Talk:Jonathan Agnew

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Jonathan Agnew is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 4, 2016.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
December 21, 2011 Featured article candidate Not promoted
February 11, 2012 Featured article candidate Promoted
Current status: Featured article

Reference to Doosra[edit]

Apparently, Agnew has referred BBC listeners to Wikipedia's article on the doosra in commentary on the test between England and Sri Lanka.

Capitalistroadster 13:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism due to subject reading the article On-Air[edit]

Agnew is reading this page now on the radio so its coming under quite a lot of vandalism :D

Gordon Bennett, look at all the stupid edits in the last ten minutes! -- Hindleyite (talk) 14:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Probably not worth tidying it up for a few days now —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boot1973 (talkcontribs) 14:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

He was reading it on air again a few minutes ago, unfortunately it still had a heck of a lot of vandalism on it. Is it worth reverting then requesting it be locked until the end of the current Test? --Peeky44 (talk) 14:23, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Bless him but talking about it on air was asking for trouble Boot1973 (talk) 14:25, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

The page has been semi-protected, can we please have no more of this infantile silliness. I'm disappointed with the listeners of TMS, I expected better. Nev1 (talk) 14:27, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

This was all the absolutely inevitable consequence of Agnew speaking about Wikipedia and particular Wikipedia entries on-air. He really only has himself to blame for any consequences!

The result seems to be that Jonathan Agnew, and others, now regard Wiki as unreliable, with some cause in this case. I wonder whose problem, whose fault, whose loss this is. I used to say when people pointed out inaccuracies on Wiki, well fix it then; hmm. Agingjb (talk) 07:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


If we add replace {{Infobox cricketer}} with {{Infobox cricketer biography}}, can we get rid of the 'career bests' section as that will be duplicating information? Nev1 (talk) 15:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

The Legover incident[edit]

I have proof-read this article and would like to change this heading to the more correct form "The leg-over incident", i.e. with a hyphen, but I am unsure whether this would damage any links. Could someone help me, please? Old Father Time (talk) 22:28, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

If you change the section title, everything should be fine (the table of contents will sort itself out). Nev1 (talk) 22:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, Nev1. I have now made the change. Old Father Time (talk) 13:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


His grandmother, Lady Mona Agnew, turned 110 years old on December 29, 2009. Should she be mentioned in the article? --Nick Ornstein (talk) 21:24, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

There isn't a section on Agnew's family, or indeed on his personal life at all. If one were to be created, I think it should be more substantial than simply mentioning his paternal grandmother's longevity. Furthermore, care would need to be taken in presenting material about her age, because ages change. Old Father Time (talk) 22:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Just add the age in years and days template, Lady Agnew's age will change automatically. --Nick Ornstein (talk) 14:11, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

I remember him mentioning her on air. Can anyone find a reliable source linking them? It's definitely notable that he comes from an aristocratic family, never mind her age. --Dweller (talk) 11:16, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

OK, got one. And it's not so aristcratic as I thought. I forgot that the wife of a knight is "Lady"... I was thinking her husband was "Lord", not "Sir". Ho hum. --Dweller (talk) 11:18, 4 August 2011 (UTC)


The page we link to has been deleted for being unsourced. It'd be a lot better to get it back up again, properly, than to remove the nice interwiki link. --Dweller (talk) 12:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Teams section[edit]

I'm not sure this is very encyclopedic - seems more like what a cricket website would include. The significant ones will be included in the narrative and the less significant... are less significant. Views? --Dweller (talk) 11:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

The first-class teams are covered by the infobox, and the rest don't seem terribly important. I say get rid of the section. Nev1 (talk) 14:14, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and removed it myself. Nev1 (talk) 14:43, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Agreed, as long as the significant ones are included in the prose. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:46, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

You removed the bibliography. Was that deliberate? --Dweller (talk) 09:10, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

No, sorry that was careless. I've restored the bibliography. Nev1 (talk) 10:27, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I wondered! Thanks for your opinion here and the various, helpful, edits. The fingers/hand thing was a bit embarrassing... glad you <ahem> picked that up. --Dweller (talk) 11:13, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Referencing Cowans and Terry[edit]

It's nice to know who someone came in for to make their Test debut, but I can't find RS who mentions it - I had to work it out by comparing the XIs for the fourth and fifth Tests, which wasn't so difficut and as OR goes is hardly private detective stuff. Would it be WP:SYNTH to cite the comment by linking to each of the scorecards? It'd be a shame to cut it, especially as it's not a very big "claim". --Dweller (talk) 12:15, 5 August 2011 (UTC)


([1]) Look for stuff about his grandmother (see above), his childhood and his interview with Mandela (he thinks it was disastrous) and covering royal weddings. --Dweller (talk) 14:08, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:FAC to-do list[edit]

  • Finish his playing career section
  • Complete the commentating section
  • Get some early life material
  • Add a modicum of information about odious ODIs
  • Review lead, remove all citations from it
  • Check everything is cited
  • Ensure all issues on this talk page are dealt with
  • All images captioned and hidden captioned for visually impaired
  • MOS check
  • Third party copyedit by editor not familiar with cricket

Please do add to the above. --Dweller (talk) 09:09, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Flickr photo[edit]

This photo seems to be appropriately licensed for Wikipedia. How do we go about getting it into the article? I'm hopeless at image licensing. --Dweller (talk) 09:20, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

This tool is easy to use and shows you whether an image is compatible with use on commons and Wikipedia. All you do is take the number from the url and paste it in the box. As this image isn't available for commercial reuse we can't use it unfortunately. Nev1 (talk) 09:32, 21 September 2011 (UTC)


The article has a Wikiquote link in the bottom right hand corner, but it seems the page was deleted, for being unsourced. I wonder if someone could get it undeleted - should be reasonably easy to source at the very least the notable leg over comment. --Dweller (talk) 09:34, 3 November 2011 (UTC)


  • Sometimes nicknames are straightforward and don't need explaining, but I think an explanation for "Spiro" would be useful if it could be found.
    • It must be a reference to Spiro Agnew, but as I have no RS saying as much, to include it would be OR. --Dweller (talk) 11:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • That's probably why. Perhaps no need to get hung up on it then. Nev1 (talk) 15:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
        • I added a reference in here, but maybe it should now be repositioned elsewhere in the article. This same reference gives him a second nickname: not Aggers, but "Agnes". (It also mentions that he plays the piano and the tuba, and that his lorry-driving job in winter 1979/80 was with a company called S.B.A. (Asbestos) in Leicester.) Johnlp (talk) 21:36, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
          • Thanks. Happy to leave the ref there. "Agnes" is presumably a result of the way they used to dictate copy in those pre-internet days. His piano playing comes up in sources in relation to his Dupuytren's, but I thought it a bit too trivial. --Dweller (talk) 09:58, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
  • I realise leads often get left till the rest of the article is in shape (that's how I often put articles together anyway) but I think the years of his debuts could be added (for Leicestershire and England), briefly mention one-dayers, and his age at retirement.
    • Yeah, I'll work up the lead a bit more when everything is done, but those would be good enhancements. --Dweller (talk) 11:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • When did his family move from Macclesfield to Lincolnshire?
    • Didn't know that they did. Not mentioned here. Do you think it's important? What's your source? --Dweller (talk) 11:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • I was sort of connecting the dots as he was born in Macclesfield but grew up in Lincolnshire. Perhaps not that important to be honest. I recently had to prune Tendulkar's article of several metions of buying houses because it just didn't seem relevant. Nev1 (talk) 15:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
        • Agreed. I've not seen RS mention it. --Dweller (talk) 15:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
          • Parents both come from Cheshire/Shropshire gentry: his (Agnew) grandfather was knighted. They'd apparently moved to Bainton (Lincs/Cambs border, near Stamford) by 1962 because his brother was born there. Johnlp (talk) 22:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
            • None of which really addresses the point without going into SYNTH/OR territory I'm afraid. --Dweller (talk) 10:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
  • What did his parents do?
    • Farming seems to be clearly indicated already! --Dweller (talk) 11:08, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • He grew up on a farm but it occured to me that maybe only one parent was a farmer. Nev1 (talk) 15:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
        • RS silent. As he's had two notable careers, the early stuff is quite thin. --Dweller (talk) 15:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Was he an only child (worth making explicit I think)?
    • No idea. --Dweller (talk) 12:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • He has a younger brother and a younger sister. Both births announced, as his was, in The Times. Johnlp (talk) 22:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
        • Great! Do you have a reference? --Dweller (talk) 10:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
  • So far the narrative of his school life is all about his cricket, but what about his O- and A-levels? Did he consider going to university or entering any other profession apart from cricket? What did his parents think?
    • No idea. --Dweller (talk) 12:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • He has 9 O levels and 2 A levels and the source I used for the Mary Duggan reference even tells you which subjects, but I can't at present lay my hands on it (chaotic filing system). Johnlp (talk) 22:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
        • If you find it, please add it. --Dweller (talk) 10:01, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Uppingham School is mentioned in the opening sentence of the early life section but I'm not enitrely sure why as it means the chronology jumps from his birth, to the ages of 11 to 18, then back to 8 when he was listening to TMS.
    • Good point. I'll address it. --Dweller (talk) 12:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Is it worth mentioning that Aggers opened the bowling (with Peter Booth) on debut? And it might be worthh clarifying that Lloyd was his first wicket.
    • I think the former is too much detail and the latter is implied by the text. Do you agree? --Dweller (talk) 12:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • That's fair enough, and the implication was clear. Nev1 (talk) 15:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • What about his performance in his first season earned him the Whitbread Award? He only took six wickets, which may be worth mentioning.
    • Done, thanks --Dweller (talk) 13:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • There's no mention of his one-day debut in 1979.
    • Ugh. I'm biased against biff wallop cricket, so these things will slip. Thanks for spotting. I'll amend. --Dweller (talk) 13:31, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • Done. I feel dirty. :-) --Dweller (talk) 15:17, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • "He had the perfect start, playing in the warm-up game against Cambridge University and achieving figures of 8–47 from 20.4 overs and guaranteeing himself a spot in the first team for the County Championship matches to come.": does the source say it was a guaranttee? A good performance against a university side doesn't always equal selection in the County Championship. In April 2007 Steven Mullaney scored 165 better than a run a ball, but it was the only first-class match he played that year.
    • Far more the case in the early 80s when the University sides were stronger and an 8-fer even against the students by a young English quick would really catch the eye, but I agree it's ORish and I've toned it down. --Dweller (talk) 15:23, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Is it important that he played one first-class match on his first tour given it wasn't an international match?
    • Hmm. I was trying to say he didn't play much. --Dweller (talk) 12:47, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Would it be worth mentiongin how many bowlers took more wickets in the County Championship in 1987 and 1988?
    • I like that! Included. --Dweller (talk) 12:47, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  • "His first duty was to cover England's 1990–91 Ashes tour, a difficult assignment because England played so poorly": does the source say it was difficult for that reason? I realise it's not always easy, but from listening to TMS Aggers does try to be balanced.
    • I think the quote at the end of that bit explains. --Dweller (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • The article is inconsistent on when he became the BBC's cricket correspondent.
    • Can't see that. You might be confusing joining TMS with becoming cricket correspondent, or maybe I just haven't spotted what you mean. --Dweller (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • In broadcasting career the caption for the photo of CMJ says "Agnew succeeded Test Match Special colleague, Christopher Martin Jenkins as BBC Cricket Correspondent in 1992." while the first sentence of the third paragraph in the same section says "In 1991, he was appointed the BBC's cricket correspondent, taking over from Test Match Special colleague, Christopher Martin-Jenkins".
        • Thanks. Fixed. Difficult to source that he replaced CMJ without breaching WP:SYNTH - I've left the cn tag in the meantime. --Dweller (talk) 12:55, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  • "His reward came the following year, when England hosted the 1999 Cricket World Cup and Agnew was asked to present the BBC TV coverage": does the soruce describe it as a reward? The quote paints the picture that it was a trying experience which he was reluctant to undergo.
    • No. He thinks it was by default, as no-one was left - they'd all decamped to C4. This may be modesty, but for us to say otherwise is OR. I'll fix it. --Dweller (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • The "leg over" incident section mentions the 5 Live poll twice.
    • Thanks, I'll fix. --Dweller (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • Though common, the division between career and personal life strikes me as artificial, as though the two did not affect each other.
    • It's a useful division, if in some places (like his marriage) artificial. It's to help a reader find what they're looking for. Otherwise someone looking to know more about him as a person has to trawl the article. --Dweller (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
      • Fair enough. Nev1 (talk) 16:27, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
  • When was Aggers diagnosed with Dupuytren's contracture, or when did it start affecting him?
    • Dunno, I'm afraid. --Dweller (talk) 16:13, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Quotes add colour, but I wonder if the article needs so many, and if the article is in danger of falling foul of WP:QUOTE which says "quotation[s] must be useful and aid understanding of the subject; irrelevant quotations should be removed". Some add colour, but others don't seem particularly illuminating. For example I think the following could be summarised so that quotes are not necessary:

  1. Agnew's father taught him the rudiments of cricket, "teaching me with tireless patience the basic bowling action. He so wanted me to become an off-spinner like him."
    I like this quote. It's affectionate, tells that his father played cricket and speaks of effort on both their parts. --Dweller (talk) 13:27, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  2. Agnew's own account is that it was "the worst winter of his life", although he recalls it as "working as a lorry driver in Leicester."
    Former is good (hard to paraphrase!) latter unnecessary --Dweller (talk) 13:27, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  3. Agnew had strengthened himself: "he has undergone a winter of tree felling to build up his young muscles"
    Agreed. --Dweller (talk) 13:27, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  4. Wisden describes how in the first innings, "Agnew's line and length were affected by first-match nerves"
    Done, but please review as I'm concerned about close paraphrasing --Dweller (talk) 14:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  5. Wisden called the pair of batsmen Agnew's "first illustrious victims in Test cricket".
    NPOV way of explaining they were a couple of corkers to have as your first two. --Dweller (talk) 14:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  6. "Looking back, the game could be used as a classic case to illustrate how different things are today," said Jonathan Agnew, who bowled only one over on the final day after pulling a muscle warming up. "I felt a complete outsider, not part of the set-up. I think the feeling in the dressing room was that the game had been a bit of a cock-up. – is the first sentence necessary? Could it just be summed up as he felt like an outsider?
    No, not necessary, so agreed and disagree respectively. On the second point, the outsider bit and the cock-up bit are both good content. --Dweller (talk) 14:41, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  7. in Wisden's words, "England brought back Gooch, Emburey, Willey, Botham and Allott, all of whom had, for different reasons, been unavailable for the previous Test in Kanpur. They replaced Fowler, Pocock, Cowdrey, Edmonds and Foster." – would be simpler to say they dropped five players. The change would mean the next few sentences have to be reworked slightly when mentioning names.
    Agreed. --Dweller (talk) 15:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  8. in 1989 he "came frustratingly close to the recall to the England team that I had set my heart on."
    Gosh, no, that's a great quote to lead to an extraordinary story! --Dweller (talk) 15:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  9. But Aggers wasn't going on the back foot. He went on BBC breakfast television to say that the media ban presented a golden opportunity to the England and Wales Cricket Board to pull out of this controversial tour, and he couldn't believe the board would pass up such a chance.
    Agreed, thanks --Dweller (talk) 15:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
  10. Also, while the bit about being competitive in staff vs pupil matches is interesting, I'm not sure if the start is really necessary, ie: "My dream of becoming a professional cricketer was finally realised when Leicestershire offered me a contract while I was still at school".
    Not sure about that one - does seem worthwhile. --Dweller (talk) 15:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Overall, the playing career section seems pretty well written. When I put together player articles I probably add too many statistics, particularly when summarising years, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. A little more detail wouldn't go amiss. How did Leicestershire perform in this period for instance, and his one-day career seems to be largely glossed over (thank God they didn't play twenty20s back then). I don't think it's good practice to have a separate (sub-)setion for controversies. It messes up the chronology and places greater emphasis on them. A lot of progress has been made with the article, and generally it's in good nick. I'm not sure I have much to offer in the way of references, but I'll see what I can do. I only made a handful of changes, and on the whole it was a good read. Nev1 (talk) 21:52, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Thats' really useful, thanks - if a lot of hard work, but that's what I signed up for when deciding to push for FA. I'll respond point by point above. I agree with you on the quotes and was aware as I began to put the article together, but I've been erring on the side of caution regarding close paraphrasing. I also like having Agger's (and others') 'voice' in the article. I'll see what I can do. --Dweller (talk) 11:02, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Some of the quotes are great, I particularly enjoyed the one about bowling against his teachers, it was just the first sentence didn't strike me as particularly important. And the near miss of '89 easily justifies that substantial quote in my opinion. Nev1 (talk) 15:20, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Leics performance in this period is not really notable for this article, as it's so mediocre, ditto for one-day form. Controversies section has good precedence at FAC, so I'm OK with that, too. Thanks very much for your scrutiny. --Dweller (talk) 15:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

more comments[edit]

Alright - some tuppence worth of...observations. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:19, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I find segments of text which lapse into quotes rather jarring to read. Any which can be de-quoted should be. You only really want to keep something as a quote which is memorable as one, and change others where possible.
Previously raised, and some have alredy been changed, but I recognise the criticism and will see if more can be done. --Dweller (talk) 14:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I've worked hard on this - hopefully it's now up to scratch. --Dweller (talk) 10:38, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
I don't get how he went to bowling school in Surrey - was that on weekends, after school, or what? The prose jumps a bit and could do with some more facts explaining things.
It says it was out of school hours. I don't know whether it was weekends or evenings or both. The sources don't say. --Dweller (talk) 14:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
By this stage, he was working on local radio during the winters (see below).. - I don't think the parenthetical bit is necessary.
Agreed. --Dweller (talk) 14:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
I dunno, the early years (school etc.) come over as very spartan. Sometimes it as if it is skimming over biographical flow a bit too scantily and makes the prose a little disjointed - e.g. the bit where he sees Michael Holding seems a bit out of place....
I don't have much about his early life. However, given he's had two notable careers as an adult, one of which is still going, I think it needs to be fairly brief anyway, and with a slant towards cricket. I'll take another look at Holding. --Dweller (talk) 14:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
This should now be much improved. --Dweller (talk) 10:38, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
... but in 1989, when England were desperate for pace bowlers, his omission amounted to wanton neglect by a regime which questioned his desire" - the last bit about questioning his desire is intriguing as I saw nothing in the body of text relating to that (unless I am missing something? late here and need to sleep......g'night.........................zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz)
Yeah, interesting, isn't it, and odd. I don't have anything else that supports that assertion. But it's from a weighty source. --Dweller (talk) 14:48, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Right, where was I? Aah yes, I'll have a read again soon, just juggling a few things. I'll try rejigging later myself. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:48, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Agnew developed a love for the game, both in terms of playing it, and its media coverage. - this sentence needs to change (Verb/noun as end bits of 2nd clause)..but I can't think what to right now....
I'll review, thanks --Dweller (talk) 10:41, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
in a blacked-out room - in a darkened room?
What's wrong with it currently? It's what he says in the source (it was a quote) --Dweller (talk) 10:41, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm, it isn't a quote now. I guess it sounds more prosaic to me I guess..but is it synonymous...oh look, nevermind. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:49, 24 November 2011 (UTC)
As a batsman, Agnew had some highs, but it was his weaker suit. - err, just sounds weird to my ears, maybe something like "Although not noted for his batting, Agnew had some moments..." or something.

Overall, something about it is still a little choppy, but I think it is better now and within striking distance of FA. I'm not seeing any gross deal-breakers prose-wise but can't exclude the possibility that others won't find issues. Aah heck, why not run with it and see what happens. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:44, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for helping to improve it. --Dweller (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2011 (UTC)


As they're clearly recognition for his journalism, I'd like to move them to that section, where they'll go nicely with the Sony awards. Opinions? --Dweller (talk) 21:35, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea to me. Nev1 (talk) 21:41, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

Agnew sources to add relevant to Sarastro comments at FAC[edit]

  • Aggers and controversy: [2]Can't use - doesn't mention controversy --Dweller (talk) 15:45, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
  • 100 wickets taken 50 times since 1969 at time of publication [3] Added --Dweller (talk) 17:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
  • DeFreitas incident ([4])
  • How did I miss this?!? Omission from England sides in Wisden CoY piece ([5]) No use - Sarastro's Wisden entry below is much better --Dweller (talk) 16:46, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Maybe ([6])

More to come, maybe --Dweller (talk) 16:24, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Some sources[edit]

From Wisden 1988:[edit]

Mentions the team's mixed performances in the season and notes that there were many off-field problems.

[Reaching the top three in the Championship and the Natwest semis]: "Both of these achievements were peppered with some fine individual performances, the most notable of which were the bowling of Jonathan Agnew and the batting of Nigel Briers. Agnew, bowling off a shorter run and with a wicked slower ball added to his armoury, became the first Leicestershire player since J Birkenshaw in 1968 to take 100 first-class wickets in a season...:" (p. 474.)

"But it was the county's England all-rounder, Phillip DeFreitas, who posed the greatest problem, following his emergence as a player of daunting potential on England's successful tour of Australia the previous winter. Indeed, it may have been his disappointment at failing to live up to the exacting standards set on that tour which led to the many rumours concerning his involvement in dressing-room rifts and conflict with the new captain, Peter Willey. However, the rumours would have remained no more than that but for a notorious incident in which DeFreitas poured a pot of salt over Agnew's lunch on the final day of the Championship match against Sussex in late June. Agnew responded by throwing DeFreitas's kit over the dressing room balcony, and the all-rounder left the ground for two hours before returning and, in dramatic fashion, helping Leicestershire to their first Championship victory." (pp. 474–75.)

From: Hunt, James. "Leicestershire in 1987". In Wright, Graeme. Wisden Cricketers' Almanack (1988 ed.). London: John Wisden & Co. p. 474. 

Thanks, Sarastro, I've used these. --Dweller (talk) 17:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

From Bannister [this section was written by Bannister] on the dirt-in-pocket affair of 1994:[edit]

"Atherton's announcement [that he would stay on as captain] prompted yet another press conference—this time at Old Trafford on Friday morning—where, so he hoped, he would lay the matter to rest. Easier said than done, because of the two extreme views held by the so-called cognoscenti. The issue divided the cricket world. BBC Radio cricket correspondent Jonathan Agnew though Atherton should go, and had been outspoken in stating his views.

He and I were co-commentators for the BBC's television coverage of Durham's home AXA Equity & Law game at Durham University two days later, and he was clearly agitated about the furore he had created.

My view was simple. He had been appointed by the BBC to report and comment. He had played Test cricket and was closer to the county cricket circuit than any of his predecessors. Perhaps that was why he was more sensitive to criticism than previous correspondents who had not played first-class cricket. I told him that if he held strong views about an issue, then it would not be honest [page break] to remain silent and paddle a diplomatic canoe through safe waters. What I still believe was that he clouded the issue by referring to his friendship with Atherton. That had nothing to do with the principle of a cricket correspondent commenting on an England captain. It was wrong of his to personalise the matter as one between Agnew and Atherton."

From: Illingworth, Ray; Bannister, Jack (1996). One-Man Committee: The controversial reign of England's cricket supremo. London: Headline Book Publishing. pp. 95–96. ISBN 0747215154. 

 Done Thank you --Dweller (talk) 16:43, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Additional prose comments[edit]

I am posting these here, rather than cluttering the already bloated FAC page. There is still a way to go.

County cricketer[edit]

  • Give date of debut
  • "Agnew came to early attention" - came to whose attention?
    • Removed, although Dweller may wish to comment. I think the "attention" is obvious from what happened next, so I've taken that phrase out altogether. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
      • I'm happy. --Dweller (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
  • "albeit at the average of 35" Why "albeit"?
    • I guess it's because it's not a bad average despite just six wickets, but perhaps the phrasing is unduly weighted, so I've rephrased. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:47, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
      • Yes... I was trying to avoid POV, but I failed. --Dweller (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
  • "This gave him the opportunity..." "This" presumably refers back to the Whitbread award, but you need to rephrase to clarify this, otherwise the sentence reads oddly.
  • The quotation beginning "He struck the captain..." should be attributed
  • The paragraph beginning "Agnew's 1979 season was disrupted by injury..." is muddled:-
    • What was the nature of this injury?
    • What winter are we talking about (tree-felling, lorry driving etc)?
    • Was the one-day game against Sri Lanka the limit of his 1979 cricket?
    • It is very confusing to read that "his competitive debut followed in 1980", when he evidently played county cricket in 1978.
      • Doing... Dweller, you have the source on this one, pull youse finger oot. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
        • I'll have a go. But to clarify one thing that the article should make clear - the tree felling and lorry driving is the same winter! --Dweller (talk) 17:48, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
          • The Indie source was dead when I tried looking into it, you still see it? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:51, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
          • Interesting... I found it dead, too but the wayback archive has it here: ([7]) Wisden says he was injured, without specifying. Thanks, Johnners says nowt. There's not much we can do about the lack of information on his early playing career - he was just another promising youngster with an injury problem in the pre-internet era. --Dweller (talk) 18:04, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
            • I've tidied this slightly. On the outstanding question, he did play some other cricket in 1979, but per WP:SUMMARYSTYLE, I've accumulated his first few seasons into a summary. His performances were not really notable in the context of his career. His one-day debut was though. --Dweller (talk) 10:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Test cricketer[edit]

  • Although I am against the overdetailing that hampers many cricket articles, I feel that the following is a little too terse a dismissal of six seasons' cicket: "Agnew's career did not initially live up to his early promise. In his first six seasons as a first-class cricketer, his biggest haul of wickets was 31 in 1980, hampered by a mixture of injuries, poor form and omission from the Leicestershire side". There is also a grammatical problem, with the "hampered by" clause misplaced; as written it appears to refer to 1980 rather than to the whole period. However, I would prefer to see some expansion of the content.
    • Doing... I'll see what I can magic up, but hopefully the D-man can help too. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
      • I just don't think it's a good idea. He's had (having) two different notable careers. This is a period of lack of achievement, not well covered by sources - especially Agnew himself, who basically jumps, as we do, straight from debut to success in Thanks, Johnners. Like many a youngster in cricket in those days, he might have sunk, but only with his swimming does he attract much coverage. For instance, I read every page on the coverage of Leicestershire in 1983 in the 1984 Wisden, including 2nd XI cricket. Agnew is barely mentioned in the prose, other than a comment about him not having many opportunities. I think we have this right. But I'm happy to be argued down - in which case, the best we can do is throw some stats at it. --Dweller (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
  • "He had the perfect start..." Editorial opinion?
  • "against" is better than "versus". And West Indies needs a piped link to the cricket team.
  • Long sentence with two "ands"; needs splitting: "It was a disappointment for England and, in a batsman-friendly match in which the Sri Lankans racked up 785 runs for just 14 wickets, Agnew suffered, taking 2–177 off 43 overs,[33] and Wisden described England's pacemen as ineffective."
  • Tense conflict: "Agnew reflects..." Short quotations like this shouldn't be in block quote form
  • Another ungainly and overlong sentence: "England toured India and Sri Lanka that winter,[35] and Agnew was included in the tour party, but did not win selection for a Test match, with England's decision to field two spinners (Pat Pocock and Phil Edmonds) in each Test playing a part in limiting his opportunities."
  • I am baffled by this: "His timing was perfect and he was called up for the Fourth Test. The match produced an improved England performance: it finished as a draw and the whitewash was averted...." What "whitewash" was averted? In the 1985 series England won the first match, Australia the second, the third and fourth were drawn. And "an improved performance" is a matter of opinion; the scores suggest similar standards of performance by both sides in the third and fourth matches.
    • Agreed, the whitewash thing seems a little, well, 100% inaccurate, but rephrased and split a couple of sentences, hopefully an improvement. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:27, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
      • Ooooops... I thought I'd removed that myself. It was my mistake - I had my series mixed up. Thanks for catching it. --Dweller (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Later playing career and retirement[edit]

  • "...he followed his 1987 feat of taking the second-most wickets in the County Championship[53] by finishing third in the table for 1988". What table did he finish third in?
  • What is the specific justification for including a 250+ word verbatim quotation? This length of copyrighted material seems contrary to WP:QUOTE, which stipulates that "Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited."
    • Doing... Tend to agree, perhaps cut it down by a significant margin Dwellmeister? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
      • This is a tough one. What happened is fantastically important to Agnew's story and frankly incredible. I remember Igglesden's call-up and the incredulity that accompanied it. That it prompted Agnew toward what was really quite an early retirement is important. It also speaks volumes about his relationship with various notables, such as Gower, Willey and the England selectors. I'll see if I can cut it down somewhat, not so much because of copyright ("extensive" is stupidly vague) but because it seems too long for the size of the overall article. But I'm worried about what we'll lose. Please review my next edit. --Dweller (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
        • I've cut it down by around a fifth. What's left is gold dust. It's the stand-out section in the whole book - my eyebrows shot into my hairline when I read that. --Dweller (talk) 22:49, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
  • "Formal retirement from playing professional cricket came at the end of the next season". Unnecessary adoption of passive voice.

I will deal with the remaining sections as soon as possible. Brianboulton (talk) 23:07, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Brian, much appreciated, hopefully Dweller and I will be able to attend to this in the next couple of days, i.e. I'll do the easy technical ones, and he'll think about the tougher ones...! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


  • Is this heading appropriate? "Legacy" implies something left for the benefit of future generations. This reads more like a career appraisal
    • Doing... I'm not too sure if this is a major issue, but Dweller may be able to use his imagination here. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
      • A good point. What about "Playing style and career summary"? The word "playing" is implied before "career" but to include it a second time seems tautological. --Dweller (talk) 22:52, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Bits of POV, e.g. "Wisden wryly commented..."
  • "His final Test was only twelve months after his debut..." That should read "England debut"

Media and broadcasting[edit]

  • "After retiring at a relatively young age of 30..." Perhaps: "After ending his playing career at the relatively young age of 30..."
  • If he joined TMS in 1991, how is it that his first job was to cover the 1990–91 Ashes tour?
    • Presumably because the tour was summer in Australia, i.e. there were fixtures in the tour in the early stages of 1991 that he commentated on? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
      • This is a great question and one I've puzzled over myself. I only have OR to go on... I think, as I recall, in those days, the BBC in London used to carry Australian radio coverage and TMS did not formally cover the Ashes down under. However, TMS team members would go and participate in the commentary, much as relevant overseas commentators come here to this day. So I think he was there in 1990-91 but not yet part of TMS. The only other explanations I could come up with are equally OR... and weaker. Either he didn't participate until after the turn of the year, or there's a mistake in the RS somewhere. I'd rather leave it as is than try to introduce something ORish or at best SYNTHy. --Dweller (talk) 22:59, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Why would England's poor performance add to the "difficulty" of a commen tator's job? Aren't they supposed to observe impartially?
    • Right. Reworded. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:34, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
      • I think that was justified - he's not just a commentator. He refers to the flak he had to handle on the call-in shows. And actually TMS commentators aren't really that neutral! --Dweller (talk) 22:59, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Again, I see no justification for the mega-quotation (see my earlier comments)
    • Doing... Dweller, another of your mega-quotes..... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
      • I'll take a look. --Dweller (talk) 22:59, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
        • Hacked at. Difficult one, as the grammar is all over the place, both in terms of person and tense. Please review. --Dweller (talk) 23:27, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
  • "As well as writing and broadcasting, Agnew's commentary has been recorded for several computer games..." Not grammatical as stated. Try "In addition to his writing and broadcasting work, Agnew's commentary..."


  • What were the reasons for the Zimbabwe government's media ban, and how did these relate specifically to Agnew?
    • It's in the Indie ref given, Mugabe blocked several news outlets, and one was the BBC, hence Agnew. The quote is covered in that reference (i.e. "they've blocked Aggers"). The Rambling Man (talk) 16:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
  • "When Vaughan resigned shortly thereafter..." Who was Vaughan (I know, but some readers might not, in say 10 year' time), and what did he resign from?
    • Doing... Actually, I can't see that referenced by the ref given, am I being blind Dweller? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
      • Goodness me. That was me, back in 2008, when I suppose I didn't appreciate the full value of including refs every time. I'd read the article and added it without the flipping ref and over time it got merged into the next sentence/ref. Sorry to all. You can see a snippet of it without going through the paywall here --Dweller (talk) 00:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
  • How are readers meant to understand what is meant by the "dirt in the pocket affair"? No link, no explanation
    • Doing... Not in the ref either... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
      • Hopefully clarified. --Dweller (talk) 00:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Do you mean "1 person" rather than "one person"? If the former is how it was represented in print then I would add a (sic)
    • Well, it's a direct quote, from Twitter, which is directly referenced. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
      • [sic] might be a good addition --Dweller (talk) 00:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
  • "...using the comments section below his article" is unnecessary detail.

"Leg over" incident[edit]

As I have said before, I think this incident is given a weight and importance beyond what it deserves. I'm not convinced by the Radio 5 survey result, which came from a self-selected sample of who knows how many listeners - a few thousand? tens of thousands? – and the significance you draw from that result is I believe unwarranted. It wasn't even a piece of commentary, it was an interjection during a summary, a factor conveniently ignored. I don't think the incident should have its own subsection but should appear, in abbreviated form, in the "controversies" section. And as I have already said, I don't think it is leadworthy. Also, do we need the addition of two further innuendo episodes involving Agnew? This emphasis on schoolboy humour intends rather to trivialise his career.

  • Doing... It's clear this is a big issue, and Dweller and I have been discussing it. Hopefully we can come to a compromise, it'll just need a bit more work. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
    • It was on the Breakfast Show, which is hardly a backwater of 5 Live, which in 2011 is getting audiences in excess of 7 million. I think that makes it an extremely important poll, especially as it was done in a knockout formula over a number of days. Agnew's use of humour and innuendo is important - it's part of the TMS tradition especially as he is seen as Johnner's heir - see the comment recently left by someone at the FAC. In the scope of a massive article like this, and following some heavyweight controversies, it's hardly overplayed. --Dweller (talk) 00:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
      • The number of 5 Live listeners is irrelevant; the validity of the poll rests on whether it can be considered representative. A self-selected sample of undetermined size is not representative. However, having made my position clear I would not oppose on this one issue. I would, however, ask you to reconsider whether the prominence you have given to this incident, coupled with the further mentions of groins and rubbers, doesn't leave a rather trivial and slightly smutty aura, which maybe is unfair to Agnew and which he might not relish? Brianboulton (talk) 11:27, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
        • Thanks, Johnners, which is as close to an autobiography as we have of Agnew, has just nine chapters. One entire chapter (18 pages) is devoted to the incident. He also says in the book that he always uses the incident as the climax of his speeches. I think he's very proud of it. --Dweller (talk) 11:43, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Personal life and personality[edit]

  • Inelegant title: what about "Private lifa and personality"?
    • I guess you mean "Private life and personality". Not sure how much more elegant that is from "Personal", but whatever floats your boat...! The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Another overlong quote for paraphrase.
  • Last paragraph: are you sure "intrigue" is the right word? Was he suspected of plots etc? And the article ends on a rather banal note, don't you think.
    • Intrigue-> incidents, and have reordered so it finishes on an upbeat moment.... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 16 December 2011 (UTC)


I'm not clear; are these books by oe edited by Agnew, or merely about him, in which case authors' names should be given.

That closes my comments. Brianboulton (talk) 16:10, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Brian, very helpful indeed. We'll see what we can do to address these to your satisfaction. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:24, 16 December 2011 (UTC)
Brian, they're excellent, thank you. Hope to complete responses asap. --Dweller (talk)


Brian, I think we've addressed all of your comments here. If I've missed any, please point them out! --Dweller (talk) 11:51, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

I haven't time to check out everything in detail, but it looks as though my concerns have all been addressed. Although I retain the reservation as noted above (legover), you clearly wish to hold your ground on this. I will read the article through one more time, but seasonal diversions are severely limiting my wikitime at present, so it may not be before tomorrow. Brianboulton (talk) 08:56, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, and tomorrow is fine. I'm not pigheaded about legover - I think I'll post to WT:CRIC and see what other members of the WikiProject think. I've always edited with consensus and if they disagree with me, I'll move it out of the lead. --Dweller (talk) 11:18, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Axl[edit]

From "Playing Career", subsection "Early years", paragraph 2: "There was also a family connection to cricket: Mary Duggan, a women's Test player for England from 1948 to 1963, was a first cousin." However the preceding sentence: "Agnew's father, an amateur cricketer, taught him the rudiments of the sport, including an offspin bowling action, as he wanted his son to develop into a bowler like him." already indicates a family connection to cricket. Axl ¤ [Talk] 15:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Rephrased. That was added post-nomination/copyedit, but hopefully the detail can remain but be presented more logically. What do you think? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Could "first cousin" be changed to just "cousin"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 17:54, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Well, first cousin is different from the general cousin, isn't it? The Rambling Man (talk) 17:58, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

From "Early years", paragraph 3: "His first cricket coach was Eileen Ryder, but within "a couple of years" a professional had arrived at the school, Ken Taylor." Why not say "after a couple of years, a professional arrived at the school"? Why is "a couple of years" in quotes? Axl ¤ [Talk] 15:49, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

It will be a direct quote from the book, which means to say that we, the reader, don't know exactly how long afterwards the pro arrived. Ref 8 at the end of the sentence relates to the paper source. Dweller can confirm. The Rambling Man (talk)
Okay. I have changed "within" to "after". Axl ¤ [Talk] 17:56, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed. This quote was included following feedback from another editor in the FAC process. --Dweller (talk) 11:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

From "Playing Career", subsection "County cricket", paragraph 2: "All four went on to play Test cricket." Why is this relevant? Perhaps delete the sentence? Axl ¤ [Talk] 18:16, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

It just adds to the flavour, the fact that these four chaps who had been selected at an early age all went on to represent their country, i.e. he and his peers were successful. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
The sentence isn't directly relevant to Agnew. I don't think that it should be in the article. Axl ¤ [Talk] 19:05, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
I think this is one of those agree-to-disagree moments. Demonstrating that his "class" was successful on an international scale seems to be reasonable for inclusion in my opinion. Perhaps Dweller has an opinion on this. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes... I think it also reflects on Aggers - the award was a serious thing, all the winners were deserving, had talent, fulfilled it, in a sport where a lot of promising youngsters fall by the wayside. I think it adds something. For me, it's a keeper. --Dweller (talk) 23:13, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I see no problems with the inclusion of this incidental snippet. Brianboulton (talk) 10:04, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

From "Playing career", subsection "Test cricket", paragraph 4: "However, in his remaining two ODIs, he proved very expensive, taking no further wickets and conceding more than 7 runs an over in each." Should this be "seven runs an over"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 13:33, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Changed. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

From "Playing career", subsection "Test cricket", last paragraph: "However, the match finished as a draw, Agnew failed to take a wicket. He was relegated from an opening bowler in the first innings, to fifth bowler in the second, in which he only bowled nine overs." It would make more sense to state the innings changes first, and the match result afterwards. Axl ¤ [Talk] 13:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Personally I don't agree, it reads fine to me as it stands, but others may disagree. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:47, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

From "Playing career", subsection "Later playing career and retirement", paragraph 3: "According to Agnew's account, Gower was at a loss as to whom to call into the squad." Should this be "at a loss as to who to call"? Axl ¤ [Talk] 13:55, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I think either are acceptable. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

All done?[edit]

I think all of Axl's comments have been responded to. If I've missed one, please let me know. --Dweller (talk) 11:47, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

Early career stuff from The Times[edit]

Re-posted from Dweller's talk page:

I'm a bit loath to edit the Agnew article when you and TRM are making such as good job of putting it into some order. But as someone thought the early career stuff was a bit thin you might be interested in a snippet I found in The Times about his injury-proneness early on. It's from the issue of 28 October 1980 under the heading "Another setback for Agnew" (page 9, issue No 60761) and reads:

The promising Leicestershire fast bowler, Jonathan Agnew, aged 22 [sic], is being flown home from Australia after contracting glandular fever. He was to have spent the winter playing for a club side.
Mike Turner, the Leicestershire secretary-manager, said: "It's a great disappointment because Jonathan had just returned to his best form after battling for 12 months to recover from a back injury."

I'll go on perusing copies of The Times from his early cricket days and will post anything sensible I find here, or on the talk page if you prefer.

Johnlp (talk) 23:38, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

The Times, Wednesday, Jun 24, 1981; pg. 11; Issue 60962;

Agnew is "out of form" which is why Ken Higgs is being recalled at age 43 to play in the Gillette Cup quarter-final v Sussex.

The Times, Saturday, Jun 04, 1983; pg. 15; Issue 61550;

Agnew "will miss the Championship match with Nottingham after spraining an ankle"

The Times, Monday, Dec 24, 1984; pg. 16; Issue 62020

Report on disrupted England preparations for one-day international and third Test at Calcutta: Agnew had "arrived here three days ago" and practice was particularly important for him, which indicates he was drafted into the tour, rather than being an original selection.

The Times, Tuesday, Feb 26, 1985; pg. 29; Issue 62072

Article by Simon Barnes about "the yips" which suggests fast bowlers demonstrate the condition through excessive no-balls: "Jonathan Agnew, bowling for England in Australia, has suffered from the no-balling problem of late, and said: 'It was becoming so bad, I was frightened to bowl. I was looking at the line, and not where I was going to bowl the ball.' "

Johnlp (talk) 23:54, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Dates for when Agnew joined TMS and the BBC[edit]

Further to a discussion at the talk page for the FAC nomination for this article.

At the moment the article says Agnew first duty for TMS and the BBC was to cover the 1990-1 Ashes tour in Australia. This is incorrect. Agnew covered that tour for the Today newspaper and joined TMS and the BBC in the 1991 English season that followed.

References - In Agnew's book "Thanks Johnners", page 59, he says "I made my decision to leave Leicestershire and join Today. I did not feel any hostility directed at me when I set off for England's 1990-91 tour of Australia with my new colleagues from the national press..." Later in the paragraph he refers to Christopher Martin-Jenkins's decision to leave his job as BBC cricket correspondent and says "This made little or no impact at the time because I did not know Chris very well and besides I was entirely focussed on my new career at Today." Over the next two pages he describes covering the tour for Today. On page 61 he describes TMS producer Peter Baxter approaching him about the TMS job during the tour, his dissatisfaction with an editorial decision at Today, and going for the job interview after the tour. After some digressions on page 64 a new section begins "Six months after bowling my last ball for Leicestershire, I became the fourth BBC cricket correspondent." The next page and a bit describes his general duties and on page 66 he says "The day before the first test and my debut on Test Match Special at Leeds..."

I think this establishes that he did the Ashes tour for Today and joined the BBC after that.

But to add to that, Peter Baxter's book "Inside the Box" is consistent with all this - on page 73 he describes approaching Agnew while in Australia and Agnew's run-in with the Today editors. On page 74 he reports on Agnew's first days as correspondent and his initial shyness while broadcasting and his first series, the 1991 one against the West Indies.

And Baxter's earlier book "Test Match Special: Fifty Not Out" has a section on Agnew and lists his first TMS test as being in 1991 (page 83). Later in the book, page 155, Agnew writes under the heading "my first test match" and the article is about the first West Indies test of 1991 and is dated as 6 June 1991.

I realise this is a hell of a lot of detail but as the fact was disputed, I wanted to provide plenty of info. Dean B (talk) 07:34, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Totally convinced. Thank you, very helpful. --Dweller (talk) 09:53, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
And amended now. --Dweller (talk) 16:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Desert Island Discs[edit]

Is this a reliable source? Interesting comments on various stages of his life and career. For example, that his family farm was mainly poultry, and he spent a lot of his time away from school plucking. Oh, and the comments about the relationship between fathers and children after divorce.[8]

Looking back at the article, I can't help thinking that we have too many quotes: for example, the first paragraph of "Background and early years" is:

Agnew was born on 4 April 1960 at West Park Hospital in Macclesfield, Cheshire, to Philip and Margaret Agnew.[4][5] His parents' forthcoming marriage was announced in The Times in 1957: Philip Agnew was described as "the only son of Mr and Mrs Norris M. Agnew of Dukenfield Hall, Mobberley, Cheshire" and Margaret as "youngest daughter of Mr and Mrs A.F.V. McConnell of Hampton Hall, Worthen, Shropshire".[6] The Agnews had a second son in June 1962 and were recorded as living at "Bainton near Stamford, Lincs"; in April 1966, a daughter, Felicity, was born and was announced as "a sister for Jonathan and Christopher".[7][8] Agnew's paternal grandmother, Lady Mona Agnew, died aged 110 years and 170 days in 2010 and is on the list of the 100 longest-lived British people ever.[9]

Do we need to have the direct quotes, getting on for a third of the paragraph? It is not as if the information made any more interesting when quoted. Wouldn't the text flow better along the following lines:

Agnew was born on 4 April 1960 at West Park Hospital in Macclesfield, Cheshire.[4][5] His father Philip Agnew was the only son of Mr and Mrs Norris M. Agnew of Dukenfield Hall, Mobberley, Cheshire, and his mother Margaret was the youngest daughter of Mr and Mrs A.F.V. McConnell of Hampton Hall, Worthen, Shropshire; their forthcoming marriage was announced in The Times in 1957.[6] The Agnews had a second son Christopher in June 1962, when they were living at Bainton, near Stamford, Lincolnshire; and a daughter Felicity was born in April 1966.[7][8] Agnew's paternal grandmother, Lady Mona Agnew, died aged 110 years and 170 days in 2010 and is on the list of the 100 longest-lived British people ever.[9]

Comments? -- Ferma (talk) 19:15, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Source material[edit]

About Agnew's role in the 84 Test vs SL and not getting picked for the India tour: [9] --Dweller (talk) 09:55, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Some nice personal stuff here ([10]) --Dweller (talk) 14:41, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Jonathan Agnew --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Infobox photo[edit]

The infobox has a photo of Agnew with the caption "Agnew at the Adelaide Oval". There are no distinguishing features of the Adelaide Oval in the photo so the location is not really of any relevance. It would be more helpful to say which year the photo was taken. Axl ¤ [Talk] 08:36, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Be our guest. The Rambling Man (talk) 08:39, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
Gerda Arendt has added the year. Thank you, Gerda! Axl ¤ [Talk] 08:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Jonathan Agnew. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:41, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Source material[edit]

[11] --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 10:05, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jonathan Agnew. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:09, 9 September 2017 (UTC)