PRESS COMMENT

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 15, 19 January 1933, Page 9

PRESS COMMENT

"UNSPORTSMANLIKE"

PHRASE * RESENTED

(Eeeeived 19th January, 1 p.m.)

LONDON, 18th January. The newspapers how generally refer in the cricket controversy to the Australian phrase "body-line bowling" or "body bowling." The "Daily Telegraph," referring to the Board of Control's protest, says:— "If the usual practice is followed the first news of Marylebone's reply; will come from Australia. The normal procedure is not to publish hero any official noto till it has been received in Australia. Tho subject now raised is sure to receive long and careful consideration. Australia's protest is so vital _ and the reply may be so farreaching that any hurried decision is impolitic." '

"Daily Mail,"" in a leader, says: "Though the Australian protest will receive tho M.C.C. ?s careful consideration, the suggestion that Anglo-Austra-lian relations are likely to be upset cannot surely bo meant seriously. Everyone in England will deeply regret the friction, but all sense of x'roportion would be lacking were a dispute over Test conditions to bo allowed to weaken even momentarily the strdng feeling of brotherhood linking Australia and Erieland." b

The "News-Chronicle," in a loader, says: "All reasonable people, whether English or Australian, should lose no time in energetically protesting against the last sentence in the board's cable.' It is perfectly monstrous, and shows a lack of perspective to suggest that Anglo-Australian relations will be disturbed unless a certain form of .bowling is immediately ma<Je illegal. If that is even a distantly possible result of the Tests, they should be stopped, but such a possibility is absurd and unintelligible."

The "Evening News," in a loader, fears that the board's protest will pour no oil on troubled waters. "It is a drastic thing publicly to accuse opponents of unsportsmanlike conduct. Cric-ket-lovers in England are not prepared to accept the accusation, without protest. The Australian Board may be right or wrong, but it should have the interests of tho game at heart. Legally, .Jardine's men are in tho right, .but

even if the leg theory is legal, is it discreet? The board's protest cannot have been easy to write, and the M.C.C.'s reply will be even harder." Carson, in the "Evening News," says: "The board's protest will be received with mixed feelings. The use of the word 'unsportsmanlike' is a diplomatic error, but if the board members think the game as played has caused more irritation- than enjoyment, they have grounds for complaint which must be considered." The "Evening Standard" says: "The board's protest is unprecedented. Neither side has previously accused the other of deliberately unfair tactics. Friendly Anglo-Australian relations are more important than Tests, but England is bound in justice to Jardine to repudiate the charge of unsportsmanlike conduct. The M.C.C. should be willing to listen to the request to alter the rules, but not in the middle of the Tests.'' The "Daily Herald," in an editorial, says: "The Australian Board of Control 's' protest at what it is pleased to call 'body-line' bowling' is untimely, and should have been held back till the Tests were ended. Ninety per cent, of cricket followers in England will label the protest as 'squealing.' Are they far wrong? The real facts are that Australia's batting with one or two exceptions has been below Test standard. Quick-footed batsmen, can punish the leg theory as well as any other bowling. When Australia finds them, they will kill the leg theory. In the meanwhile we hope the M.C.C. will be firm. There must be no sentimental climb-down."