We set off to do a story on offspinners and left-arm spinners – similar to what we had done some months back on legspinners. We had hoped that our favourite mystery and left-arm chinaman bowlers will find adequate space. To our dismay we found that many of the names that rolled deliciously off our tongues just did not have enough wickets to qualify under stodgy criteria such as minimum number of wickets, etc. So we said, to hell with all that – let us just enjoy ourselves writing about our favourite chinaman and mystery bowlers – the non-conformists, conjurors and sleight-of-hand purveyors.
The left-arm chinaman is a mirror image of the right-arm leg break – bowled by turning the wrist so that the ball turns the opposite way to left-arm finger spin. When bowled back of the hand, it becomes the googly, it turns the other way. We identified 10 chinaman bowlers as we trawled through the history of the game. Even if you were to add up all the wickets taken by the chinaman bowlers it would be less than a combined tally of Bedi and Underwood. There are 45 left-arm spinners who have more than 40 wickets each but just four chinaman bowlers who meet this criterion. The strike-rate of the chinaman bowler is superior (a wicket every 70 balls as compared to 79 for the orthodox left-arm); the bowling average is similar, 31.6 as compared to 31.2. The difference is that while the 45 left-arm spinners have taken over 4800 wickets in 1605 matches, the 10 chinaman bowlers have played only 184 matches to take 427 wickets.
Old timers had the great fortune to see the peerless Garry Sobers bowl a lot of this stuff. In fact they were so fortunate that they saw that genius bowl left-arm fast, slow orthodox and chinaman all on the same afternoon. His 235 test wickets are a wonderful mix of all three. In the fifties, Johnny Wardle played for England. A maverick – and that sat badly in England – he bowled orthodox finger spin in England, but served up chinaman and googlies abroad. He bowled the way his heart dictated and he bowled really well - 28 Tests, 102 wickets at a strike rate of 65 balls per wicket. His average of 20.39 is the best for any post-war spinner who has over 100 wickets. In our statistical analysis, he is second-best among left-arm spinners since 1900 (min. 50 wickets) which is awesome. But he rubbed the administrators and his captain Peter May the wrong way. He would have played a lot more games for England but for May’s preference for his Surrey team-mate Tony Lock.
Time for a lovely story: Johnny Martin who played for Australia in the sixties bowled his chinaman very slowly through the air. In a Sheffield Shield match, Martin beat a batsmen all ends up and struck him on the back foot in front of the stumps. To his utter disgust, the Umpire turned down his appeal. Martin asks the umpire: “What’s wrong, ump, isn’t he in front?” Umpire: “Yes son, he is”. Martin: “Then why isn’t he out?” Umpire: “Because the ball wouldn’t have reached the stumps, Johnny!”
Why is it that most of the chinaman bowlers are from Australia? Is there something in the Australian air that makes spinners bowl back-of-the-hand wrist spin rather than finger spin? Just as they have given cricket so many famous legspinners from Mailey to Warne and MacGill, so too have they provided us a line of chinaman bowlers, from Fleetwood-Smith to Hogg. Strangely, Australia hardly has a worthy presence among orthodox left-arm spinners.
Fleetwood-Smith (10 Tests, 42 wickets) in spite of some sterling performances in the 1930s is unfortunately best remembered as the bowler who conceded the highest number of runs in an innings - one for 298 out of an England score of 903 for 7. This was The Oval test where Hutton made 364.
Much later, Lindsay Kline (13 Tests, 34 wickets) and Martin (eight Tests, 17 wickets) had their unforgettable moments too: Kline took a hat-trick against South Africa in 1957 but his moment of glory was as a No. 11 bat for Australia in the famous 1960-61 series against West Indies. Coming in as the last batsman he stayed for more than 100 minutes with Slasher Mackay to earn Australia a draw in Adelaide. More than the fact that he lasted against Hall, Sobers, Worrell and Gibbs for that long, what was amazing was that he was practicing at the nets in the afternoon against similar bowling for more than an hour as if anticipating what he would be called upon to do later that day! Immediately after, he was dropped for the final Test – typical of Australian cricket, no sentiment at all.
Martin’s moment came in the same series. After the famous Tie in Brisbane, Australia won the second Test comfortably in Melbourne, thanks to Davidson and Martin’s bowling. In a golden spell, Martin removed Kanhai, Sobers and Worrell in four balls. Had he done it in three, it would surely have ranked as the grandest hat-trick ever!
Time once more to pull the leg of the chinaman bowler: This story was told with great relish by Dileep Sardesai. In the fourth Test in Barbados of India’s landmark tour of West Indies in 1971 – the series belonged as much to Sardesai as it did to Gavaskar – India were 70 for 6 and Sardesai was left with Solkar to repair the damage. Sobers, the West Indies captain, had Inshan Ali their chinaman bowler on at one end. Now, for the Indians this slow bowler was a far happier proposition and not wanting Sobers to change him, Sardesai and Solkar decided that in every Inshan Ali over they would deliberately appear to be beaten by the odd delivery, as though they had failed to pick him. Sardesai chortled that the extended spell to Inshan Ali actually helped the Indian cause. Knowing Sardesai, this could well be a true story!
Not much need be said about the chinaman bowlers of the last 25 years. We have watched them in close detail on TV. None more so than Paul Adams of South Africa, perhaps the only bowler to have ever had his face towards the umpire while delivering! His action – called frog in the blender – caused great consternation to the English batsmen when he was first unleashed. But batsmen sorted him out in time, because although Adams bowled good length and line he became too predictable. Nevertheless, by the time he finished he had 134 wickets in 45 matches. More recently, we have seen Hogg – tongue hanging out – bowl for Australia. Katich bowls too but we think that he should be bowled a lot more by Ponting.
It is surprising that the sub continent that produced left-arm orthodox spinners (Vinoo Mankad, Bishan Bedi, Dilip Doshi and Iqbal Qasim come to mind), does not have a single chinaman bowler in its Test history. The one chinaman bowler who could have played for India was a wonderfully gifted bowler from Hyderabad – Mumtaz Hussain. A contemporary of Gavaskar, Mumtaz promised a lot when he made his name in university and Ranji Trophy cricket with a mesmerizing mix of orthodox left-arm, chinaman and the googly. He was so difficult to read that the keeper had to devise a set of hand signals to read him. Sadly within a couple of seasons Mumtaz had greatly reduced his chinaman and bowled mainly orthodox finger spin. Soon – for it was the time when Bedi ruled – Mumtaz faded away into the anonymity of first-class cricket. It is probably the closest that India came to having an international chinaman bowler.
never realized before reading the article that an article will be dedicated to chinaman bowlers.
Posted by: Karthik Ranganathan at October 12, 2009 12:34 PM
Good piece, but it could have mentioned Michael Bevan, who even won a test single-handedly against West Indies, with his bowling. Whenever he was able to bowl an entire over without dishing out any long hops or full tosses, there weren't too many people batsman who could read him. He didn't bowl a whole lot, but an average of 24.2 and best bowling of 6/82 is proof enough.
Posted by: Julian Denny at October 12, 2009 1:05 PM
Denis Compton bowled a pretty effective chinaman. Although his first class career is creditable with 622 wickets at 32.27 a piece. In tests he was less successful with 25 at 56.40 apiece. The latter did include one 5 wicket haul though.
Posted by: D.V.C. at October 12, 2009 2:51 PM
Don't forget Michael Bevan. 29 Wickets in 18 Tests (21 Inns) at an average of 24.24 and a strike rate of 44.3.
I agree, Katich should bowl more. He's a far better option than Clarke or North.
Posted by: david varney at October 12, 2009 4:26 PM
Worth mentioning Michael Bevan. His test bowling was much more impressive than his batting - particularly against the West Indies.
Posted by: Anson Bennett at October 12, 2009 6:03 PM
What about Dave Mohammed; the chinaman bowler from Trinidad currently playing in the Champions League. I remember him confounding Dravid and beating him all ends up at the Queens Park Oval a few years back.
Posted by: luke at October 12, 2009 6:44 PM
Nice article. I genuinely learnt reading it what exactly a chinaman bowler is. I do, as I usually do, however, have a niggle...why is it thought that Adams was 'found out'? He began his career with a 31.5 ave and finished it slightly higher (though if you knock off the two last very high scoring tests he finishes with a lower ave. He took more wkts vs australia in his last series v them than in the others. In fact, remove those last two tests (where no-one shone brightly) he kept taking wickets in the mathces he played. 4 here and there...an 8. I never really felt justice was done to him after there was this idea he was 'found out'.
still - liked the article and you do use 'nevertheless' after saying batsmen sorted him out so fair play
Posted by: sr at October 12, 2009 10:08 PM
dave mohammed from trinidad is a pretty good chinaman bowler at first class level
Posted by: Phil S. at October 13, 2009 12:41 AM
Simon Katich's inability to get a bowl even when his team are chucking the ashes away for the want of a spinner just about sums up the lot of the chinaman. Any teenager out there who wants a career bolwing left-arm wrist spin has my sympathy.
Posted by: S George at October 13, 2009 5:49 AM
What about Michael Bevan? Wasn't he also in the same breed when it comes to bowling dept.? He too was used less frequently like Katich.
Posted by: Vikram Maingi at October 13, 2009 6:41 AM
What about Nicky Boje?
Was he a chinaman or a left-arm orthodox?
Posted by: Manasvi at October 13, 2009 9:18 AM
And don't forget Dave Mohammad. Not much success in Tests, but he's had quite a bit of success in ODI's and T20's. And he played a crucial role in one of WI's tests... with the bat.
Posted by: Dave at October 13, 2009 9:43 AM
A note regarding your thought that Katich should be bowled more often by Ponting. I believe that he problem is that bowling very often gives Katich trouble with his back. Whilst I'm sure Ponting would like Katich to bowl a few overs every now and again (he has done well on occasion in the past), it's obviously not worth it if his opening batsman can't walk the next day!
Posted by: Balaji at October 13, 2009 10:55 AM
Very readable article...the anecdotes make it really enjoyable.
Posted by: ted at October 13, 2009 11:41 AM
well done good piece.i always liked hogg as a bowler.is it true that fleetwood smith ended up destitute living under a bridge?
Posted by: RS at October 13, 2009 12:52 PM
He's only played sporadically, but Dave Mohammed of the Trinidad and Tobago side currently playing in the 20/20 Champions League bowls a pretty good left-arm Chinaman.
Posted by: Adam at October 13, 2009 2:22 PM
Let's not forget Michael Bevan. Was so successful for a period with his chinamen who was actually picked in tests as one of Australia's 4 bowlers at one stage. And this was when Australia were an exceptionally strong team.
Posted by: Keith Ainsworth Roach at October 13, 2009 3:17 PM
A little further on Inshan Ali, in one 6-ball over, he had Roy Clinton Fredericks (Guyana and West Indies opening batsman) comprehensively beaten with the five previous deliveries only for Freddo, in utter frustration, to run down the wicket to hit Ali out of the Oval. He was smartly stumped by wicket-keeper Anthony Lewis. Most spectators (at the Queens Park Oval in Trinidad) would surely have remembered such an episode for a very long time
Posted by: Adam Frankowski at October 14, 2009 2:12 AM
The Caribbean has produced quite a few chinaman bowlers, apart from Sobers and Inshan Ali who are mentioned in the article. Roy Fredericks bowled chinamen occasionally, while Dave Mohammed has played a handful of tests without much success. Then there was the "original" chinaman, Ellis Achong, while another Trinidadian wrist-spinner, Shervan Pragg, would probably have played test cricket, but for his tragically early death, aged just 20, in a car crash in 1982.
Posted by: Joseph Bahri at October 14, 2009 3:05 AM
What about Roy Fredericks? He oftened bowled with more control than other SLC bowlers.
Posted by: Giridhar at October 15, 2009 2:40 PM
While writing our piece it was not our intention to name or write about every chiunaman bowler. However I wish we had devoted a couple of lines to Compton. Maybe we will correct this one day by writing about his batting, his comical running between the wickets and his excellent football skills!
Posted by: Naval Patel at October 21, 2009 6:13 AM
Another extremely effective Chinaman was George Tribe, while he bowled in Australia. Indeed he bamboozled the touring English batsmen during the 1946-47 Tests. The ridiculous 50-over new ball Law found Bradman rely only on his fast bowlers during the 1948 tour and deprive Tribe and McCool of any bowling opportunities.
Fleetwood-Smith should also be remembered for his dominance of England batsmen in the Fourth and Fifth Tests of 1936-37, particularly how he dismissed a well set Hammond to clinch victory.
Posted by: Andrew at October 24, 2009 5:00 AM
Can't overdo Bevan - need to keep him fresh for the inevitable "ODI specialist who can't play long form" and the "great batsman who plays the short ball worse than McGrath" articles.
Someone asked about Boje - in the absence of any actual spin he wasn't a Chinaman or a LAO, more so a slow-slow-slow medium bowler.
Post your comment
About this blog
'Inbox' will feature submissions from you with us playing gatekeeper as we do with the rest of the site. We will set no rules apart from
ensuring a certain quality that you have come to associate with Cricinfo. You may write on the aspects of the game that you
hold dear; about matters that rile you; about players, teams and trends; you may share your memories and views, and
you may so do so in 100 words or 500. The only tip we will give you is to repeat a line from
our style sheet: Brevity is not just the soul of wit, it is the heart of all writing.
Welcome. (Editor, Cricinfo)