Statham could drop the ball on a coin: Gopinath

The death of Brian Statham, that by-word for accuracy, roused memories from a distant past in the minds of two former Indian Test batsmen who matched wits with this master bowler. CD Gopinath made his Test debut in the 1951-52 home series against an England side singularly bereft of star names. Statham himself was in the dawn of a career that would produce 252 wickets in 70 matches at a respectable 24.82.

Polly Umrigar was another who duelled with the Lancashire paceman, over two Test series in fact, at home in 1951-52 and in England in 1959. The honours could be described as roughly even, with Umrigar blasting his way to an unbeaten 130 at Madras although Statham did see the back of him on three occasions.

Gopinath considered him to be quite fast although pace was not his chief selling point. "He (Statham) was ab-so-lutely accurate; on the spot; you couldn't take any liberties with him", said the Madras middle order bat. "You've heard of bowlers who could drop the ball on a coin. Statham was one of them." He went on to say that he believed in the widely held proposition that Freddie Trueman got a lot of wickets because Statham at the other end was so difficult to get away.

Gentleman 'George' as he was known, Statham was also reputed to be a mild mannered individual far removed from the stereotypical fast bowler who breathed rings of fire. Umrigar termed him a 'pleasing personality' which is hardly something you could say of most other bowlers of his ilk. Gopinath, who faced Statham in three Tests, also assented, "He was a nice chap in the sense he didn't create a nasty scene or try to intimidate the batsman. And he rarely bowled a bouncer."

Of course Statham did have a nasty bouncer when he chose to use it but only when provoked by the batsman. Easton McMorris of Jamaica once tried to frustrate 'George' by planting his front foot forward and blocking the ball. After warning him ineffectually, Statham let him have it with one that struck the heart and despatched him to hospital.

When it was put to Gopinath that Statham was a bit too accurate for his own good, he replied " In a way yes. You knew he wouldn't bowl a short ball or half volley. When you played him you were more or less prepared to defend, you rarely attempted to play a stroke." Umrigar was in agreement: "He was really steady in length and direction. You knew where he's going to pitch the ball, so it becomes easy for the batsman." Easy? I'm not sure all the 252 victims who fell to this wily campaigner would agree.

Comparing Statham with his legendary contemporaries, Trueman and Tyson, Gopinath suggested that "Tyson was very fast for the first few overs, bowling flat out when the ball was new. But after the first five overs, Statham was as fast as Tyson." Umrigar believed that there was not much to choose between Trueman and Statham apropos speed but Trueman was less accurate which was why paradoxically he got more wickets. The burly Parsi, now 74, also proposed that his bete noire Trueman had a more varied repertoire, including the yorker, bouncer and outswinger.

According to Gopinath, Statham's most dangerous weapon was the one that suddenly came into the batsman and nipped through between bat and pad. Umrigar concurred, "He moved the ball off the seam, cutting it in after pitching. The batsman tried to leave it and was bowled." One of the most parsimonious characters who ever grasped a cricket ball, Statham was paid tribute by Umrigar who remarked that "if in his time there was one day cricket, he would have been a champion. It was that difficult to score runs off him."