Keith Miller With The Australian Cricket Team in England in 1948 - Role

Role

During the tour, Miller generally played in the Tests as an opening bowler alongside Lindwall and as a middle-order batsman, coming in at No. 4 or No. 5. His batting ability was such that he played as a specialist batsman even when he was unable to bowl due to injury, such as during the Second Test. Miller wanted to play purely as a batsman, feeling that the workload of bowling would hinder his productivity with the willow. However, Bradman was intent on going through the tour undefeated, and utilised his bowling options to the full, to maximise the Australians’ chances of winning. Lindwall and Miller were the first-choice pace duo, regarded as one of the greatest speed pairings in the history of cricket, whereas the latter was just one of many accomplished batsmen in the team. As a result, the Australian skipper valued his all rounder more as an opening bowler. Miller ended the Tests with 184 runs at 26.28 and 13 wickets at 23.15 from 138.1 overs and took eight catches.

During the Tests, Miller usually batted at No. 5, except in the Fourth Test when he batted at No. 4 due to the injury-enforced absence of opener Barnes, which resulted in a reshuffle in the batting order. Miller totalled 1,088 first-class runs for the tour, the seventh highest aggregate, although his average of 47.30 was only the eighth highest in the squad. During the tour matches, he batted in a variety of positions, as did all of the squad, because Bradman used a rotation system to rest his team because many matches were played consecutively.

When fit, Miller opened the Test bowling with Lindwall, and the pair bowled in short and fiery bursts with the new ball. The English cricket authorities had agreed to make a new ball available every 55 overs. The pre-existing rule stipulated that a replacement ball would be available every 200 runs, which usually took much more time to accumulate. This played directly into the hands of the Australians with their vastly stronger pace attack, as a new ball is ideal for fast bowling. Bradman thus wanted to preserve his two first-choice bowlers for a fresh attack every 55 overs. With 13 wickets in the Tests, Miller was third among the Australians behind Lindwall and Johnston, who took 27 apiece. Due to his fragility, Miller was used sparingly compared to the other four Australian frontline bowlers: Lindwall, Johnston, Toshack and Johnson. Toshack and Johnson each delivered more than 170 overs despite playing in one less Test, while Lindwall bowled 224 and Johnston 306 in five matches. In all first-class matches, Miller took 56 wickets at 17.58 and held onto 20 catches. There were many consecutive matches during the tour with no intervening rest day, so Bradman ensured that his leading pace duo remained fresh for the new ball bursts in the Tests by giving them a smaller proportion of the bowling during the tour matches. During all first-class matches, Johnston bowled 851.1 overs, Johnson 668, Lindwall 573.4 and Toshack 502, while Miller bowled only 429.4 overs. Doug Ring—who was only selected in one Test—bowled 542.4 overs, while all rounders Colin McCool and Loxton bowled 399.4 and 361.2 overs respectively. McCool did not play in any Tests, while Loxton was only entrusted with 63 overs against England. As such, in some tour matches, Miller was not asked to bowl at all, in order to keep him fresh for the Tests.

After the tour, Bradman was full of praise for Miller, although somewhat critical of his aggressive batting, which the Australian captain thought to be reckless:

One of the most volatile cricketers of any age. Long, rangy, athletic type—drove the ball with tremendous power—tried to hit sixes with abandon. Many of them would have been prodigious. Would have been a far better player had he curbed this propensity and showed more judgement in his hitting. Dangerous bowler with the new ball, swinging it both ways not much short of Lindwall's speed. In 1948 he was the best slip field in the world. Altogether, a crowd-pleasing personality ... whose limitations were caused mainly by his own failure to concentrate. —Don Bradman,

Bradman criticised Miller's hitting of sixes (26), feeling that his mercurial all rounder lacked restraint and concentration. In contrast, Fingleton praised Miller's attitude to cricket, saying "He is never one to accept runs when they are there for the taking ... I acknowledge myself the supreme believer in Miller as a cricketer. He had given me joy in the game approached by others." With respect to his persistent bouncing of Hutton and Compton, Fingleton said that it was up to England to develop bowlers of express pace—which they lacked at the time—to retaliate against or deter the Australians from pursuing such tactics. Miller's persistent disagreements with Bradman soon caught up with him, despite the latter's retirement after the tour. During Bradman's testimonial match, Miller bowled three consecutive bouncers at his retired captain, dismissing him with the last of these and drawing an angry look. Bradman was one of three members of the national selection panel, and Miller was dropped for the next series against South Africa in 1949–50. Although Bradman denied voting for the omission, most of the players in the team did not believe this.

Read more about this topic:  Keith Miller With The Australian Cricket Team In England In 1948

Famous quotes containing the word role:

    But however the forms of family life have changed and the number expanded, the role of the family has remained constant and it continues to be the major institution through which children pass en route to adulthood.
    Bernice Weissbourd (20th century)

    My role in society, or any artist or poet’s role, is to try and express what we all feel. Not to tell people how to feel. Not as a preacher, not as a leader, but as a reflection of us all.
    John Lennon (1940–1980)

    Where we come from in America no longer signifies—it’s where we go, and what we do when we get there, that tells us who we are.
    The irony of the role of women in my business, and in so many other places, too, was that while we began by demanding that we be allowed to mimic the ways of men, we wound up knowing we would have to change those ways. Not only because those ways were not like ours, but because they simply did not work.
    Anna Quindlen (b. 1952)