Talk:Alec Bedser

Selectors

Bedser was chair of selectors from 1969. Insole chaired the '68-9 meeting.Fieldgoalunit (talk) 23:48, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

The Freedom Association

Perhaps I am alone on this one, but I find the following sentence disturbing and slightly weaselly;

He was a founding member of The Freedom Association, which supported the apartheid system in South Africa, and he was one of selectors when Basil D'Oliveira was left out of the England team for the 1968–69 tour of South Africa.

Through a chain of inferences, the sentence seeks to cast Bedser's shared decision to exclude Dolly from the England touring squad was racially based. Looking at the chain we see the following inferences

• Bedser was a founding member of The Freedom Association
• The Freedom Association "supported apartheid" (Not being English, I don't understand the history here but did the TFA support apartheid or did they merely oppose British attempts to force the South African govt to change. There is a difference: Many Australians deplored apartheid and the decision by a group of Australian cricketers to tour there, but also deplored the attempts by the Aust. Govt to stop the players from touring.)
• D'Oliveira was later left out of an England touring team to South Africa.

It seems clear to me that the contributor of this sentence means to link D'Oliveira's exclusion to Bedser's "support of apartheid". It may be true that Bedser was a supporter of apartheid and deliberately excluded Dolly on the basis of his colour but this chain of links is pretty thin support for such a claim, especially in what is supposed to be an encyclopaedia written from a neutral point of view. If the inference needs to be made, it needs to be attributed to someone, such as "XXXX linked Bedser's part in the exclusion of D'Oliveira from the 1968-69 England touring side to apartheid South Africa to his membership of The Freedom Association, a conservative grouping that, among other causes, opposed attempts to pressure South Africa to abandon its race-based discrimination." I am sure that others can improve on this. -- Mattinbgn\^talk 02:18, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

• The freedom association is a very right-wing body and I didn't see mention of it in either the guardian or the Torygraph obituary. The source for this sentence is also factually incorrect because its says that bedser was the chairman of the selection panel when in fact it was Doug Insole for the selection of the 68/69 touring party. Bedser became chairman in 1969 so I can't see that we can trust this source as particularly accurate on this point. I'm going to remove the sentence and we can discuss restoring it if better and more reliable sourcing is produced. Spartaz ^Humbug! 04:36, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

I think that the second half of the sentence could be restored. Bedser was one of the selectors who left d'Oliveira out of the team, as mentioned in The Telegraph and The Independent. There are also sources for his involvement in the Freedom Association, such as this, this and this. Whether the two things are linked is another matter. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't see that either fact is an issue in isolation but the problem is when they are linked in that way. It kinda implies he was a right-wing nut who deliberately left a black player out of a team from South Africa. That's a nasty sounding synthesis that needs better referencing then that. To be honest, given how right wing counter cricketers are supposed to be, being a member of the freedom association is hardly a surprise or notable. Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

I've reintroduced the material, sourced it, and removed the synthesis. I hope that this is acceptable. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Good article assessment

1. Has a neutral point of view More relativist facts are needed. Greater mention of the sides' associated achievements, of his acclaim, of wider effects such as on audiences, selection and captain's selection as bowler/batting order status vs other contemporaries/rivals and legacy with Surrey CC and the England Cricket Team would be interesting pithy facts for an A-rated article.
2. Reasonably clear
3. Organized adequately
4. No known factual errors
5. Appropriate categorization
6. Adequate in scope and proportion As above, scope is not yet grade A / Good article. But the article is already much more than a C in scope.
7. Uses style consistently within the article
8. Visually adequate (that is, not ugly)
9. Uses correct grammar, spelling and punctuation
10. Lists at least one appropriate reference, source, further information item, or external link. A link fulfills this obligation only if it connects to a reputable source. Government, professional or education sites are reputable for this purpose. Any external links must also still be valid (that is, still connect to the intended material).

• Overall rating: B. Could be A subject to others' views and minor improvements.- Adam37 Talk 15:33, 27 November 2016 (UTC)