Talk:Geoffrey Boycott

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Geoffrey Boycott has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Cricket (Rated GA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Cricket which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the sport of cricket. Please participate by visiting the project and talk pages for more details.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article is currently undergoing a peer review.
WikiProject Biography (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Yorkshire (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon Geoffrey Boycott is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Journalism (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Test Centuries[edit]

Would the author care for a new Test Century table like the one at Ken Barrington?--Philipjelley (talk) 17:03, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

There is already a Test century table. If you feel you can improve it, please do. SGGH ping! 17:21, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I don't have a particular view on which looks better but if the intention is for this article to go to FA (and probably even if it isn't) then I would suggest reverting to the previous table. Embedded links and excessive flags are discouraged within the Manual of Style. --Jpeeling (talk) 22:04, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Geoffrey Boycott/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. The rules for GA reviews are stated at Good Article criteria. Feel free to respond to my comments under each one, and please sign each response, so that it's clear who said what.

When an issue is resolved, I'll mark it with Yes check.svg Done. If I think an issue remains unresolved after responses / changes by the editor(s), I'll mark it X mark.svg Not done. Occasionally I decide one of my comments is off-target, and strike it out --

It looks like this should be an easy pass and GA has a massive backlog at the moment so you were probably better off going to FAC. Regards, Aaroncrick (talk) 06:23, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

  • In Early Years, it reads, "Boycott played in spectacles before later switching to contact lenses. He feared his career would have ended had he not done so, as his eyesight was poor." Why did he fear his career would have ended, as lots of people have batted in glasses.? Daniel Vettori still does. Aaroncrick (talk) 02:51, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Fixed. I have checked with an Arlott source and the McKinstry one, it means to say that he felt he had to wear vision aids because his vision was poor, not the lenses or glasses in particular - though I'm sure contacts are easier. --SGGH ping! 02:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Later Years - "On 21 January 1984 the Yorkshire Club committee, in the face of this rising pressure, agreed after all to offer Boycott a contract for 1984." Is "after all" needed?
  • Debut - "Boycott was brought back into the team following the summer and toured Australia that winter with the Marylebone Cricket Club to compete the Ashes, however illness dogged his performance initially." Change to 'in the Ashes'?
  • Early Career - "He scored 173 in the first warm up match, followed it with 124 against Queensland." 'followed by'
  • Ashes series, West Indies and India - "England went on to win the six-Test series 5:1." Change the result to '5–1'
  • Okay, believe I have addressed these points. SGGH ping! 12:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Well done! I'll be passing the article. Aaroncrick (talk) 22:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Post-PR comments[edit]

Carrying on from beginning of Test section...

Test match career
  • "England did not lose a Test match in which he scored a century and only 20 of his 108 Tests ended in defeat.": I'm not too sure of this. It is cited to a statsguru search and I'm not sure I've seen this sort of stat given too often. How meaningful is it? When you factor in his avoidance of the mid-1970s when England were routinely hammered by teams with fast bowlers, and his return against a fairly weak Australian team... Also, this fact does not discount the possibility that a high proportion of these games were drawn owing to his slow batting! I think I'd prefer this fact to be linked to a better source to show that it is considered important as it otherwise looks a touch like OR. At the very least, it needs some context such as a comparison with other players.
  • "John Arlott wrote in 1979 that "any expectation of an English win, except in freak bowling conditions, is based on a major innings from Boycott."": Not too sure of this either, as much as I love Arlott! Given that this was written when Botham was at his best, and Gooch and Gower were coming into their own... And he had only played in 1977 and 1978 at this point after his exile, and this was not against the greatest teams ever to play Tests.
  • It's quite nice to include the actual dates for things like debuts and maiden centuries.
  • "In the same year he topped the country's domestic averages with 59.45.": This would be better in the domestic section: looking back, it rather skips over 1964 there. I'm not sure I'd put it in the Test section, personally.
  • It's not quite accurate to include the SA tour in this section; it could be moved to early years, or this section could be renamed (something like "debut and first tour").
  • "In the winter of 1964...": Watch out for this, as it could refer to an English winter or South African winter, which are very different times of the year. Maybe a month would be better?
  • "He averaged 49.66 overall": Tests, or all games?
Early career
  • On a general note, the article is a little inconsistent in giving the results of series: sometimes they are given, sometimes not. I think it is worth giving results, but they should be given for all series if they are going to be used at all.
  • "hit a form of "brighter cricket" during the First and Second Tests": Not too sure what this means, or why quotes are needed. Also, the article needs to be consistent over whether to use "first Test and second Test" or "First Test and Second Test". (My personal preference is for the former, but that may just be me).
  • "Uncharacteristically" suggests editorial voice, which is best avoided.
  • "when the MCC went on to tour New Zealand": This is the first mention of the MCC, and the general reader will be a little lost here. It may be better to either refer to the team as MCC earlier and explain (or add a note) what this meant at the time, or just refer to the team as England. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:14, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • "a disappointing year for Boycott both for England and Yorkshire, and his average for the former fell to 36.60. Furthermore, he had only passed 50 twice in his last 12 first-class innings.": Again, not sure why f-c details are in the Test section when they were left out of the domestic section.
  • "at a strike rate of 44.32": Most readers will not know what this is, or confuse it with bowling strike rate. Perhaps either link to it, or it may be better to give the number of balls faced.
  • "Their frustration was exacerbated when Boycott added 140 runs in four hours on the second day.": Why? Presumably because he continued slowly? This should be explained.
  • I'm not sure the Woolridge quote adds too much.
  • "He nevertheless again topped the domestic averages with 1260 at 48.46" As above...
  • "where Boycott hit a rich seam of form": Slightly purple prose?
  • "unspectacular" average is a little POVish.
  • "Domestically, his injury also limited his contribution, however he did hit five centuries before he was forced to stop playing in June 1968" And once more. I can understand the temptation to do this, but if the two "strands" of his career are being told separately, the information should be kept separate. (This is why I always combine it as I'm too lazy to do this!)
  • Did he miss the Pakistan tour of 68 with health problems, or did the problems surface after he was left out for reasons of form? Not quite clear, but I've reworded it slightly (make sure I didn't mess it up!).--Sarastro1 (talk) 14:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
  • "first three Tests against the World XI": Should be made clear that these were regarded as Tests at the time, but no longer. And possibly make it clear why these games were being played as the general reader may not know.
  • The ref given for the Walter Lawrence trophy (and I can't believe he ever won this!) does not support the match cited, just that he won it. Also, it may be good to say how long the century took (I imagine it was when the fastest ones were quite slow really) and maybe even add a comment "the Walter Lawrence Trophy, awarded for the fastest first-class century each season...".
  • "In the third Test match, having hit good partnerships in the first two..." Maybe some numbers would be nice, or it is a bit vague and opinion-y. And it does rather brush these matches under the carpet.
  • I would also move the Gleeson comment before the third Test scores. And is the comment and the ""used as evidence" cited to McKinstry p. 105? I think some more refs are needed either way as this part looks to be uncited.
  • Not sure why his average should be referenced to Peter Wynne-Thomas, rather than a stats page... Never mind.
  • The "best batsman in the world" part does not really link to his ODI debut, but should be included somewhere else, I think.
  • "In the summer of 1971 he enjoyed an average of over 100 in domestic cricket": Another domestic one.
  • "but rejoined the team in the West Indies under Denness' captaincy": A little messy: which team, and link Denness?
  • "over Boycott's preference for a one day match over a three day game against Bermuda": Not quite clear over what they were clashing? The scheduling of a match, or Boycott's preferences over which games to play? --Sarastro1 (talk) 15:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

More to follow... --Sarastro1 (talk) 15:25, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Any contemporary stuff? It mentions Boyc's views in 2006 and McKinstry's interpretation, but my understanding was that it was an open secret he took his bat home when Denness was appointed. Perhaps something from nearer the time to reflect this?
  • "His weak immune system was a recurring motivation for not touring the Indian subcontinent.": Doesn't really fit with what is around it, as he wouldn't have played there at this time no matter what the state of his immune system. Probably belongs somewhere, but perhaps not here.
  • Horrible citation needed tag in this section, for a pretty controversial statement.
  • This section does rather feel like it is trying to make a point in one or two places. And I'm not sure about the "Boycott responds" paragraph as it feels like we are in a debate rather than an encyclopaedia, and I'm not too clear what point is being made by Boycott.
  • Relevance of "When an old cricketer..."? --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Comeback Tests
  • Maybe we need some background to the comeback. Why did he choose to come back? Was he picked immediately? What was the team/public reaction? Anything in the sources about the relative weakness of the Australian side?
  • Following on from this, the start of the section is very abrupt, and could maybe be softened slightly so that it is not straight into the run out.
  • Do we need to know about Botham's debut?
  • Result of 77 series?
  • Against whom was he captain?
  • "and brought with him his successful summer form..." Not too sure what this means. As captain? As batsman? And if the latter, we have no indication if the form was good or bad.
  • Chronology is confusing in this section. Did he organise the practise game while captain, or after Brearley returned, which is how it appears in the article. And it suggests that two matches (the warm ups and Boycott's practice game) were taking place simultaneously. Why not keep the mention of Boycott being captain until after saying Brearley broke his arm? Did Brearley resume command during the tour or the following summer?
  • "increasing his statistics": not sure how statistics can be increased. Maybe "runs"?
  • "England were defeated in the opening Test for the first time in 48 years": Precision needed. They hadn't lost an opening Test for 48 years? They hadn't lost to NZ for 48 years? They hadn't lost an opening Test against NZ?
  • "The tale does nevertheless remain a renowned story." Not sure we need this.
  • "Boycott then delayed his declaration, much to the frustration of England bowler Bob Willis.": Why is Willis's reaction important, and why is he singled out? If there is a connection with his bowling success, this should be made explicit. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Geoffrey Boycott. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:19, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Leading run-scorer[edit]

From the lead: "When dropped from the Yorkshire team in 1986 he was the leading run scorer in first-class cricket". Exactly what does this statement mean, as seven other players have scored more first-class runs than Boycott? Brianboulton (talk) 15:07, 29 May 2016 (UTC)