Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

MR. CARR'S SUBMISSION TO DESTINY

In county matches the Notts captain, A. W. Carr, will "certainly" use Lanvood and Voce with legtraps, at the risk of bruising batsmen. Mr. Carr speaks thus as captain. In the next sentence Carr, the batsman, speaks, and says that he frankly hates to bat against this sort of attack, and personally he dislikes it, "but a captain's duty is to win matches." It seems, then, that Mr, Carr, who hates batting against bruise risks, will give the hateful orders to Messrs. Larwood and Voce, who will hate to obey. Yet a soldier's duty to his officer, and an officer's duty to his duty override everything else. There is, however, another man on the field—the umpire. He has not (or should not have) a duty to either side. Can umpiring be put on a basis that will enable the umpire to check things that the umpire hates—without taking the aggressiveness and the sting out of the noble game? The' conflict between love and duty has become so serious that something ought to be, done.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19330317.2.56

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 64, 17 March 1933, Page 6

Word Count
179

MR. CARR'S SUBMISSION TO DESTINY Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 64, 17 March 1933, Page 6

MR. CARR'S SUBMISSION TO DESTINY Evening Post, Volume CXV, Issue 64, 17 March 1933, Page 6