BC BOOK
Saved by @Alex1Powell

I suppose a lot of us are still upset, so let me share something amusing.

This concerns this book, one that I had been unaware of until I came across a report by Andrew Lang in The Times.

In a piece in 1922, EV Lucas hailed the author as the Indian Nyren.
+

 .@sumitganguly14 got a scan of the cover for me from an acquaintance in Lucknow.

I shall share some snippets here.

I shall share more if and when I ever get the entire book.

But first, a word or two on cricket books in India.
+
Calcutta Cricket Club Scores 1844-54, the first known book of scores outside the British Isles, was published in 1854.

In 1867 a Hindi coaching book was published in Agra. It was translated in Urdu in 1868.

In 1889, a Marathi coaching book was published in Baroda.
+
JM Framjee Patel's famous Stray Thoughts on Indian Cricket was published in 1905.

In between all this, this book came out in 1891. As you can see, it has a long name.

I shall refer to this as Cricket Guide.

Here are the promised excerpts, mostly taken from Lang's piece.
+
I am trying to add some comments. I also have some questions. See whether you can answer them.

Excerpt 1:
"Even those who are very good and noble turn so rash and inconsiderate at certain moments that their brains lose the balance and begin to take fallacious fancies."
+
I do not know what to make of this in cricketing context. This seems more out of a self-help book.

Excerpt 2:
"Devout lovers of the duty [of umpiring] call last but one at the fourth ball, a very common practice, although by mistake prevailing."
+
Five-ball overs, I must remind here. The umpire was supposed to announce the end of the fourth ball.

Maybe this used to be standard practice. It certainly seems helpful.
+
Excerpt 3:
"Each and every one of the umpires must avoid using insulting terms, or playing on bets, with any one of the fielders, in his capacity of being an umpire."

Was insulting cricketers commonplace for umpires? It would have been a refreshing revenge in reverse timeline.
+
Even if one ignores that part, was the bit on betting needed?

Was it really necessary to *legally* prevent the umpires from betting with fielders? Why? Did it usually happen?

Additionally, was it okay to bet with batsmen? Or the other umpire? How did this syndicate operate?
+
Excerpt 4:
"The fielders must take special care not to exchange jokes with one another or try funny tricks that do secretly divide their attention and produce a horrible defect in their fielding."

I do not like Mr Mohammad at all. :(
+
Excerpt 5:
"During one and the same over the bowler is allowed to change his ends as often as he may desire, but cannot possibly bowl two overs in succession."

First, some context. Until 1889, a bowler was allowed to bowl consecutive overs *twice* in an innings.
+
So some part of this makes sense.

But Mr Mohammad seems to have taken things a bit further.

But my favourite bit is "as often as he may desire".

Does this mean that he could bowl the five balls from alternate ends?
+
That would mean switching ends four times in an over, at different batsmen, with the field and umpires changing every time...

Excerpt 6:
"The bowler is allowed to make the batsman stand in any direction he may choose from the wicket he is bowling from."
+
How did this work? Could the batsman be made to face the wicketkeeper on demand?

Excerpt 7:
"Two trial balls are only allowed in every match to each party."

This is nice. Trial balls still exist in gully cricket, and back then, used to be in vogue in serious cricket as well.
+
In an attempt to inflict mental disintegration, Warwick Armstrong once bowled them for 19 minutes to keep a debutant Frank Woolley waiting.

Mr Mohammad puts an upper limit of two. He would have prevented Armstrong from doing what he did.
+
Excerpt 8:
"I would like this man [wicketkeeper] to be of a grave demeanour and humble mind, say the Captain of the Club, whose duties are to guide the fielders, order the change of their places if necessary guard himself well against the furious attacks of the sweeping balls.
+
Also
"He should also stand with the stumps under his arms."

I get the duties, the extra responsibilities, but what is with the demeanour and humility? Why should the others get away without being humble?

"Stumps under his arms" was probably poor phrasing.
+
Excerpt 9:
"He [the point fielder] must be a very smart and very clever man, of a quick sight and slender form. His place is in front of the popping-crease, about seven yards from the striker.
+
"He must take special care to protect his own person in case when fast bowling is raging through the field. Pay great attention to the game, my dear pointer, or suppose yourself already hurt."

At seven yards this is more of a silly point, but that is not the point (intended).
+
Why should he take special care when a fast bowler was bowling? Weren't silly points more at risk when spinners bowled?

Or was there a chance of the fast man bowling wide enough to decapitate the fielder?

Also, why should he be smart and clever?

And
WHY IS THIS A LAW?
+
Excerpt 10:
"The fielders must never sting the player with taunts, if they turn him out, for this often results in something disagreeable to the human mind."

Spirit of Cricket, basically. I do not have a problem with this, because it is a law, and therefore not vague.
+
Excerpt 11:
"If one of the strikers is run out , then the remaining one must not leave his wicket, unless next player comes in, and even then both the parties must agree to the proposal of the striker leaving his position to complete his innings."
+
This one, I could not fathom. Can someone help me understand this?

Excerpt 12:
"Behave like gentlemen after the game is over; avoid clapping and laughing in faces of the persons you have defeated.
+
"If you are the Captain of your team and the fielders of the opposite party clap your welcome, you are required simply to turn or raise your night cap a little, and this is sufficient to prove your easy turn of disposition as well as to furnish the return of their compliments."
+
All that is fine, but did Indian cricketers of the era take field in nightcaps?

Excerpt 13:
"If you have any book to be signed by the captain of the opposite side, confessing his defeat by so many runs, please do it like men."

???????????????????????????

More from Abhishek Mukherjee

Abhishek Mukherjee
Abhishek Mukherjee
@ovshake42
I often come across gobbledygook like "Spirit of Cricket" or "Gentleman's Game" or "That's Not Cricket".

These comments often remind me of what Archie McLaren did to Charlie McLeod (in photo).

And that happened on this day, 1897-98, at Sydney.
+


In those days, SoC and GG were often defined based on whether MCC were the enforcers or victim.

Before getting into the incident, a bit on McLeod.

McLeod's name never comes up when cricketers who overcame disabilities are listed.

He was hearing impaired.
+

So he could not hear snicks, appeals, even the non-striker's call.

Yet he had 3,321 runs at 21 and 335 wickets at 24 in First-Class cricket.

His numbers were not great in Test cricket (17 Tests, 573 runs at 24, 33 wickets at 40), but he had one great series.
+

The series in question.

McLeod was playing his second Test match, three years after his debut.

McLaren, on the other hand, was filling in for Andrew Stoddart, whose mother passed away just before the Test match.

England amassed 551 before bowling out Australia for 237.
+

McLaren enforced the follow-on.

Till this point, McLeod had 3/80 and 50 not out (from #9).

He was promoted to #3 in the second innings. At stumps on Day 3 he was unbeaten on 20.

He added 6 more the next morning when it happened.

Tom Richardson bowled a full-toss.
+
CRICKET
Abhishek Mukherjee
Abhishek Mukherjee
@ovshake42
India and West Indies met for the first time on Australian soil on this day, 1991, at Perth.

And they produced one of the greatest ODIs of all time.

In those days the WACA pitch used to produce incredible pace and bounce (it still does, but not as much).
+


So West Indies picked Marshall, Patterson, Ambrose, and Cummins.

India went in with Kapil, Prabhakar, Srinath, and debutant Subroto Banerjee.

Richardson opted to field, and Srikkanth was out caught in the fifth over.

Now Manjrekar joined Shastri.
+

Both had scored hundreds on West Indian soil three seasons ago.

But while they did not throw it away, runs did not come either.

Manjrekar did not look particularly pleased when he was given out caught behind off Cummins. 35/2. 18th over.

Then Tendulkar was caught mid off.
+

Then Shastri flicked Cummins for the first over of the match.

Ambrose had Azhar caught behind, but Shastri stepped out to drive Hooper straight for four.

I described the two fours because these were the only ones in the 284-ball Indian innings.
+

Then one Brian Lara took a flying catch off a Shastri edge.

His 33 had taken Shastri 110 balls. It would remain the highest score of the match.

Kapil holed out to mid wicket, but Amre and Prabhakar added a crucial 23 for the seventh wicket.
+
CRICKET
Advertisement
Abhishek Mukherjee
Abhishek Mukherjee
@ovshake42
On this day, 1950, a bizarre Test match on a ridiculous pitch got over at The Gabba.

The match lasted only 129.2 eight-ball overs (172.2 six-ball overs), and involved two of the most extraordinary declarations, on 68 and 32.

Here is what happened.
+


Hassett won the all-important toss.

Australia were 66/1 at lunch. 166/6 at tea, and bowled out for 228 just before stumps.

Nothing spectacular so far.

To provide stability to the frail middle-order, England had decided to push Hutton – their best batsman – down the order.
+

Simpson walked out with Washbrook and appealed for bad light before a ball were bowled. It was accepted.

It rained that night. And then for the next day and the rest day.

And for part of Day 3.

Then, against all expectations, play started at 1 PM.

But first, some context.
+

We know that pitches used to remain uncovered back in the 1950s and play began when rain stopped.

So the matches were played on sticky wickets.

Every footmark, every spot where the ball pitched, left an imprint.

These dried in the sun. A drying wicket could be dangerous.
+

And The Gabba had probably the worst of these "gluepots".

The roller tried its best, but not enough.

The first over, from Lindwall, was eventless.

Johnston bowled from the other end. By now the sun was already out.
+
CRICKET
Abhishek Mukherjee
Abhishek Mukherjee
@ovshake42
The Boxing Day Test match is two days away, so I suppose it is better to tell the tale of the greatest Boxing Day cricket the world has ever seen.

That happened in 1953, at Ellis Park, Johannesburg (the photograph is from another match).

Warning:
+


I often get carried away even while reading this, let alone writing. There may be overdose of emotions.

First, as usual, some context.

Despite playing Test cricket for over two decades, New Zealand were yet to win their first Test match.
+

Jack Cheetham, on the other hand, was turning South African cricket around.

They had drawn the 2-2 in Australia and had won 1-0 in New Zealand.

And they won the first Test of this series, at Durban, by an innings.
+

The South African attack already consisted of swing bowler David Ironside, the untiring Anton Murray, Hugh Tayfield.

Arguably the greatest South African spinner, Tayfield still holds the record for the most consecutive dot balls in a Test (Bapu Nadkarni does not hold this).
+

And in Durban, they had drafted in Neil Adcock.

Standing at six foot six and gifted with long arms, Adcock could make the ball take off even from a good length.

And he was quick.

The first South African to take 100 Test wickets, he would finish with a bowling average of 21.
+
HISTORY
Abhishek Mukherjee
Abhishek Mukherjee
@ovshake42
Raqibul Hasan Sr (also spelled Roqibul, Raquibul, Roquibul) was born on this day, 1953.

He was the first international captain of a representative Bangladesh side.

And his heroics in 1971 on a cricket field, in the face of fire, have been matched by almost no one.
+


Let me provide the backdrop first. This was 1970-71. Threats of Civil War loomed over East Pakistan.

Yahya Khan was making a last-ditch attempt to have control on East Pakistan, and cricket was going to be his tool.

An International XI was touring Pakistan.
+

Their second match was scheduled at Dacca.

In the 1970 Pakistan General Elections, Awami League had won 160 seats out of 300, but were still not allowed to form the Government.

And now Raqibul was roped in, probably as the ruling party's poster boy.
+

A year ago, they had named him twelfth man in the final Test against New Zealand.

Like his teammates, he was given a Gray-Nicolls bat that bore the symbol of the Pakistan People's Party.

There was no way Raqibul, staunch supporter of the Awami League, would agree to that.
+

He sneaked out of Hotel Purbani that night to meet his friend Sheikh Kamal.

They decided that the PPP symbol would be covered with a sticker with the message Joy Bangla (viva Bengal).

The Mukti Bahini used the slogan during the Bangladesh Liberation War later that year.
+
HISTORY

More from Book

Ankur Warikoo
Ankur Warikoo
@warikoo
My top books I read in 2020

A thread...

Almanack of Naval Ravikant
What a stunning and thoughtful compilation of @naval's work and words.
I predict that this is going to define a new industry - curating public content of thought leaders and converting them into

Waking Up: Search for spirituality without religion
@SamHarris provoked me through this book and offered me, an atheist, a lot to think about.
Pick up his works!

Psychology of Money
My most awaited book of this year, since the day @morganhousel announced his book.
A must read for all ages, especially those in their 20s.

I predict this to reach levels of "Rich Dad Poor Dad" over the next 10

Courage to be disliked
What a stunner! Challenges most of our tightly-held beliefs and I found myself nodding more often than not through the book.

Not for the
BOOK
David R. MacIver
David R. MacIver
@DRMacIver
One like = one* interesting book pairing

* with an option to give up any time after 100 tweets

(Not formally part of @threadapalooza, just a warm up exercise / fodder for if I do give in to the imp of the perverse and do a 100 threads thread.)

1. "Ritual and its Consequences" with "Games: Agency as Art".

Both detailed analyses of social technologies (rituals and games) and how people engage with them by essentially suspending the normal complexities of the world within a structure. Would reward detailed comparison.

2. "The Collected Schizophrenias" with Ratcliffe's "Feelings of Being"

Autobiography of someone with schizophrenia paired with a detailed phenomenological analysis of what it's like to be schizophrenic. The latter would be an interesting lens to read the former through.

(<)3. "All About Love" by bell hooks and "About Love" by Josef Pieper.

The reason for the pairing is fairly obvious, but each of these has had significant and distinct impacts on my understanding of love.

(Both are fairly religious and/or spiritual)
BOOK
Advertisement
James Bejon
James Bejon
@JamesBejon
THREAD: Jonah, Moses, and the Cross.

Jonah is traditionally read on Yom Kippur.

Why?

One reason is no doubt its emphasis on repentance.

Thematic and calendrical issues, however, may also play a part.

Consider the book’s flow of events:

🔹 As the book opens, a threat of judgment looms on the horizon.

🔹 Per the Yom Kippur ritual (on 10th Tishri), lots are cast and Jonah is selected to be sent away.

🔹 And, four days later (14th Tishri), Jonah builds himself a ‘sukkah’ (‘tabernacle’), in which he rejoices (שמח) (cp. 4.6)—a verb specifically connected with the feast of Tabernacles (Lev. 23.40, Deut. 16.15).

Further connections can also be noted.

But, before we dive into their details, we need to take a step back.

(Christians of all people should make they sure don’t get carried away by divers’ lusts: KJV II Tim. 3.6.)

--- A PROPHET ON THE RUN ---

Jonah’s distinctive as a prophet is undoubtedly his decision to run away from his God.

How many other prophetic books open with a description of their author’s disobedience?
BOOK
Sabi Boyz Only \u2b55\U0001f1f3\U0001f1ec
Sabi Boyz Only ⭕🇳🇬...
@Sabi_boyz
There is a difference between allowing a women do whatever she wants, and treating her accordingly
(which is what I advise)

And

Having a woman treat you anyhow, giving you drama, wasting your time and treating you like shit

Lemme elaborate further
BOOK
Mukesh Harjai
Mukesh Harjai
@harjaim
My daughter has just finished reading 'Atomic Habits' and I have started to observe a few changes in her behavior, most notably, she is now better prepared for Sat 7AM swim session. Her swim bag and costume are right by her bedside the night before. I was impressed by this tiny

change so asked her to summarise the book for me. I found it very impactful for behavior change and building new habits so sharing here
@dmuthuk @unseenvalue @nishkumar1977 @connectgurmeet @ishmohit1 if you find it useful, kindly like or RT so that it reaches the wider audience.

1. A large portion of our daily actions are influenced by our automatic habits, habits that have been formed through repetition over the course of our entire life. There are healthy and productive habits that serve us and negative ones that work against us.

2. We are what we repeatedly do and the quality of our lives often depends on the quality of our habits.


Lesson 1: Tiny changes lead to big improvements


“Atomic habits” is all about showing how small and seemingly unimportant changes and adjustments can lead to a massive

3. transformation. If you make a tiny 1% improvement to something on a daily basis in the course of just one year, you end up being 37 times better...37 times better health, 37 times better finances or relationships, even a fraction of that will significantly transform your life
BOOKS , ATOMIC HABITS , BOOK

You May Also Like

The '60s at 60
The '60s at 60
@the_60s_at_60
"The MAD Primer of Bigots, Extremists and Other Loose Ends," from September 1969.

Seen a couple of these panels make the rounds from time to time, so here's the complete set of 10 (something to amuse and/or offend almost everyone).


Chapter 1: The Super Patriot


Chapter 2: The Ku Klux Klansman


Chapter 3: The American Student


Chapter 4: The Right-Wing Extremist
FUN
Hector Navarro
Hector Navarro
@Hectorisfunny
I'm going to attempt to chronologically list all of the Marvel characters Stan Lee had a hand in creating. Working with his genius collaborators, Stan and his team produced an insane amount of iconic characters in a roughy ten year period. (Thread)


With his younger brother, writer Larry Lieber, and Jack "the King" Kirby:

Groot

Tales to Astonish #13 (November, 1960)


With writer Lieber, and artist Kirby:

Fin Fang Foom

Strange Tales #89 (October, 1961)


With the King, Stan gives birth to the Marvel Universe:

The Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four #1 (November, 1961)


With Jack Kirby:

Mister Fantastic

Fantastic Four #1 (November, 1961)
CULTURE
Advertisement
Christina Warren
Christina Warren
@film_girl
A brief thread on Jovan Hutton Pulitzer, the crazy con man who is now claiming to have hacked into the Georgia voting machines in Fulton County. 90s kids and tech aficionados might remember Jovan as the inventor of the CueCat, the dumbest gadget of all time.

Also, for anyone who wants to claim that Jovan Hutton Pulitzer (not his given name, but one he changed legally after the CueCat debacle) invented QR Codes: he did not. Like that other right-wing crazy man who claimed to have invented email, Jovan didn’t invent QR Codes.

He did invent the CueCat, a product that somehow raised $185 million dollars for a tethered barcode scanner for magazines and newspapers, so you could get ads from your ads. As I said, the dumbest product of all time. Good backup barcode scanners after they were hacked, however

Oh, that’s another thing. When CueCat was a thing, its systems were hacked. I guess that’s what makes Jovan a security expert. His bankrupt company from 20 years ago was hacked and widely mocked. He’s a genius.

In recent years, Jovan pivoted to being a treasure hunter who was featured on and widely mocked on Curse of Oak Island, because the man is insane.
POLITICS
Quinn Cummings
Quinn Cummings
@quinncy
Gather round, Gentle Readers. It is time I tell the story of the worst decision I ever made in an office. Some of you have heard this. Some have not. Whatever you do in your office today, this week, the rest of this year, you can console yourself by recalling this tale.

A long time ago, I was a talent agent. I worked for a woman named Susan Smith, who had her own small boutique agency. She was known for three things:

1. She had fantastic taste in clients. If there is someone you admire, odds are good that at some point, she was their agent,

2. She could negotiate a deal like few who have ever trod the earth. Casting would give her all the money they had budgeted for that part, plus a little more, plus promising to get her dog Barnaby groomed. She was magnificent to watch.

3. She was insane.

I'm sure you're thinking, "Quinn, it's the entertainment industry, they are all insane." Yes, many are. So consider this; if you told someone you worked for Susan, people who worked for insane people would look and you and whisper, "I hear she's insane."
LIFE
Kaspars Ozolins
Kaspars Ozolins
@lettlander
THREAD: Meditations on marriage metaphors in Ruth

The book of Ruth is, of course, a story about a beautiful marriage. But even before the courtship and the wedding and the important genealogy at the end, we find interesting language that is strikingly reminiscent of Genesis 2:24


That important verse reads:

'Therefore a man shall leave [יַֽעֲזָב] his father and his mother and hold fast [וְדָבַ֣ק] to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.'

The verb עזב can be quite strong in force. For example, Joseph leaves behind [וַיַּעֲזֹ֤ב] his garment as he flees from Pharaoh's wife's sexual advances. Countless times, Israel is depicted abandoning the LORD, for example in Judg 2:12 [וַיַּעַזְב֞וּ], and going after other gods.

Likewise, the verb דבק is rather striking. Lot is mortified of disaster overtaking him [תִּדְבָּקַ֥נִי] as he flees from Sodom. Israel is commanded in Deut 10:20 to cling fast [תִדְבָּ֔ק] to the LORD and serve him and swear by his name.

Together they illustrate how radical God designed marriage to be. Marriage is a real severing of family relations in order to form a new, permanent bond with another human being.

Something very similar to this takes places in Ruth's life.
HISTORY