The passing of Sunny Ramadhin has brought attention to the mystery spinner of cricket. Some batsmen think that since all spinners are a mystery, this adjective is unnecessary. Ramadhin could swing the ball either way without apparent change, often fooling wicket-keeper Clyde Walcott, who was about a foot tall.
In the 1950s, England ran into two mystery spinners in successive series and lost both of them. Ramadhin took 26 wickets as West Indies registered a 3-1 win in England for the first time. The shocked batsman then clashed with Jack Iverson in Australia and lost that series 4–1, with Iverson taking 21 wickets.
Iverson, in the words of his biographer Gideon High, “was not a wrist spinner, as the wrist did not provide any leverage. He was not a finger spinner, as the propulsion, not rotation, was from the middle finger. He was called a thumb spinner. Had to be told, because it was his undersung thumb that was really the basis of the delivery…” Iverson perfected his craft using a ping pong ball held between thumb and middle finger.
Bosanquet, the inventor of googly, did the experiment. Twisty Twisty’, A pastime where you try to spin a tennis ball in front of your opponent sitting at the other end of a table. His action turned the ball the wrong way.
… until the secret is revealed
Every bowler is a mystery until the batsmen discover the secret. The man even credited with inventing the off break – an 18th-century farmer named Lambourn who in the days of under-arm bowling was a natural to turn from leg to off – starts I must have been a mystery bowler.
Colin Cowdrey and Peter May put on 411 runs to save a Test as Ramadhin’s career (he took 158 wickets in 43 Tests) neared its end, and he bowled a considerable 98 overs.
The Leg Before Law was then changed to include the dismissal of balls outside the off-stump with no stroke awarded. But Ramadhin was successful, and although he continued to play for another three years, the mystery was solved, or at least a counter was worked out.
Iverson was hurried to expose by his own countrymen in a Shield match when Arthur Morris and Keith Miller worked out that the high bounce ball was the top spinner, while the lower trajectory had a false ‘un’. Morris scored 182, Miller 83 in a short time and performed the role of Iverson. Ignore his hand, work him out into the air.
Closest to Iverson
The bowler who came closest to being Iverson’s clone was Australia’s John Gleason, who used the same thumb and middle-finger technique, but with less spin. It was said about him that he used to bowl ‘Iverson’. The word never caught on, as ‘bosi’ (from bosanquet) did for googly or ‘saki’ (from Saqlain Mushtaq) may still mean another.
Gleason’s fingers were strengthened by milking cows in her hometown in New South Wales. David Frith brings him to life in this description: “…this brief postal technician with ears like cabbage leaves, his green hat sitting like a pancake on his head…”
When Saqlain Mushtaq introduced the second, it upset the coach as it could not be bowled without changing the angle of the arm. Muttiah Muralitharan’s second rule causes a change, with an acceptable angle of turn, but delivery was still discouraged. Graeme Swann took 255 Test wickets without resorting to a second.
Bosanquet said of his googling, “It’s not unfair, just immoral.” The second is seen as both unfair and immoral.
short term feeling
The mystery bowler often turns out to be a one-trick pony, and results in a one-season surprise because once one of his codes is decrypted, he lacks the range or confidence to advance.
South Africa’s Paul Adams, whose action was compared to “a frog in a blender”, was quickly settled, as was Sri Lanka’s Ajantha Mendis, but when he was rumbled, he had There was a lack of continuity.
Also, as poets are known, spinners come across as fragile beings who sometimes cannot handle punishment, but rather as poets who cannot withstand criticism.
The success of bowlers like Saqlain, Muralitharan and Bhagwat Chandrasekhar lay in the fact that these bowlers had much more to offer, and were often conservative.
However, it will only get more difficult for the budding mystery spinner. For example, Sunil Narine is known for something neither Iverson nor Ramadhin have done: slow-motion television and extreme analysis. There may be no secrets or mysteries in cricket – or if there are, cameras help quickly negate them.
But, as High wrote in Iverson’s biography, mystery spinner“It is entirely possible that cricket is yet to discover the full potential of the ball being rotated.” And it’s a comforting thought.