Holding wore down the resistance, and England's final six innings - as Close and Edrich and Steele ended their careers - were:

71 and 126
387 and 204
435 and 203

 

[OMB]

As I wrote last year, Brian Close was, let's say, "no enemy of Apartheid". He had views about non-white people which were normal for a white Yorkshireman born in 1931. (My mother is a white Yorkshirewoman born in 1941. When she married my father, who was born in Dacca in 1940, the only member of the Yorkshire side of my family who attended the wedding was her brother's wife).

Brian Close was as hard as nails, but he was an old-fashioned dyed-in-the-wool bigot, whose racial beliefs would make Ollie Robinson look like Nelson Mandela.

When Holding bowled that spell to Close there was no moral high ground for Close to take.

And believe me, that spell to Edrich and Close won the series. When the England team realised that the series was not going to be won by the bravery of the old soldiers who had resisted 155K spells by Griffith and Hall 13 years ago, the whole series fell apart for them.

In the first two Tests the old guard of Edrich, Close and Steele ensured that the lowest England innings was 250 all out.

But gradually the pace assault of Roberts and Holding wore down the resistance, and England's final six innings - as Close and Edrich and Steele ended their careers - were:

71 and 126
387 and 204
435 and 203

Good insight into the Irish mindset of that time.
Whatever Brian Close's private belief or public utterings be, Holding was bowling with one intention only. What's
worse, no one walked up to Close and asked him if was ok. Could have been a concussion case.

Hence the argument of Moral highground doesn't look apt in this case. Greatly skilled bowler and very smooth action and all that but .

 

[Bewal Express]

I don't care for the BCCI, and much less the IPL.

But I recognize a gold digger when I see one. This particular specimen has dug his way into the ground to such an extent that there's no comeback outside of being a poster boy for BLM on Sky, sort of as a flavour of the month.

Anyone that does Panga with the BCCI is seen as the bad guy. Do you remember all those discussion threads on the DRS and the Indians on here argued why the BCCI was right, when they knew they didnt have a leg to stand on and as proven later when they accepted it with some face saving minor modifications. Whether you do it consciously or unconsciously, you dont like anyone that disagrees with the BCCI.
Mikey is a legend- one of the best and fastest bowlers ever, a commentator loved by the audience that pay his wages and he doesnt need Indian money or approval. The guy has credibility in the cricketing World and no matter on what grounds you decide to criticise him on, it makes no difference.

 

[MenInG]

45 years, today....

<div style="width: 100%; height: 0px; position: relative; padding-bottom: 100.000%;"><iframe src="https://streamable.com/e/kglmef" frameborder="0" width="100%" height="100%" allowfullscreen style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute;"></iframe></div>

 

[Robert]

Good insight into the Irish mindset of that time.
Whatever Brian Close's private belief or public utterings be, Holding was bowling with one intention only. What's
worse, no one walked up to Close and asked him if was ok. Could have been a concussion case.

Hence the argument of Moral highground doesn't look apt in this case. Greatly skilled bowler and very smooth action and all that but .

Irish?

 

[TheSultan]

So many snowflakes here it’s unbelievable.

That was a great display of fast bowling. Enjoy it and stop whining.

 

[Corridor of Uncertainty]

That is a lot of revisionist stuff on Michael Holding on this thread.

Only a country with no history of fast bowling will begrudge a generational talent for using his craft the way it should be used.

Look up his averages and his records against the best teams and compare against others and come back.

If there is no blood in the floor, is it even fast bowling?

Teams have gone toe to toe with West Indies and later day Pakistan without giving an inch.

To actually protest beautiful, aggressive bowling rather than admire it, I just find it sad.