Editing Bodyline (section)

==Legacy==
Following the 1932–33 series, several authors, including many of the players involved, released books expressing various points of view about bodyline. Many argued that it was a scourge on cricket and must be stamped out, while some did not see what all the fuss was about.<ref>Frith, pp. 378–397.</ref> The series has been described as the most controversial period in Australian cricket history,<ref name=c171>Colman, p. 171.</ref> and it was voted the most important Australian moment by a panel of Australian cricket identities.<ref>Haigh and Frith, foreword.</ref> The MCC asked [[Harold Larwood]] to sign an apology to them for his bowling in Australia, making his selection for England again conditional upon it. Larwood was furious at the notion, pointing out that he had been following orders from his captain, and that was where any blame should lie.<ref>Frith, pp. 399–401.</ref> Larwood refused, never played for England again,<ref name="p141"/> and became vilified in his own country.<ref>Frith, pp. 437–441.</ref> Douglas Jardine always defended his tactics and in the book he wrote about the tour, ''In Quest of the Ashes'', described allegations that the England bowlers directed their attack with the intention of causing physical harm as stupid and patently untruthful.<ref>Douglas, p. 157.</ref> The immediate effect of the law change which banned bodyline in 1935 was to make commentators and spectators sensitive to the use of short-pitched bowling; bouncers became exceedingly rare and bowlers who delivered them were practically ostracised.<ref>Frith, pp. 410–17.</ref> This attitude ended after the Second World War, and among the first teams to make extensive use of short-pitched bowling was the Australian team captained by Bradman between 1946 and 1948. Other teams soon followed.<ref>Frith, pp. 418–20.</ref>

Outside the sport, there were significant consequences for Anglo-Australian relations, which remained strained until the outbreak of World War II made cooperation paramount. Business between the two countries was adversely affected as citizens of each country avoided goods manufactured in the other. Australian commerce also suffered in British colonies in Asia: the ''[[North China Daily News]]'' published a pro-bodyline editorial, denouncing Australians as sore losers. An Australian journalist reported that several business deals in [[Hong Kong]] and [[Shanghai]] were lost by Australians because of local reactions.<ref>Frith, p. 382.</ref> English immigrants in Australia found themselves shunned and persecuted by locals, and Australian visitors to England were treated similarly.<ref>Frith, p. 383.</ref> In 1934–35 a statue of [[Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha|Prince Albert]] in Sydney was vandalised, with an ear being knocked off and the word "BODYLINE" painted on it.<ref>Frith, p. 384.</ref> Both before and after World War II, numerous satirical cartoons and comedy skits were written, mostly in Australia, based on events of the bodyline tour. Generally, they poked fun at the English.<ref>Frith, pp. 381, 385.</ref>

In 1984, Australia's [[Network Ten]] produced a television mini-series titled ''[[Bodyline (miniseries)|Bodyline]]'', dramatising the events of the 1932–33 English tour of Australia. It starred [[Gary Sweet]] as Don Bradman, [[Hugo Weaving]] as Douglas Jardine, [[Jim Holt (actor)|Jim Holt]] as Harold Larwood, [[Rhys McConnochie]] as Pelham Warner, and [[Frank Thring]] as Jardine's mentor [[George Harris, 4th Baron Harris|Lord Harris]].<ref name="f386"/> The series took some liberties with historical accuracy for the sake of drama, including a depiction of angry Australian fans burning a [[Flag of the United Kingdom|British flag]] at the Adelaide Oval, an event which was never documented.<ref name="f386">Frith, p. 386.</ref> Larwood, having emigrated to Australia in 1950, was largely welcomed with open arms, although received several threatening and obscene phone calls after the series aired.<ref name="f387">Frith, p. 387.</ref> The series was widely and strongly attacked by the surviving players for its inaccuracy and [[sensationalism]].<ref name="f387"/>

To this day, the bodyline tour remains one of the most significant events in the [[history of cricket]], and it is still strong in the consciousness of many cricket followers. In a poll of cricket journalists, commentators, and players in 2004, the bodyline tour was ranked the most important event in cricket history.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/02/07/1075854114533.html |title=It just wasn't cricket |work=[[Sydney Morning Herald|The Sun-Herald]] |access-date=4 December 2006 |date=8 February 2004}}</ref>