This kind of discussion reminds me of Orwell's essay on Salvador Dali. For some reason, people are unwilling to accept that someone can have serious character flaws, or even be a horrible person, but still a great artist or writer or poltician.
While hardly in the same league as Dali (either in talent or in perversions) Roebuck was one of the greatest writers on the most lirterary of all sports. He was fearless, eloquent and intelligent and his prose was always crystal clear. This is not incompabatible with him being arrogant, manipulative or expolitative.
Must admit i personally wouldnt put him amongst "the greatest" i think thats too higher praise from as you say "the most literary of sports " but he was very good dont think he will be compared to cardus,robertson-glasgow,arlott,fingleton .swanton et al in the future
Must admit i personally wouldnt put him amongst "the greatest" i think thats too higher praise from as you say "the most literary of sports " but he was very good dont think he will be compared to cardus,robertson-glasgow,arlott,fingleton .swanton et al in the future
That's partly because we live in a TV age so literary writing has less impact as we can see the images for ourselves.
Roebuck's "greatness" for me, whether I agreed or disagreed, was his willingness to push the boundaries by challenging the status quo in an at times frighteningly forensic and analytical fashion.
The others you mention by and large did not do that, although Swanton could at times be more subversive than he is given credit for, so no Roebuck won't be compared with them because he was different.
Not better not worse just different and possibly unique.
agree re contemporaries it is difficult to judge the evolution of cricket writing/journalism which was once the preserve of the elite and the broadsheets as of course the genre is now also populated by the blogs and websites
Cant think of any other sport that has inspired such great written prose and commentary ,must be something to do with how "slow-moving"the game is
Must admit i personally wouldnt put him amongst "the greatest" i think thats too higher praise from as you say "the most literary of sports " but he was very good dont think he will be compared to cardus,robertson-glasgow,arlott,fingleton .swanton et al in the future
That's partly because we live in a TV age so literary writing has less impact as we can see the images for ourselves.
Roebuck's "greatness" for me, whether I agreed or disagreed, was his willingness to push the boundaries by challenging the status quo in an at times frighteningly forensic and analytical fashion.
The others you mention by and large did not do that, although Swanton could at times be more subversive than he is given credit for, so no Roebuck won't be compared with them because he was different.
Not better not worse just different and possibly unique.
agree Len ...your piece went in as i was typing mine
This has been a fascinating debate about Roebuck who was a great writer who clearly had his demons ,I also did not know the back story about Stuart Leary.
In my youth I went to College with the former Kent bowler Danny Kelleher , I wouldn't claim him as a friend but he seemed very out going and sociable . He had a moderately successful career , I believe he once took Viv Richards wicket.
Ten years later I was staggered to find he had commited suicide at 29 when he was passed his prime and was no longer playing for Kent .Is it a coincidence or is there a more sinister pattern and why do cricketers seem to be more affected ?
This has been a fascinating debate about Roebuck who was a great writer who clearly had his demons ,I also did not know the back story about Stuart Leary.
In my youth I went to College with the former Kent bowler Danny Kelleher , I wouldn't claim him as a friend but he seemed very out going and sociable . He had a moderately successful career , I believe he once took Viv Richards wicket.
Ten years later I was staggered to find he had commited suicide at 29 when he was passed his prime and was no longer playing for Kent .Is it a coincidence or is there a more sinister pattern and why do cricketers seem to be more affected ?
David Frith wrote a book called Silence of The Heart on this very topic.
This was a sequel to an earlier book called By Their Own Hand (or similar). The foreword to this was written by none other than Peter Roebuck.
EDIT: Already mentioned by Incorruptible Addick higher up the thread.
cricket is a slow moving team game that is some times at odds with the individual performances/interests that it contains eg Geoff Boycott " they dont want me but they want me runs" etc
it allows time for players to ruminate/cogitate over things,Peter Roebuck i am sure in his cricketing days would have been the type so my theory is that people who "play things over in their mind" are inclined to be attracted to the sport and such characters can be fatally consumed by those thoughts
having said that PR only took 5 seconds to make up his mind RIP
apologies if i didnt articulate that that aswell as someone like David Frith
Are you sure it wasn't a conspiracy and Mugabe, Botham and Paul Newman weren't all in in together, OA?
This is starting to get even sillier than all the wild stories after Bob Woolmer died.
I agree that it is unlikely there is foul play involved but it is absolutely clear that Roebuck was making some serious enemies in southern Africa, both in Zimbabwe and amongst Mugabe supporters in South Africa, most of whom are 'radical' nationalists in the Julius Malema mould.
As well as educating young opposition leaders in Zimbabwe he was also writing prolifically on the crisis in Zimbabwe and was continuing to argue that they should not be allowed to compete internationally whilst Mugabe was in place.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Moreover, he was spending increasing amounts of time in India – he was planning to move there next year – with one of his aims to pressure the BCCI (which effectively runs world cricket via its control of the ICC) into re-instating the ban on Zimbabwe.
Roebuck is hugely popular in India and very widely read in the country’s top papers so he would have had some clout in the matter if he had moved to India and really ramped up the pressure.
Nonetheless, it is still more likely that he took his own life as either a reaction to being (properly) charged for an assault he did commit on the man in question or, alternatively, that he was so distraught at the prospect of being charged for a crime he did not commit (but with his past record knew that people would think he had) that he then took his own life because he could not bear to go through the public humiliation he went through back in 2001.
I suppose we may never know now the truth of the matter now that he is no longer here to tell his version of events.
What we do know is that he was a fine writer, below is his most famous column of all.
Is it a coincidence or is there a more sinister pattern and why do cricketers seem to be more affected ?
Probably, or i would like to think more coincidence. Cricket, as said before in this thread, is a team game that relies heavily on individual performances. To make any kind of success of it (particularly a batsman) you need to have an almost perfectionist attitude to your technique. I think those with relatively little ability need to work meticulously hard at their game to improve and to keep at their best. Some characters can deal with this stress, but there are others that cannot (I know i probably wouldn't). Causing inevitable mental health issues as a result.
That's my guess anyway, I played cricket at a decent level and play for a pretty decent village team in kent in the summer and even I get brought close to tears when i've had a shocking day with the ball (I'm a bowler). So i wonder how some professionals feel!
Thanks KA , lolway and len that makes sense . Roebuck himself said Cricket attracted a certain sort of person .
Ironically as a spectator who watched Kent regularly I found watching Cricket quite peaceful and a lot less intense than following the Addicks . Kent's successes and failures have never had the same affect on me as Charlton's . I enjoyed socialising whilst watching play in a way that Football does not allow ,as a rule the crowd was a lot less partizan although sometimes Kent at the St Lawrence Ground in big games it could resemble a Football crowd.
In the 70's and 80's when I regularly went to the St Lawrence ground to watch Kent you could often experience an opposition top quality world class player (Zaheer, Richards B&V, Greenidge etc) effortlessly stroke a ball through the covers for 4 and the shot be treated with absolute silence from a crowd of over 5,000. To be fair this was more the case in a 1/4 or semi of the B&H or Gillette etc rather than a Championship game. The Canterbury crowd were well known for their bias in those days. It made it quite intimidating for the visitors and probably contributed to Kent’s success in those days. I didn't agree with it myself. It just wasn't cricket. I don't think it happened anywhere else in England. Even Yorkshire crowds appreciated good cricket!
Slightly off-topic as I want to give the full context of Stuart Leary from David Frith's Silence of The Heart Cricket Suicides since his name has been mentioned:
..."But by 1985, with Robin Jackman having replaced him at Western Province,dark days were upon Stuart Edward Leary. He had married a woman older than himself who was prominent in business and constantly travelling. By 1988 he was feeling pressures known only to the damned. Bob Woolmer, who knew him well, said later: 'He was suffering from a depressive state where he was on drugs to keep him from committing suicide at an earlier stage. However, the drugs seemed to affect his performance as a coach and reduced his normal outgoing personality.'
According to three other people who knew him, Leary was apprehensive at a nationwide investigation into juvenile vice. Not only that, but he also feared he might be infected with the dreaded disease, Aids. Close friends have since indignantly repudiated such suggestions. Asked about any possibility of'gay' inclination in Leary, former South African cricketer Eddie Barlow said he only knew that there had been a divorce and that Leary had 'about five girlfriends on the go at the time of his death'. Venerable journalist A.C. 'Ace' Parker believed Leary had suffered losses in his gold-mining investments.
Whatever the details, Stuart Leary was a deeply troubled man when he bought a (return) ticket for the cable-car to the top of Table Mountain in August 1988. He had a meal in the restaurant on the plateau peak and made a telephone call to his sister-in-law, with whom he had recently quarrelled. Then he walked towards the seaward edge and threw himself over. It meant he had overcome what an aquaintance described as the vanity factor, the fear of disfigurement.
He was reported missing when his car was found empty and abandoned at the base of the moutain, and mists and high winds hampered the police search. On 23 August Leary's body was found, with a note nearby. He was 55 and the shock news reverberated through the cricket and soccer fraternities of England and South Africa".......
Make up your own minds. Yet another spooky coincidence, given subsequent events, is the involvement of Bob Woolmer.
Talking of spooky coincidences has anyone else noticed that with the recent death of comedy writer David Croft it proves that Dad's Army was cursed or has suffered a major conspiracy. Nearly all the cast are dead. Unbelievable!
Quite unbelievable indeed but I think it holds a little more water than Len's!
Talking of spooky coincidences has anyone else noticed that with the recent death of comedy writer David Croft it proves that Dad's Army was cursed or has suffered a major conspiracy. Nearly all the cast are dead. Unbelievable!
Quite unbelievable indeed but I think it holds a little more water than Len's!
Who rattled your cage?
I just think it strange that Roebuck wrote the foreword to Frith's first book and Woolmer is quoted commenting on Leary.
I guess it shows that first class cricket is a small world.
Bob Woolmer spent a lot of time in SA, he played for Kent and he didn't commit suicide.
I believe an open verdict was given on Woolmer so we don't know one way or the other.
The real point, as well you know so I don't know why I'm playing, is that both Roebuck and Woolmer died in the public eye as it were and that is the coincidence.
By the way is ARP Warden Hodges still going? I know Pike is.
i think we can safely dismiss any dads army conspiracy theories although this is a great thread as i can safely say that cricket is a bigger passion than CAFC ...sincere thanks to all although it obviously has a sombre tone
Just reading through these posts, goes to show how many people form an opinion based on previous assumptions of character. I'm not criticising anyone here, I've done it myself many times. I think it a bit too early to condemn the man so early before any real facts come out. Like the Justin Fashanu case after the suicide you'll probably never know, those who support him will point to no charge and the tabloid nature of many of us will see any hearsay as fact: I assume Fashanu wasn't charged as the police usually drop cases quicly after the suspect dies, and this may be the case here.
It can be safely said if Roebuck did have a proclivity for young men, as a 50 plus year old it would be most unusual for their to be no previous occurrences of sexual relations. Suffice to say that the tabloids will most likely get hold of those stories. Before you condemn a man, maybe take a step back and wait for multiple pieces of evidence, preferably not just tabloid; although they do place pressure on any account for good or bad.
I think yr right to say the tabloids may pick up on any salacious aspects of the story ,i certainly wdnt condemn him for his sexuality (whatever it was)and i think the world has lost a damed good cricket writer but as a person i couldnt take to him ,just putting it bluntly the way PR would have
He's obviously a bit of a deviant with demons , who overstepped the mark on more than one occassion
But he also done some very good work helping others less fortunate than himself, far beyond the call of duty or what many others in similar situations offer back to society and that shouldn't be forgotten
Comments
This is starting to get even sillier than all the wild stories after Bob Woolmer died.
This kind of discussion reminds me of Orwell's essay on Salvador Dali. For some reason, people are unwilling to accept that someone can have serious character flaws, or even be a horrible person, but still a great artist or writer or poltician.
While hardly in the same league as Dali (either in talent or in perversions) Roebuck was one of the greatest writers on the most lirterary of all sports. He was fearless, eloquent and intelligent and his prose was always crystal clear. This is not incompabatible with him being arrogant, manipulative or expolitative.
http://orwell.ru/library/reviews/dali/english/e_dali
You're probably right. I was thinking of his contempories.
That's partly because we live in a TV age so literary writing has less impact as we can see the images for ourselves.
Roebuck's "greatness" for me, whether I agreed or disagreed, was his willingness to push the boundaries by challenging the status quo in an at times frighteningly forensic and analytical fashion.
The others you mention by and large did not do that, although Swanton could at times be more subversive than he is given credit for, so no Roebuck won't be compared with them because he was different.
Not better not worse just different and possibly unique.
On the subject of cricketing literature, can I put in a recommendation for Twirlymen. A well-written history of spin.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Twirlymen-Unlikely-History-Crickets-Greatest/dp/0224083236/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1321360428&sr=1-1
Cant think of any other sport that has inspired such great written prose and commentary ,must be something to do with how "slow-moving"the game is
This has been a fascinating debate about Roebuck who was a great writer who clearly had his demons ,I also did not know the back story about Stuart Leary.
In my youth I went to College with the former Kent bowler Danny Kelleher , I wouldn't claim him as a friend but he seemed very out going and sociable . He had a moderately successful career , I believe he once took Viv Richards wicket.
Ten years later I was staggered to find he had commited suicide at 29 when he was passed his prime and was no longer playing for Kent .Is it a coincidence or is there a more sinister pattern and why do cricketers seem to be more affected ?
David Frith wrote a book called Silence of The Heart on this very topic.
This was a sequel to an earlier book called By Their Own Hand (or similar). The foreword to this was written by none other than Peter Roebuck.
EDIT: Already mentioned by Incorruptible Addick higher up the thread.
it allows time for players to ruminate/cogitate over things,Peter Roebuck i am sure in his cricketing days would have been the type so my theory is that people who "play things over in their mind" are inclined to be attracted to the sport and such characters can be fatally consumed by those thoughts
having said that PR only took 5 seconds to make up his mind RIP
apologies if i didnt articulate that that aswell as someone like David Frith
I agree that it is unlikely there is foul play involved but it is absolutely clear that Roebuck was making some serious enemies in southern Africa, both in Zimbabwe and amongst Mugabe supporters in South Africa, most of whom are 'radical' nationalists in the Julius Malema mould.
As well as educating young opposition leaders in Zimbabwe he was also writing prolifically on the crisis in Zimbabwe and was continuing to argue that they should not be allowed to compete internationally whilst Mugabe was in place.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />
Moreover, he was spending increasing amounts of time in India – he was planning to move there next year – with one of his aims to pressure the BCCI (which effectively runs world cricket via its control of the ICC) into re-instating the ban on Zimbabwe.
Roebuck is hugely popular in India and very widely read in the country’s top papers so he would have had some clout in the matter if he had moved to India and really ramped up the pressure.
Nonetheless, it is still more likely that he took his own life as either a reaction to being (properly) charged for an assault he did commit on the man in question or, alternatively, that he was so distraught at the prospect of being charged for a crime he did not commit (but with his past record knew that people would think he had) that he then took his own life because he could not bear to go through the public humiliation he went through back in 2001.
I suppose we may never know now the truth of the matter now that he is no longer here to tell his version of events.
What we do know is that he was a fine writer, below is his most famous column of all.
http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/arrogant-ponting-must-be-fired/2008/01/07/1199554571883.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
Thanks KA , lolway and len that makes sense . Roebuck himself said Cricket attracted a certain sort of person .
Ironically as a spectator who watched Kent regularly I found watching Cricket quite peaceful and a lot less intense than following the Addicks . Kent's successes and failures have never had the same affect on me as Charlton's . I enjoyed socialising whilst watching play in a way that Football does not allow ,as a rule the crowd was a lot less partizan although sometimes Kent at the St Lawrence Ground in big games it could resemble a Football crowd.
In the 70's and 80's when I regularly went to the St Lawrence ground to watch Kent you could often experience an opposition top quality world class player (Zaheer, Richards B&V, Greenidge etc) effortlessly stroke a ball through the covers for 4 and the shot be treated with absolute silence from a crowd of over 5,000. To be fair this was more the case in a 1/4 or semi of the B&H or Gillette etc rather than a Championship game. The Canterbury crowd were well known for their bias in those days. It made it quite intimidating for the visitors and probably contributed to Kent’s success in those days. I didn't agree with it myself. It just wasn't cricket.
I don't think it happened anywhere else in England. Even Yorkshire crowds appreciated good cricket!
Talking of spooky coincidences has anyone else noticed that with the recent death of comedy writer David Croft it proves that Dad's Army was cursed or has suffered a major conspiracy. Nearly all the cast are dead. Unbelievable!
Quite unbelievable indeed but I think it holds a little more water than Len's!
I have not condemed him for anything apart from facts. What ever went on in the lead up to his demise does not bother me.
From what I know of him, he was not a nice person.
But he also done some very good work helping others less fortunate than himself, far beyond the call of duty or what many others in similar situations offer back to society and that shouldn't be forgotten