February 1 marked three decades since modern cricket's most infamous moment of controversy, the underarm delivery Australian captain Greg Chappell ordered his brother Trevor to bowl as the final ball of a One-Day International against New Zealand.For Greg it was a major blip on what was a glittering but always controversial career. For the unfortunate underachieving Trevor, he will always be remembered for his role in the debacle.
The defining visual of the underarm incident is Trevor Chappell rolling the ball along the ground towards New Zealand batsman Brian McKechnie, who threw his bat away in disgust. The wider context of the day cannot be forgotten however, as it adds to the sheer drama of the event, and highlights what a devastating anti-climax is ultimate conclusion was. World Series Cricket was barely two years in the past, and had given Australian cricket with its legacy of spectacular day-night One Day cricket with coloured clothing and white balls. To continue this popular new fad, the Australian Cricket Board established an annual triangular tournament of one-day matches involving Australia and two touring teams to be played over the summer in conjunction with the Test matches. The World Series Cup began in 1979 and, under different names, continued until 2007 when it was replaced by the current format of five-to-seven match bilateral seiries', adding to the over-saturation of superfluous one day contests.
This was a time when the Australian public, driven by youth, were captivated by the spectacle of 50 over One-Day Cricket. In the modern age of over-scheduling, most one day series hold little interest to anyone outside the immediate playing group. It can be hard nowadays to even imagine a context where an Australian captain could find the result of 'just another one-dayer' so desperately essential as to commit such a foul act. Not that Greg Chappell would ever have considered even the most inconsequential dead rubber anything other than vitally important and worthy of full effort. For all of his faults, this was the genesis of Chappell's cricketing genius.
In the summer of 1980-81, New Zealand and India visited in what was an evenly matched series filled with tense clashes that continued to delight the public. As it was, India were inconsistent and over time faded to finish a clear 3rd, and Australia and New Zealand qualified for the five-match finals series. On February 1 the teams were at the MCG for Game 3, with the series tied at 1-1. So outside any World Cup there could be few more important one day matches. It could also be said that for Australians the home triangular series was more important than the World Cup, which at that point was a decidedly English venture with white clothes and Test-like conditions. World Series Cricket had moved Australia's interests away from this conservative English state of thinking towards the new exciting spectacle of day-night cricket.
Australia amassed 235 from their 50 overs, on the back of a 90 from Greg Chappell which was predictably not without controversy itself. When 52 Chappell was caught in the outfield by Martin Snedden, but the catch was a tight one with the ball close to the ground and Chappell stood his ground. Snedden was adamant the catch was taken but Chappell did not walk and the umpires called not-out. Later replays showed the catch was indeed cleanly taken. New Zealand's reply was anchored by a stellar century from opener Bruce Edgar, who batted throughout the 50 overs for 102 not out.
Entering the final over New Zealand were 6 for 221, requiring 15 with barnstorming all-rounder Richard Hadlee (now Sir Richard) new to the crease and on strike. An error in bowling calculations from Chappell meant that he was left with the far from optimum option of brother Trevor to bowl the final over. On a pitch which was playing absurdly low by today's standards, Hadlee took four off the first ball but then was trapped LBW. No.9 Ian Smith was able to mishit a couple of swings into the outfield and scramble a pair of twos before being bowled. This left New Zealand at 8 for 229 with little known medium pacer Brian McKechnie the new batsman. Seven were needed to win, a six could tie it and take the teams to Game 4 with the series still locked up. As they say, the rest is history.
For thirty years since that fateful day, Greg Chappell's actions have gone down as a definitive low point in Australian sporting folklore. Relations between Australia and New Zealand were strained like never before. No sporting controversy had caused such wide ranging national antagonism between Australia and a political ally since Bodyline. New Zealand prime minister Robert Muldoon called the underarm delivery "the most disgusting incident I can recall in the history of cricket." But in reality, there were few genuine repercussions outside cricketing circles, as people on both sides of the Tasman for the most part agreed it had been a low act. But the fact remains, sliding a ball up the pitch underarm was not prohibited in the tournament laws. The overriding question mark of why this was the case is what really astonishes many people. I've been asked many times why such a ridiculous happening could legally occur in the first place. One element is simply that the very bizarreness of every possible unpredictable event can't be legislated against. But there is a wider context, that of the origins of bowling itself.
In the earliest centuries of Cricket the default form of bowling, the only form for all intents and purposes, was underarm. Cricket drew many similarities from bowls, and the ball was delivered in a similar way on similar grass surfaces. The only ostensible difference was the presence of a batsman. Although there's no concrete evidence as to how cricket surfaced, it's easy to imagine a lawn bowls patron accidentally striking a moving ball with a plank of wood, the seed of an idea dawning in his eyes. It would rival the romantic origins of Rugby (supposedly invented when an enterprising young student at Rugby School in England picked up a football mid-game and ran off the pitch with it). Until well into the 19th century, bowling was done either by the original rolling method, or by a pitched variant where the ball was delivered underarm, but projected airborne. Many specialist bowlers, most notably the revolutionary Edward "Lumpy" Stevens, began to develop the art of bowling, discovering and studying phenomena such as spin and air resistance, and learning the physics of bowling. An extremely subtle art involving precise lines and lengths developed, but it was still all underarm.
It wasn't until well into the early part of the 19th century that there were recorded occurrences of a new roundarm style, which may or may not look a bit like Mitchell Johnson. By the time Test Cricket began in 1876, underarm was largely superseded and the modern overarm style was dominant. Even into the the 20th century underarm bowling was a notable minority rather than a rarity. Until at least WWI there remained the odd underarm bowling professionals. Only in the last hundred years has it really disappeared from the game in any practical sense. Even still, instances of underarm bowling are peppered all the way through the 20th century, because of special circumstances such as injury or bowling action illegitimacy. Some forms of first-class cricket in time banned underarm entirely, or because of its anomalous nature specified that a bowler must notify the umpire of his intention to bowl underarm. However the ACB, in its running of the World Series Cup had omitted any specific rule prohibiting the practice. This was not because of any ideological deference towards the idea of underarm bowling but was merely an oversight born out of how unlikely such an occurrence would be. By 1981 the idea of delivering a ball underarm in an international was so foreign and inconceivable that when it suddenly happened, in such a high profile match and with such egregious and unsavoury motives, the shock waves were intense and still ring out thirty years later.
