LEG BEFORE WICKET

Evening Star, Issue 18136, 28 November 1922, Page 7

LEG BEFORE WICKET

INFLUENCE ON MODERN BATTING At the conclusion of every cricket season in England tie law of leg before wicket and its influence on batting comes under review. A special correspondent in the London ‘Observer 1 urges that something might be done to make the Ibw rule a, little move just to the bowler, or, more accurately, to the fielding side. The modern batting method of using the ieet for the purpose of doing all kinds of unorthodox things lias naturally resulted, ho says, in batsmen talcing additional risks, and the large proportion of those who pay the inevitable penalty k easily seen, by a glance through the score sheets of any series of first-class matches. The Ibw rule which is in force to-day is as follows i—“ That batsman is out if with any part of his person he stops the ball which, in tho opinion of the umpire at tho bowler's wicket, shall have been pitched in a straight lino from it to the striker’s wicket, and would have hit it.” Tho words “from it” wore not in the rule prior to about 1810, when the present rule was drafted. It is said that at the time there was a, dispute between the two leading umpires of the day as to hoiv tho rule should 1 he interpreted, one coni,ending that tho proper interpretation was the one which prevails 10-day, and the other that it was immaterial where tho ball pitched. Tho question was, referred to the JLC.C., who interpreted, tho rule as it stands to-day. Until about twenty years ago a batsman would have been called a poor sportsman if he adopted the views of the more modern writers of cricket text books. To quote one of the most popular of them, ,IL J. Knight, “there is nothing wrong nor contrary to tho spirit of the game in bringing tho legs back together in front of the wicket and behind the bat, to act as an extra defence, so long as tho ball has pitched off the wicket,” The vicious practice gradually crept in. Mr _MacLaren’s learn .that visited Australia in 1902 resorted to this second line of defence in greater measure than any Louring combination before or since. In fact, Tom Hayward, who established .so many firev wicket partnerships with his captain during that tour, admitted, on retiring from the game, that his legs had saved his wicket hundreds of times during his career. In the year before this the matter had been seriously dismissed by the yd.C.G., and a motion was actually carried, but without sufficient majority, to alter the 'rule, making it immaterial where tho ball was pitched as long ns it would have hit tho wicket. Tho lion. R. 11. Lyttelton, who fought for years for the amendment, was present at "that meeting, ami slated subsequently (bat he was convinced that it was not generally understood that if logs were kepi clear of the wicket uebedy couldi be Ibw. Latterly it lias become a practice among Australian bataiftcu to take every advantage of the loose wording of the law. There are men who would have scorned to practice in their youth, who since developed it to the last degree. But it may be taken as a general rule that the moro aggressive batsmen avoided it whenever necessary. Trumper may have used his

legs to protect his wicket, but one cannot recall an instance i'ter having seen him at the wickets for very many years in ah grades of cricket. Yet his partner in the opening test matches, R,. A. Duff, frequently used it'. Jessop and Ranjitsinhji chose to keep their legs clear ol the ball; Quaifo and Lilley, on the othey hand, would play a- whole over with their lege. According to reviews of the last two English seasons, there is a strong feeling among players that the Ibw rule as now interpreted is not only grossly unfair - to bowlers, but is having an evil effect on the style of batting. If it wove possible to lake a vote of players in Sheffield Shield and county cricket, one feels that a strong majority would favor the amendment of the law. Playing the bowling with the lege has been always distasteful to the barrackere, especially Australians, and if it continues to be a, tactical means of defence tho game must decline in popular favor. . Only six cases of ibw occurred in the years 1870-79 in the Gentlemen v. Players series of matches; in 1905-14 there were thirty-five. The deadly easiness of the modern, wicket made the bowler’s lot a hard one: he would welcome the disappearance of the severe ha.ndicap the present rule imposes on him. Look at batting antj bowling averages. Note the enormous number of runs still scored from bowlers. Freeman, the best siow bowler in England, gets an average of three wickets for 169 runs at Adelaide, while the two_ Richardsons, not yet fully Known to classic cricket, get a century each, mainly at his expense. It is possible, to argue that lege as well as bat should be used to protect the wicket? It is only necessary to mention the four principal ©ejections to the change to show how little weight they carry ." that it would make umpiring more difficult; that on slow bowlers’ wickets batting would lie too difficult; that it would be Impossible to play the- modem leg break and swerve bowler; and that the change was saij to he a failure when tried in second-class county matches twenty seasons ago.