LAWN TENNIS.

Auckland Star, Volume XLIII, Issue 305, 21 December 1912, Page 16

LAWN TENNIS.

Mr. C. P. Dixon. <-aptain of the British isles tennis team. wa.s asked recently if he had noted any essential difference in the style of Australian and Enclish exponents of the game that has been holding attention =o much of late. "The great difference." lie said, is in the ground play. Our stand is much further away from the ball than yours, and we use aa extended stiffened arm. The Australian player stands over the ball, and hits, as it were, off hie body. Then, again, in backhand strokes w e play with the opposite face of the racquet" to that we use for the forehand. Australians use the same face by turning the wrist." The interviewer told of an argument he had listened to in the stand at Double Bay courts the other day as to whether he < Dixon i changed his grip for the backhand stroke. That stroke is undoubtedly one of the most powerful ofi the battery of the Englishman and his confreres. He settled that argument by seating' that he doesn't alter his grip, and he 1 doesn't think Pa-rke does. "Australians arc more Americanised in their game than Englishmen," he says. "You volley more than we do. I think the baseline game should be cultivated, more by Australians. The volley becomes bo much easier and so much "more often a winner when your baseline play i≤ good.' . Speaking of the present form of Aus- \ tralians. the English captain placed Brookes first. A. B. Jones second. Bice third, and Heath fourth. Ehmlop he regards a= a fine doubles player. But Mr. Dixon qualifies his placing by saying that Heath, should he reproduce the form he showed in England, would go up second to Brookes. A. B. Jones he regards as a born tennis player, needing only the experience of English tournaments to finish him off. Australia has a brilliant outlook so far as tennis i≤ concerned. Mr. Dixon thinks. "'Playing at the schools ac you do," he remarked, "you cet them starting much younger than we do. You haven't the number we have to select from, but what you h.*ve axe extraordinarily good.";

FOOTBALL. Recently several items appeared in. the English papers commenting on the treatment accorded the "Springboks. | Mr Max Honnet, the manager of th« ( South Africans, has stated that the ventilation of alleged grievances of the team against the treatment being meted out to them in England is unauthorised, and in many respects untrue. A few little matters did require adjustment, and most of them were at once set right when pointed out to the Rugby L'non, and the position is now quite satisfactory. If the South Africans had held to the text of the agreement approved by their Board there would not have been the slight<*st difficulty; and certain.y there has been no justification either for the post-prandial howl from Northampton or for the grossly exaggerated statements which have appeared in the London Press. The statement that noting was done for the entertainment of the Springtjoks in London is quite untrue. A fund was subscribed to by the various counties, and unless they are difficult to please, which certainly they have nut been, the players have had nothing to complain about in regard to their London experience.

Tremendous comment has followed the! Aus'-aKan - University of OaLforniaj game, and the collegians have been soundly criticised for their rough play.j Investigations show that at the time of l Tasker's expulsion, Coach Schaerler shouted to Referee Ashley, "Put that man off the field." Further, it was dis-| covered that when Schaeffer ran across the field, and engaged in an animated! conversation with l>r. Bohrsmann, tae| Australian manager, it was not for the purpose of proposing that the Australian; team should use a substitute for Tasker.' Dr. Bohrsmann staled that Schaeffern 1 conversation consisted of a tirade of abuse of Tasker, interspersed with much 1 swearing. The whole unfortunate affair was not allowed to remain a closed incident. The Australian manager d-emanded a trial for Tasker before the Califurn an Rug-by I'nion. under whose auspice-* the game was held. The union met, and the men in charge were asked to consid r whether Tasker's offence was such as fo entitle him to punishment in the way of suspension. The result of the invent -ration was that Tasker was exonerated by the California I'nion. who believed that tie failed to hear the referee's wins. le. Die California referee was mildly censured, and the union found that psi-' tively no blows were struck by either I Ta-sker or his opponent. Allen. j