“BODY-LINE” AGAIN.

Evening Star, Issue 21433, 9 June 1933, Page 6

“BODY-LINE” AGAIN.

With a sublime disregard of unpleasant facts and the cool hauteur which has so endeared a certain type of English visitor to snobbish colonials, the London ‘ Times ’ cricket correspondent in mid-April penned an article ostensibly reviewing the prospects of the West Indies cloven now touring England. Its real purpose, however, may be gauged from one or two extracts. The article opens thus: “The elaborate care taken last season by the Selection Committee of the M.C.C. has been amply rewarded by the success of their chosen players in Australia, a success the glory of which no palaver about * body-lino ‘ bowling can dim. Had the Australian Board of Control not been cajoled into recording the displeasure of a portion of the Australian public in a formal telegram to the M.C.C., who perforce had to send a courteous reply, it is possible that by now Larwood’s achievement would bo regarded in the proper perspective, in plain words, he bowled exceedingly well to a not over-strong Australian team, and is to be thanked for his share in reminding the world in general that the game of cricket does' not rely entirely upon the Ability of batsmen to make huge scores.” After advocating that the selectors must choose the very best English team to meet the West Indians in view of an Australian eleven visiting England in 1934, “ should the Australian authorities decide that cricket is a good game,” the writer works in a tactless innuendo in his closing appreciation of the West Indians as “ taken in all a handy, and certainly an agreeable, team, who should help us to forget a lot of the nonsense which has been both spoken and written during the last few months.” Since then the same West Indians gave at Lords a modified exposition of the body-line type of bowling, Constantine being the chief exponent. A little damage was done, and Hendren helped publicity by hiding his head in a home-made helmet. Now Bowes, a half-formed player of out size, whose last-minute inclusion in the team against Australia surprised himself as much as anyone, has been sweetening the Red and White Rose relations by “ bumping ” Watson out. retired hurt with a smashed face. And, lastly, Hobb’s has again spoken out bravely. In his choice of strokes Hobbs was (and still is) an artist. In his choice of words he is no less happy. Ho saw Larwood, Voce, and Bowes in Australia, and he says that the type of attack they exploited is “a most venomous thing,” and its purpose was to intimidate , the batsmen. The ‘ Times’s ’ cricket correspondent has always been a great admirer of Hobbs as a player. Will he now turn round and rend Hobbs as a critic of cricket? Is the deserved epithet, “a venomous thing,” merely more palaver about body-line bowling? Is Larwood still to be thanked for habitually using something which Hobbs says it is absolutely wrong for anyone to use at any time? One thing is certain: English professional cricketers, especially the batsmen, will unanimously thank Larwood for deciding that his foot injury must keep him out of the game this summer.