THE L. B. W. RULE

Manawatu Times, Volume 61, Issue 11, 14 January 1936, Page 5

THE L. B. W. RULE

ENGLAND STANDS STAUNCH AUSTRALIAN AND SOUTH AFRICAN OPPOSITION WHAT OF THE FUTURE? In these times the course of cricket is not allowed to run smoothly for long, writes “Watchman” in tee London Observer on November 20. That old subject of contention, the leg-before-wicket rule, has now become prominent again as a cause of difference of opinion between England and Australia. Lord Hawke, full of good intentions, no doubt, but acting unofficially, sent a cablegram to the Australian Board of Control, in which he exuressed “the sincere hope” that the Board would “seriously reconsider their position” and allow their team to play under the new l.b.w rule during the tour in South Africa. Probably he imagined that the mere mention of his name would carry a tremendous influence with the Board. But in this rapid age, when the events of one week are almost forgotten oefore the end of the next, it is possible that some of the members of the Board had never so much as heard of Hawke’s name, just as many of a new generation have very hazy ideas of the qualities even of such a giants as “Ranji” and C. B. Fry. Anyhow, the Board were not impressed. They decline to go back on their decision. And on top of this there comes an announcement from Johannesburg that the Transvaal Cricket Union, following the example of the Western Province, have decided to revert to tee old rule after using the new last season.

The law which governs leg-beforc-wicket has agiated many minds for many years. When a change somewhat similar to that introduced last season was advocated so long ago as 1901 a vote taken at a special meeting of the M.C.C showed that 259 were in favour of it against ISB, but as tee necessary two-thirds majority was not obtained, no alteration could be made. The subject, however, continued to be debated until, in 1935, an experimental rule, which applied only to first-class matches made it possible for batsmen to be out to breaking or swerving balls that pitched outside the ofLstump. Opinions varied as to the extent of the benefit brought by the change, but even those who had been its foremost enemies admitted that if it did not work the miracles hoped for by its friends, it did not harm the game. At least the many calamities predicted by some people—ridiculous decisious, distracted umpires, matches reduced to farce on rain-affected pitches—did not enter. But evidently the governing body of Australia have no use for it. Otherwise they would willingly have tried it as an experiment in case it is made a permanent law.

Test Troubles m store. Now in an ordinary domestic year there is no need to worry ourselves about the way cricket is played in Australia on in South Africa or in any other country. Their bastmen could make up the rules as a game goes on, and none of us would shed tears. But the troubles may come with future Test matches.

There is a big probability that if the new l.w.b. law finds favour with the counties after another season of experiment it will be passed into the rules. Yet it seems possible that even in that event- such stubborn people as the Australians may still decline to accept the new conditious on their own grounds. In any event it is now unlikely that they will consent to play under the temporary rule when an England team go to Australia next autumn. If they did consent their own players, unfamiliar with it, would be at a big disadvantage when opposed to batsmen who had been given two seasons in which to make themselves' familiar to it, and the Australians are not the people to allow the opposition to load the dice against them. But if the next series of Test matches is played under the old rule the English batsmen who have reshaped the technique of their footwork to meet the new rule will be badly handicapped. There appear to be breakers ahead.

The danger is .that if cricket legislation continues on its present course there will gradually be evolved two different games of the same name. Already in Australia the over consists of eight balls instead of the old six, and the follow-on rule differs from that which applies in England. The' size of the wicket too, is allowed to be different to the extent of tw'o inches in height and width according to the choice of players outside English county cricket, and so far club players have stuck to the old leg-before rule. No game can flourish among players of all degrees unless it is governed strictly by uniform laws. What we have to fear is that a breach once made between club and count}', between country and country, may widen until the cricket W'hich the ordinary man or boy plays becomes of a different nature from the cricket that he watches. Such a condition of affairs would assuredly undermine popularity and stifle development.

Wherein the Blame. The recent changes have not been made necessary by any fundamental fault of cricket as it used to be fashioned. The increase in the size of the wicket came as a consequence of absurdly big scoring made possible by t.fte artificial preparation of pitches. The pitches, not the old size of the stumps, caused the mischeif. And th j change in the l.b.w. rule won support because flrst-class batsmen had got into such shocking bad habits and wandered so far from the path of rectitude tfa 1 -, they used their pads in preference to their bats. The players were to blame, not the oil rule.

It is lamentable tils- 1 . first-class cricket should have got into such a position that the M.C.C eons, der themselves obliged to legu aie ior a very small corner at thg expense of the greater world of cricket which sun plies the game with iis ’ife blood. For every county batsman there are ton thousand club batsmen. There was a time when the laws of the U.C.O ruled supreme everywhere. Cricket was the same in its principles at Toowoomba

as at Lord’s. Now the wieumstane js which get a man out at Trent Bridge or Old Tratfirl need not cut short an innings at Sydv.w or Jol annesburg; and the wicket which a piajer defends m a Saturday afternoon Lejrue mat til may be of a different size ti that whmn is in use on the net wi*i lg ground

The fact that an a Jt-’.ent'il yule adopted in th s rouutry )..t< not found fovour iu Australia makes it evid-'n' that since cricket has become an Imperial game, wirh . vines tttween one country and. another frequently exchanged, parochial leguU-ioi i; out of place. Before ovra t temporary chance in a rule is nude, something n oro than the blessing of :be co t captein is now desirable. The imperial Conference must have a vjie s Otherwise only fog and muddle can result, as it the case to-day.

Squash Racquets Champion. Without the loss of a game, J. Dear (Princes Club) beat D. G. Butcher (Conservative -Club) (holder), for the professional squash racquets championship of the British Isles. In the first half of the month Dear won by 9—3, 9—4, 9 —3, w r hile in the second part the scores in favour of Dear were 9—4, 9—l, 9—o.