Talk:Clem Hill

Source

Wisden obit - a good one for batting style. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 07:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments

• He scored his first 100 runs in 98 minutes, a record only equalled once in Tests for Australia, by Don Bradman ==> What record ? There are faster hundreds by Aussies - Benaud has a 78 minute one, for eg. Fastest by an Australian captain perhaps ? Tintin 09:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

• It should have read "in" rather than "for" but I am still not entirely convinced it is correct. Thanks, Mattinbgn\^talk 00:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Joe Darling scored a 91 minute hundred at Sydney 1897-98. http://au.geocities.com/sportandhistory/cricket.html may have a list of all sub-100 minute hundreds (I can't check myself because hosting sites like geocities are blocked from work). Tintin 04:57, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

When watching Hobbs break his record for the most runs in Test cricket at Headingley in 1926, it was Hobbs' wife sitting nearby who had to remind Hill that the record was previously his.[4]

Hobbs improved on Hill's record for most runs in Ashes in that Test (See Hobbs' stats v Australia, Hill's aggregate had been 2660). Can't really blame Hill not noticing that :-) Tintin 13:36, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I find the same error in Neville Cardus' match report too. I am not sure what do about such errors, but it certainly contradicts the (correct) comment in the "Retirement_and_legacy" section that Hobbs broke the record twelve years after Hill (and hence in 1924). Tintin 07:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

The quote from Robinson is:

"[quoting Mrs Hobbs] 'You should know if anyone does, he had broken your record of most runs in Test matches.' Hill's total was 3412 in 49 Tests."

Given this, do we want to correct the article and include a note to clarify the incorrect claim of the source? -- Mattinbgn\^talk 08:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure. As said above, Cardus too repeats the error in the report that is reproduced in A fourth innings with Cardus . Let me ask around. Tintin 02:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Quoting JHall's reply from my talk page : "I suppose it wasn't a surprising slip for the author of On Top Down Under to make, since in those days I think that Tests against South Africa were seen as being a long way behind Ashes Tests in importance. Adding a footnote sounds like good idea. JH" Footnote looks okay for me too. Tintin 08:33, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Did we find anything more on the South African hundred ? "the record equalled only once by Bradman" is still there and the reader gets no clue what the record is. Tintin 07:53, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

I haven't found anything else so I have removed the claim as ambiguous and a likely error in the source. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 08:34, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

As a matter of pure curiosity, so I haven't added it to the main article: when the Old Trafford surface was taken up in August 2008, I worked out where Hill perhaps took his famous catch in front of the pavilion in 1902 - well, two possible spots! - and, as was being allowed, took up the turves. They are being relocated at Whalley Range Cricket Club, in the pavilion garden lawns, as is the patch of turf where Fred Tate dropped so infamously a vital catch in the same game on the other side of the ground. More-expert research preceded this identification. Archie MacLaren, the England captain, was born in Whalley Range, athough there is no evidence he played for us; his brothers may have done. We also took the bits where players stepped down from the amateur and professional gates onto the pitch, and are placing them where all our players walk out from the garden to the field of play. We hope to interest them, especially the juniors, that they are succeeding to such immortal 19C-20C-21C steps. Given the autumn battering the area takes (Bonfire Night etc), the sods are all currently thriving away on my own lawn, but will soon be moving to their new home. If New Soutn Wales and/or Lancashire and/or Sussex ever want a portion of these relics, the Range accepts that is is mere custodian of them, but we'd like to be allowed to keep a cultivatable remainder. Just to round off, we did think of Laker's 1956 run-up, but apparently he actually bowled from both ends, and both round and over. We'd have needed a JCB to bring it all home. We are going to put a modest framed explanation and location-map on the pavilion lounge wall, so that these nondescript patches of grass won't be forgotten when we are. 19 December 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Medievalduck (talk • contribs) 21:37, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

LG Ratings

• Hill's ranking - No. 1 for much of his career. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 00:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

GA review/peer review

So sorry for the delay - totally slipped my mind :|

Please note that these are all suggestions, and many are in fact questions - they're not a "do this" or "do that". However, due to the fact that I won't be using full sentences, reading them straight-out may give this impression. Please insert the friendly missing words ("possibly", "a suggestion", etc.) mentally :)

Lead and early life

• "Clement ("Clem") Hill" — Brackets around "Clem"?

• Now removed - overkill. probably need removing from some other articles I have written such as Archie Jackson

• "Hill scored 3,412 runs in Test cricket—a world record at the time" — "...of his retirement"?

• That's correct, added

• "His 365 scored against" — "innings of 365"? (the rationale of lead = general = non-cricket-fan-friendly)

• Good point, done

• "The South Australian Cricket Association named a stand at the Adelaide Oval in his honour in 2003 and he was inducted into the Australian Cricket Hall of Fame in 2005" — double "he"?

• I agree the sentence doesn't scan but I am not sure that there is a double "he". Let me ponder this one.

• "Two years later, at the Melbourne Cricket Ground, Hill scored 188, his maiden Test century and still the highest score in Ashes Tests by a player under twenty-one" — given this is a choppy sentence, would removing the first comma work?

• I am a compulsive comma user and need to go on a twelve step plan to bring my use of this particular punctuation mark back within reasonable bounds!

• "With Roger Hartigan he still holds the Australian Test record partnership for the eighth wicket, made against England at the Gabba in Brisbane in 1907–08" — would including the exact figure be beneficial?

• Yes it would, added

• "His father scored a century (102 not out) for North Adelaide against the touring Kent County Cricket Club, reportedly the first century at the Adelaide Oval." — ref?

• Ref now immediately follows fact

• ""Inter-collegiate" matches, the annual fixtures against rivals, St Peter's College, were fiercely contested." — is the comma before SPC needed?

• see above

• "At 16, he scored 360 in the inter-collegiate match, a schoolboy record, bettering the mark made earlier by Joe Darling." — would exact figures be acceptable?

• Not sure what you mean here, 360 is the exact score

• "Despite this, a school sportsmaster threatened to leave him out of the School XI if he continued to play the hook shot" — just double-checking, is this meant to be "a" (in the sense there's more than one sportsmaster) or should it be "the"?

• The source uses "a" rather than "the"

• "just nine days past 16" — as in, his 16th birthday or his 17th?

• 16th birthday

• "Hill scored 335 runs at an average of 47.85." — games/innings?

• in nine innings, added now. Will continue to look at the rest shortly. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 05:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Test career

Part I

• "A disappointed Hill responded by scoring 206 against New South Wales, captained by tour selector, Tom Garrett." — is that to ref 4?

• Yes it was, made clear now

• "Experienced cricket watchers were impressed with the young man's ability to control the strike" — the use of "young man" stood out for some reason, maybe because my brain subconsciously felt it didn't fit with a biographical piece. Thoughts?

• Reworded slightly, The point I am trying to make here is that Hill was capable of controlling the strike very early into his career, normally something that comes with experience and confidence.

• "All scored over 1,000 runs for the tour, Hill scoring 1,196 runs at an average of 27.81." — "...with Hill scoring"?

• done

• "The captain, Harry Trott (143), partnered by Syd Gregory (103) helped Australia to a score of 347, setting England 109 runs to win." — another thing which stood out for non-conscious reasons. Would adding a "was" before "partnered" and changing "helped" to "to help" make the sentence read better? Or is my brain going apeshit again? :)

• Changed, although it did not read that strange to me.

• "Hill played in the remaining two Tests without much success and Australia lost the series and the Ashes by two Tests to one." — although I like the mix of specifics and generalisations in this article overall, the "much" in this sentence (with no support from statistics or official/recognised opinions in the prose) will probably get a giant {{specify}} at FAC, from experience.

• Will get back to this one. I take your point but I do not want to turn the article into a proseline of innings by innings scores

• reworded and referenced now. Your thoughts?

• "The Second Test was played in Melbourne and Australia fought back, winning the Test by an innings and 55 runs, Hill scoring 58." — with? (see above)

• done

• "Batting for 294 minutes he gave only the one chance." — given how short that sentence is, could you possibly give a brief description (eg. "Batting for 294 minutes Hill gave only the one chance, a difficult catch low down to John Doe at mid-off when he was on 17" or something)?

• Good point. The source does not specify what the chance was but I will look around for another.

• "Before this, Hill was recognised as the best of the Australian batsmen." — needs a qualifier of some kind, in my opinion.

• I think I have picked up what you have meant. Please let me know if this is not so.

• "He topped the Test averages" — Australia or both teams?

• Neither! An error by me. Charlie McLeod, playing in one Test only averaged 108.[1]

• "The record stood for twenty seven years until beaten by Bill Ponsford." — use numbers (ie. 27)?

• done

• "He attempted to hit the ball away from the stumps but accidentally knocked the off bail and was out, bowled." — Not hit wicket? Bizarre. So, he hit the bail off with his bat and was given out bowled?

• This confused me as well. My source reads "He chopped down on a ball when just three runs short of his century and to his horror saw it rolling back towards the stumps. He swung around to stop the perfect 'stump landing' but knocked off the leg bail with his bat instead." This reads to me as "hit wicket" but the scorecard from CricketArchive[2] reads "b Jessop". Perhaps WP:CRICKET could clear this up?

• "In return Monty Noble and Jack Saunders bowled England out for 145 and Australia led by 49 runs on the first innings." — just the two of them? This sprang to mind because I remember a journalist using the same expression when the only three wicket-takers in a regional representative match came from the same club within the region. Just curiosity really :)

• Yep, just the two with five wickets each.

• "He had given two difficult chances, one at slip when 74 and in the outfield at 77 before he was caught by MacLaren for 119." — seems strange to mention the fielder but not the bowler...

• Jackson was the bowler and mentioned now

• "Australia won the Test by 143 runs.[31] The final two Tests were thrillers." — the two short sentences stick out when reading it and break up the excellent momentum the reader has. Any ideas?
• In fact, there's a series of shortish sentences starting with the "Australia won" one and finishing with "at the Oval by one wicket".

• You are right but inspiration fails me at present. I have a bias towards short sentences.

• "On the return trip to Australia, the touring team stopped in South Africa to play three Tests, the first between the two nations." — the first test or the first three-test series?

• The first Tests ever, now specified

• "In the First Test he made a century (145)" — this seems a little redundant; saying "145" would do, because it makes "a century" redundant.

• agreed and changed. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 07:10, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Part II

• "The Test series was dominated by boring, safety first cricket" — would "uninspiring" be a less emotive and judgemental and more safe (no pun intended) term to use? Just kicking ideas around.

• Tried a reword that I think is a little less suggestive. I will see if I can find a quote summing up the approach taken by both teams.

• "The English team were hit the loss of their captain, Arthur Jones who contracted an illness that threatened to develop into pneumonia causing him to miss the first three Tests." — comma after "pnumonea"?

• done

• "When Hartigan was dismissed for 116, the pair had together made 243 for the eighth wicket; still an Australian Test record." — given the part after the ";" isn't a full sentence, would a "," be sufficient?

• Tried a dash, please let me know what you think

• "but his efforts assisted his team defeat the English by 245 runs.[45][4]" — swap reference order.

• done

• "who he claimed " was past his best" and "not suited to English conditions"." — space after the first quotemark, before "was".

• done

• "The South Africans, lead by Aubrey Faulkner had a novel bowling attack consisting of a number of googly bowlers" — comma after "Faulkner"?

• done

• "He scored his first 100 runs in 98 minutes, a record only equalled once in Tests in Australia, by Don Bradman." — did SDB equal or better it?

• The source states "...since equalled only once in Tests in Australia, by Bradman". Tintin and I have discussed this and this will need better sourcing before any FA attempt. The fastest scorer stats are not as extensive as I would like from that era.

• "With Warren Bardsley, he put on a partnership of 224 in only two hours" — "he" or "they"?

• reworded to avoid any awkwardness.

• "Australia won the Second Test in Melbourne after bowling the South African out for 80 in the last innings" — this didn't make sense the first time I read it, which generally means that a) my brain was not functioning or b) the text was slightly (emphasis on slightly) confusing. I'd never seen "last" innings used before, thats probably why.

• By last innings I meant the fourth innings of the Test. Fourth innings is a little confusing as well as teams only have two innings. Should it be "bottom of the second"?. Reworded.

• "Australia won the Second Test in Melbourne after bowling the South African out for 80 in the last innings and the South Africans fought back to win in the Third Test in Adelaide by 38 runs." — comma after "and", before "the"?

• done

• "The English team included bowlers of the calibre of Barnes and Frank Foster and after losing the first Test in Sydney, won all four remaining Tests to secure the Ashes." — comma after "and", before "after"?

• done

• "Hill then warned McAlister to stop insulting him, McAlister repeated the remark." — "but" before "McAlister repeated"?

• done, much better

• "Hill told Smith he could no longer work with McAlister and was asked to put his resignation in writing; the Board accepted it that evening" — was later asked, I presume; who by?

• By Smith, I trust this is clearer now.

• "In support of the benefits of some former colleagues , he played" — space before comma

• fixed

Outside cricket and style/personality

• The second paragraph of Outside cricket seems to need more references. Also, the exact date of the accident may also be relevant if it is known.

All sourced from Robinson. I have added another reference for reassurance. I can't find an exact date for the accident. Note that ADB shows him dying of heart disease.[3] I think only a death certificate is likely to confirm cause of death but I am more confident that the accident is more likely. Of course, he could have been involved in an accident just before his death from heart disease.

• "His body was returned to Adelaide for burial at North Road cemetery" — suburb?

• The suburb is Nailsworth, now added

• The first paragraph of Style and personality has a successive usage of "he"/"his". Maybe change one to "Hill"?

• agreed and done

• "—Wisden obituary, [64]" — is this standard formatting?

• Normally, this field would be for the author but there is no author cited for the obituary. Happy to consider alternatives.

• "Hill made a catch that Wisden claimed "will never be forgotten by [those present]"[64]" — Full stop missing.

• done

• "His pleasant nature was commented on by Pelham Warner and Robert Trumble recalled him as honest" — "who" missing after "Trumble".

• reworded and specified who Robert Trumble is.

Final comments and review

This is a GA. It is, in my opinion, very nearly a FA. I'll do the paperwork to pass this for GA tomorrow, because the above is all minor. I look forward to seeing this at FAC, and my sincerest apologies once again for the ridiculous delay. Cheers, Daniel (talk) 10:09, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the very thorough peer review. I am away from home at present so I will address these points on the weekend. Thanks again, Mattinbgn\^talk 13:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I have addressed nearly all the points mentioned. Thanks for the review, it has certainly improved the article. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 08:58, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

So, when's FAC coming? I'd be happy to copyedit when you want to take the plunge. dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 07:24, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Not far away. Work and other RL events are limiting the time I would like to spend here at the moment however but I do mean to get to it. 100 WP:AUST FAs is the target. Mattinbgn\^talk 10:48, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Today's edits

I have (with some trepidation!) made several detailed edits to an article which is already excellent. I haven't (as above) given detailed reasons, but hope most will be obvious. (In case you wonder, I'd describe myself as a cricket-lover & supporter of Yorkshire & England, in that order). If some of the edits are too nit-picking for your liking, please revert them without asking for my reasons. I, too, sometimes get more excited than I should about the likes of commas and hyphens. Hill's 99-98-97 sequence is mentioned twice (under both "Consolidation" & "Style and personality"), but I've left both in. I imagine that the Islington referred to is the one in SA - not that it matters much.NinetyCharacters (talk) 13:34, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. I have no problem with nit-picking at all, especially with grammar and punctuation. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk 09:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The lead section

This is very much a matter of opinion, but it seems to me that at four substantial paragraphs the lead-in is much too long, and that most of the more detailed stuff should only be in the body of the article. JH (talk page) 11:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I suspect you are right. It seems to be a common fault of mine when writing biographies of this type: I get too close to the details and tend to think that all the points in the article are important and need inclusion in the lead. I guess I have three or four days or so to try and trim it down. I could lose:

• SACA grandstand.
• Most of para 2 other than a sentence on style and batting position
• Most of para 3 except for:
  • Teen prodigy
  • Record partnership
• in para 4, need to keep the brawl and Big Six, the rest could probably go

Anything else? -- Mattinbgn\^talk 11:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

WP:LEAD suggests four parags for a long article is fine. --Dweller (talk) 11:13, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Clem Hill. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080318223510/http://www.fullpointsfooty.net:80/hi-hz.htm to http://www.fullpointsfooty.net/hi-hz.htm#Clem%20Hill%20(South%20Adelaide)

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:54, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Clem Hill. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090302123758/http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/fow/highest_partnerships_by_wicket.html?class=1%3Bid%3D2%3Btype%3Dteam to http://stats.cricinfo.com/ci/engine/records/fow/highest_partnerships_by_wicket.html?class=1%3Bid%3D2%3Btype%3Dteam

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:23, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Clem Hill. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081224203052/http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/5662.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Dallround%3Bview%3Dmatch to http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/5662.html?class=1%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Dallround%3Bview%3Dmatch
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081224201338/http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/5662.html?class=1%3Bfilter%3Dadvanced%3Borderby%3Druns%3Bplayer_involve%3D210%3Brunsmax1%3D99%3Brunsmin1%3D90%3Brunsval1%3Druns%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Dbatting%3Bview%3Dinnings to http://stats.cricinfo.com/statsguru/engine/player/5662.html?class=1%3Bfilter%3Dadvanced%3Borderby%3Druns%3Bplayer_involve%3D210%3Brunsmax1%3D99%3Brunsmin1%3D90%3Brunsval1%3Druns%3Btemplate%3Dresults%3Btype%3Dbatting%3Bview%3Dinnings

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:22, 24 September 2017 (UTC)