It remains one of the most controversial tactics ever seen on a sports field. Relations not only between the teams, but the two countries, were soured.

In simple terms Bodyline, known also as fast leg theory, involved bowling the ball at the batsman rather than the wicket. Faced with a ball rearing towards his body, or face, at up to 90mph, the batsman could only defend himself by fending off the delivery. An array of close fielders were placed nearby to swallow-up the inevitable catches as the ball flew, uncontrolled, from the bat. It was within the rules but not necessarily the spirit of the game, as the images of bruised Australian bodies testified.

Three England bowlers, Harold Larwood and Bill Voce, from Nottinghamshire, and Bill Bowes, of Yorkshire, had honed the technique to perfection on English county grounds by the time they were unleashed on the unsuspecting Aussies.

Injury and insults

Several batsmen were hurt in the first match of the tour, prompting an outcry from Australian spectators, who complained that this wasn’t cricket. The media, which coined the description Bodyline, joined the furore. The English were unrepentant, branding their detractors “squealers” and setting the tone for a bitter series.

England won 4-1, with Bradman averaging 56. By the standards of a batsman who was to average 99 in his career, it was a modest performance and the tactic appeared to be justified.

In the third Test match, Australia’s captain Bill Woodfull was hit above the heart, by a ferocious ball from Larwood. Captain Jardine’s response was to congratulate his bowler. “Well bowled Harold,” he was heard to remark. Then wicketkeeper Bert Oldfield’s skull was fractured. A riot was only avoided when police formed a line between the pitch and 50,000 spectators. At the time of the injury, the Bodyline tactic was not being used but the tone had already been set and angry fans were baying for blood. The match continued amid a storm of barracking and abuse. “Go home you Pommie bastards,” was the cry.

Woodfull fuelled the fires, when he commented later: “There are two teams out there. One is trying to play cricket and the other is not.” In a cable to the MCC, the sport’s governing body in England, their Australian counterparts accused the England team of using “unsportsmanlike” tactics and demanded an end to this win-at-all-costs approach.

As the dispute escalated, the MCC demanded a retraction and threatened to bring the England team home early. Politicians became involved, warning that trade between the countries could be harmed. The standoff was only resolved when the Australian Prime Minister Joseph Lyons, concerned at the economic impact, intervened. The tour continued and fortunately no one else was injured.

A change in the rules

In 1934 the laws of cricket were changed, allowing umpires to intervene if they believed the batsman was being deliberately targeted, but that did little to repair the damage. There were boycotts of English produce in Australia, English immigrants were persecuted and relations remained strained until the outbreak of the second world war.

Ironically, the biggest loser was Harold Larwood, who refused to sign an apology which was designed to build bridges and never played for England again. Eventually, in 1950, he emigrated to Australia where he was warmly welcomed.