U.S.A. RETAINS DAVIS CUP

Greymouth Evening Star, 6 September 1938, Page 7

U.S.A. RETAINS DAVIS CUP

A CLOSE FINISH BUDGE AND BROMWICH WIN [BY CABLE —PRESS ASSN. —COPYBIGHT.] (Recd. September 5, 11 a.m.) PHILADELPHIA, September 5. In the Davis Cup (second singles) Budge beat Quist 8/6, 6/1. 6/2. Bromwich beat Riggs 6/4, 4/6, ’6/0, 6/2. America retained the Clip by three matches to two. Success with passing shots 1 in the early part of the first set gave Quist a 3/1 lead, but Budge drew level at 3/3. The games then alternated with the sei’vice. There was a peculiar incidents in the tenth game, when Quist was leading 40/15. A foot-fault judge called three foot-faults against Quist, completely upsetting the Australian, and seemingly having the same effect on Budge. The crowd booed, and Paul Gibbons, who was 1 umpiring, cautioned the spectators that • “footfaults are part of the game.” Budge dropped three points successively, apparently without trying, thus giving the Australian the game. Breaks in service occurred in the eleventh and twelfth, each dropping a. game, and the score stood at 6/6. Quist stood 40/15 to break Budge’s service again in the thirteenth, but the American recovered to take the game with the loss of only one more point. The footfault judge called two footfaults against Quist in the fourteenth game, and the crowd jeered unmercifully. Gibbons angrily cautioned the audience that “footfaults are footfaults and should be called. This is a most unsporting protest against them. The Australian captain agrees with me on that.” Budge, thereafter, sportingly dropped the two points, which the footfaulting cost Quist, but the latter seemed unnerved, and dropped the game, after deuce, and the set.

lii the second set, Quist outed repeatedly, and the American led 4/0. Quist won the fifth game on Budge’s service, but was unable to carry on the revival, and lost the set 1/6. In the third set, both played spottily. Quist lost his service twice, and Budge once. Quist’s service, however, returned to form in the fourth game, which he won. The American took the next two games for a lead of 5/1. Quist won the seventh, but it was only a brief interlude, and he went under in the eighth, Budge winning the match, and thus 1 retaining the Cup for the United States.

BROMWICH-RIGGS DUEL In the first set, Bromwich and Riggs each lost their service. Bromwich won his service in the third game, but- Riggs again dropped, his, giving the Australian a 3/1 lead. Riggs drew level at 3/3. At this stage, the tennis became amusing, both dropshotting frequently. Riggs showed surprising ability to score points from these, but Bromwich netted little easy ones, and the crowd was hilarious. The games alternated with the service until Bromwich won the ninth, breaking Riggs’s service, and he took the set by winning the tenth, with cool placements after forcing the American out of position. In the second set, when the score was 2/2, the players again tried to out-trick each other, with dropshots, and, again, Riggs had the better'of it. who lost his service in the seventh, and who lost his service in thes eventh, and the American led 4/3, which he improved to 5/3, after the best game of the match, in which, after long sustained rallies the American’s lobs or volleys ultimately proved ungettable. Bromwich won his service in the ninth, but Riggs settled matters in the tenth with a series of beautiful smashes, and passing shots. In the third set, playing with sustained precision, Bromwich had the better of it throughout. The American contested every point, but the Australian had just a little more “on the ball.”

In the final set, the Australian was too steady for his opponent, who netted or outed most of his shots. Bromwich had a lapse, after leading 5/0, Riggs winning the sixth and seventh games, and the American was leading 40/15, in the eighth, when Bromwich applied the necessary pressure to win the game set, and match.

FOOT-FAULTING CALLS UMPIRES CROSS-EXAMINED (Rec. Sept. 6, Noon) PHILADELPHIA, Sept. 5. Harold Lebair who called the footfaults against Quist, later explained: “Quist leaped into the air when serving, and clearly foot-faulted.” When asked why he, alone, called foot-faults, he shrugged his shoulders 1 ? Interviewed by the Australian Associated Press correspondent, Lebair said: “Quist had both feet off the ground every time I foot-faulted him. He was simply violating the rules.” The correspondent askea: “Did he footfault before the tenth game?” “No! I called the first foot-fault I saw,” said Lebair. The correspondent asked: “Did he footfault after the last you called.” Lebair replied: “Yes! He repeatedly footfaulted after that.” “Why didn’t you call them,” asked the correspondent. “I didn’t because the man’s game after that was completely demoralised,” stated Lebair. Mr. Shaw interviewed, by the Australian Associated Press correspondent said Quist did not foot-fault on his side of the court. Asked why, Shaw replied, “Because he was facing into the sun, and did not jump up.” The correspondent asked: “But yon believe he foot-faulted on Lebair’s side?”

“Yes, because I saw him repeatedly jump off the ground on the first day, and therefore I know he footfaults that way, but the only thing that saved him on Saturday was the spiked shoes, which kept him in contact with the ground. However, this is a silly rule, and should be removed from the rules book.” “COST ME THE MATCH” . Quist, on leaving the court, told the Australian Associated Press correspondent: ‘lt was horrible! How can I be expected to play tennis if I am not allowed to serve. Those footfaults cost me the match even before the contest was well on its way. There was simply nothing I seemed able to do after

I the tenth game. I was pretty well at the top of my game before that, aad ( would not have allowed the match to g go so easily.” _f| Shaw, who' was interviewed by the '.'T Associated Press is Louis Shaw, the second judge. -E HOPMAN’S STATEMENT } Hopman, interviewed by the Asso- 4?- . ciated Press said: Bromwich’s victory simply reaffrmed our strategy. 44 | Quist should have defeated Riggs on Saturday. He did not because his game broke up after the foot-faults began. his attack, even his resistance, broke up, and he was simply unable to maintain the pace necessary to win. Footfaults to-day again emphasised the problem. They came both days when he was fighting to an advance, and -5; ; each time they robbed him of the spirit. 1 am not saying this because I am I complaining against the judge. Quist.s% ! has been really foot-faulting. There jg'’ has been unending controversy over that part of the rule forbidding both feet off the ground. It is beside the point whether the rule should be altered. It is essential that Quist should learn not to violate it. “We had a valiant able team. They did well and they learned Ig; much of value. Bromwich is now ~ strongly advancing to number one position in world tennis iii 1939, if Budge becomes professional, as pro- 4. bably he will. Bromwich said he was satisfied with 1 his showing against Riggs, who how- 4" ever, it must be admited, lost most -/•», of the incentive, after the challenge g? victory. I am looking forward to the National Singles, with a great deal of S’:pleasure, since it will be a genuine, .54 test of the relative values of the 4 ) world players.” *

PRESS COMMENT.

NEW YORK, September 5.

Referring to Australia’s victory in 4; 'the Davis Cup doubles, some experts insist that it bears out their “pos- 4-' sum-playing” prophecy. John Gardner, the tennis critic for the North American Newspaper Al- 57: liance, comments: “These iron Anzacs S/j are the world’s swiftest and shrewdest doubles team, and the most untrustworthy. They are so full of guile S > that they even fool themselves. The 4... moral is never trust an Australian; 4;. doubles team further than you’ can throw a Sunday paper.” No one has yet suggested that Budge '7 j and Mako are “playing possum” for. -4,; the 1939 match. 47