SPORT AND POLITICS

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 19, 22 July 1933, Page 12

SPORT AND POLITICS

Lovelock's mile being, as we have conceded, a national and even international event, the tributes of the statesman (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister) and of the athlete (the French cham-pion-Ladoumegue) are in order, and it is rather a pity that the same unanimity of thought could not be found in the cricket issue. Mr. Bruce's insistence that the bumper-with-leg-field is a matter for "Marylebone and Australia alone," and that "other people" should "keep out," seems to be not very logical, and, in any case, to be suggestive of a greater tension than can really exist. Likewise, his appeal for a settlement "not by exchanging notesj but by coming face to face," emphasises, probably unnecessarily, the sense of strain; for though both notes and exchange are sore subjects with Australia and New Zealand in a currency sense, it is hard to believe ■ that the bumper has yet bounced beyond the level of polite correspondence. Lord Hailsham, it is to be noted, heaped all the English laurels on to the , Scottish captain, but it is solemnly cabled that the Scot actually blushed, and insisted on bringing Larwood into it, too. Then came Mr. Forbes's chance. He said quite wittily i that when the London Conference stood all ready with batting pads and wicket-keeping gloves, "somebody got away with the ball." Mr. Forbes stopped at the brink of a precipice. Had he said that President^ Roosevelt was an international Larwood, the American Consul would have had no course but to ask for his passports.