Strictures on bumpers are not called for

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33779, 27 February 1975, Page 1

Strictures on bumpers are not called for

(By <

R. T. BRITTENDEN)

If Peter Lever plays in tomorrow’s test match, it is not likely that he will have any strictures put on his use of the bumper as an attacking or disconcerting weapon. Nor should he.

The affable M.C.C. manager, Mr Alec Bedser, said yesterday that the umpires were in control of the match. He did not take it any furI ther than that, nor need he have done.

There is a good, usually observed unwritten law that bumpers are not bowled at very late'-order batsmen. But there are proper variations of this. The accident Ewen Chatfield suffered was regrettable. But his very ability to defy England’s bowlers for 75 minutes removed him from the rabbit class. And that is where the “union rule" about bumpers is overridden.

A number in the batting order often establishes the ability of a player to defend himself from the shortpitched ball. But not always. Some strong teams have had extremely good batsmen very late in the order. Chatfield, to be sure, has had a very short first-class career, and certainly had not distinguished himself as a batsman. But a player able to defy a test attack for an hour and a quarter and add more than 40 runs with his partner is bound to lose some of the sympathy normally accorded a batsman of limited capabilities. It should also not be overlooked that accidents such as .this are not uncommon. 'There have been many in-

stances of batsmen being injured: the risk which has to be taken is part of the game. Some of them have come from full-length balls which have reared spectacularly on damaged pitches; in those conditions, a bowler has to pitch the ball somewhere.

It was a pity, of course, that with more than five hours left for play Lever did not feel capable of dismissing Chatfield without recourse to the bumper. But there was nothing unfair about it, and there is no question but that Lever himself suffered agonies of remorse at the effect of the delivery

If there was anything which could be described as good about the incident, it was the handling of the situation by the principals— Chatfield himself, Mike Denness. and Bevan Congdon. There were no recriminations, because none were warranted. There were no seizures of hysteria. Everyone interested in cricket felt deeply sorry that Chatfield’s gallant defence ended in such a manner. He won full marks for his stouthearted effort. But the accident should not in any way diminish the pleasure of having an England team on Lancaster Park again.