Famous Cricketers No 57 - W. M. Woodfull

“He had an iron fist but he did not have to use it,” was how one player summed up Woodfull. Others rated him as more of a “strong and silent type.” He showed interest in his players to the extent that “no national captain held players’ trust and loyalty to such a degree.” Oldfield said that Woodfull was “skipper, psychologist and humanitarian all in one.” Realistically his force of character and reliability won him the hearts of his men. Whatever the merits of Woodfull as a captain, Warner was forced to say that “there has never been a more popular or better-liked Australian Captain in this country.” Fiddian wrote that “Woodfull observed the spirit of the game. His conscience would not allow him to take a mean advantage of a loophole in the letter of the law.” His players respected him for that. If a more forceful personality such as a Warwick Armstrong had captained Australia during the 1932/33 series, the game of cricket would possibly be significantly different now. Test cricket may not have even survived. Woodfull was the supreme diplomat. Bill Woodfull the Cricketer Woodfull possessed a wonderful temperament. Nothing seemed to upset him. The tougher the battle and the more desperate the position, the better he played. His efforts against Bodyline confirm this. Such traits endured him to his team mates. Having a captain who reacted in such a way served to inspire his team. He would never tell a team mate to do something that he would not do himself. Moyes thought that Woodfull’s face “indicated his strength of character and Woodfull’s conversation revealed a wealth of knowledge.” These mental qualities, when “superimposed on an amazing defence, enabled him to become a Test match batsman and a captain who commanded everyone’s respect.” His strength of character made him a natural leader of men. He submerged himself for the good of the team to the extent that his career batting figures did not do him full justice. A Test average of 46 and a first-class average of almost 65 could have been better. This is because he was an “outstanding team batsman, he was forever involved in the partnerships that counted.” Woodfull was not into the high scoring which Ponsford indulged in, only recording six double centuries in his career. Ponsford made 13, four of which he took into the third century and two to the fourth. Only half of Woodfull’s centuries made the 120 mark, whereas Ponsford seemed to see the century mark as merely the launching pad for higher scores. The fact that their career figures are so close indicates that Woodfull was the more consistent scorer. His figures do not show the “man’s courteousness, his sense of decorum and unshakeable commonsense.” Bill Woodfull the Fielder He was variously rated as ‘safe’ or ‘serviceable’. Perhaps he would struggle in today’s game because of his lack of mobility. This is not to denigrate his ability, because I would imagine that few players of his era would survive in the modern game. He seems to have generally fielded on the leg-side at either mid-on or a widish mid-wicket. There were never any adverse comments about his fielding, neither were there any saying how well he fielded! He may well have changed fielding positions about the middle of his career, about the time when he became captain. In the first half of his career he made 58 catches. In the second half he took only 20. He did not seem to have dropped many, so the implication was that he now fielded in a position where the ball rarely went. Perhaps he was just lucky in the first half of his career? 7