CRICKET CLIMAX

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 112, 4 February 1933, Page 18

CRICKET CLIMAX

Review of Australia’s Viewpoint

BODY-LINE BOWLING

“Since 1912, when the memorable dispute occurred between leading players and the Board of Control, Australian cricket has pursued the even tenor of its way undisturbed by storms of any magnitude,” writes Dr. Eric I’. Barbour, The one-time New South Wales player, in the “Sydney Morning Herald.” “During the past week we have reached the climax of a storm that has been brewing all through the season. That climax has been precipitated, not, as some are inclined to think, by Oldfield’s injury, and not, as others have unworthily suggested, by Australia’s defeat in the third Test. It has been brought to a head by two very serious protests, one by Woodfull, captain of the Australian eleven, the other by the Australian Board of Control. “Newspaper criticism has only been provocative of argument, and, as might be expected, has allowed the main issue to be obscured in a maze of repartee and biting rejoinder. But the action of the Australian captain and the controlling body immediately lifts the question out of the realms of a newspaper dispute into those of a pressing international crisis in the world of cricket. Woodfull is known throughout Australia and England as a sportsman of the first water; no Australian captain has ever been more highly respected, either by his own men or by his opponents. Matters must indeed be serious when he expresses himself as forcibly as he is reported to have done in Adelaide.

“We may not agree with all that the Board of Control does iu matters of policy, any more than we agree with all the actions of a Ministry which we have helped to put into office; but we must admit that the Board of Control is composed of men who are regarded as sportsmen in the best sense of the word, and to whom the welfare of the game of cricket is a more serious consideration than the winning or losing of a rubber. “They have seen fit to cable to the M.C.C., the controlling body of English cricket, two very grave statements, firstly, that in their opinion the policy of body bowling pursued by Jardine’s team is unsportsmanlike; secondly, that it has caused intensely bitter feeling among the players, and unless stopped at. once is likely to upset friendly relations existing between Australia and England, moaning, of course, cricket relations. Opposition in England. “It may now fairly be said that an overwhelming majority of Australian cricketers and enthusiasts has expressed its condemnation of the tactics. “By a majority verdict it stands condemned at the bar of public opinion. The question now is, what are we going to do about it? There are many who, like the writer, would have fe.t more comfortable if the board had not sent any formal protest. We all cling tightly to our own estimate of ourselves as sportsmen, and tend to resent any action that might lead other people to think that we are ‘squealers or bad sportsmen. “The Board of Control is taking u broader and bigger view. Personal considerations and amour propre do not weigh so heavily with them as the proud position of the great game of cricket, and the Imperial relations connected with it. “If a man of the mild nature of Woodfull cannot restrain himself at the present juncture, what may happen among the more hot-headed members of the side, whose patience is daily and weekly being worn out by a continuance of tactics that make it impossible for them to play decent cricket, and subject them to constant physical pain and discomfort?

Serious Disagreement.

“It is common property that serious disagreements have already occurred between .the members of the English team themselves on this question; is the board to wait until a personal clash takes place between members of opposing teams? “I am not suggesting that anything of the kind is contemplated, nor would it be applauded, but human nature can only stand a certain amount of goading, and the Board of Control, which should be in a position to know, evidently thinks that the players have reached the limit of their patience. And, in any case, why should our batsmen, great cricketers and great fellows, be called upon to endure a further battering extending over many weeks, just in order that armchair critics in Sydney and Melbourne mny be able to sit back and complacently congratulate themselves on being good sportsmen?

“Let us be fair. We hear of a lot of heroics from a few non-cricketers and a very few cx-cricketers, who say ‘Why don’t they stand up and take it?’ I do not believe that the majority of these critics would face the music for five minutes. I do not believe that there is in Australia, or in the world, for that matter, a fairer Sportsman than W, M. Woodfull, or a gamer player. I also believe that if the English batsmen had been subjected to their own attack, the tactics would have been stopped long before the third test. Hobbs refused to take it even for one match from Bowes, and Bowes is a joke in comparison to Larwood. Retaliation Not Kight. “The ideal solution of the matter would have been for Mr. Jardine to realise, even at this late hour, that his tactics are outside the pale of good sportsmanship, and voluntarily to withdraw them. It seems,' however, that he has gone so far with them that there is no likelihood of a withdrawal from the position he has taken up, unless instructed by the M.C.C. ‘‘For all that we know, the tactics that Jardine Is now using may have been dictated by that body, or by its selectors. "If could not have been an easy matter for the Board of Control to compose the cable that has been sent to the M.C.C., nor could it have been an. easy matter to send it. We may take it as certain that the board would not have taken so drastic a stop unless it had very definite facts before it for its justification.”