PASSING OF DR. BARBOUR

Northern Advocate, 29 December 1934, Page 2

PASSING OF DR. BARBOUR

STUDENT OF CRICKET. - ■ TECHNICAL, PRACTICAL AND ■ • , ADMINISTRATIVE. A comparatively young man, Dr. E. P. ;Barbour, who died in 'Sydney re- ’ ; cently, was an uncommon combin- ; Ration in the game of cricket, in which . he excelled at school, at the University, for'the State, while on active . -service, and on furlough in England ;'(writes Mr J. C, Davis in the “Re‘'feree”). . h In his prime he was good enough to -i play for Australia against England, as •> a bailsman, had he uninterruptedly fol? . lowed, up first-class cricket. A discriminating and zealous student in " cricket’s every angle, he was also an = accomplished writer on the problems, the play, and the players. While on active service in Egypt—he was a captain in the A.M.C.—he made 1 two centuries in one match at Gezireh

' against an English team that included -. some very fine players. He also had • the honour of making a century on Lord’s classic pitch for one of the • A.I.F. teams against a combination of high-grade English and South African players.

It is given to few Australian cricketers to possess so rich a knowledge of the technical, the practical, and the administrative angles in cricket, and to possess the power to vividly convey that knowledge to his readers. It :is worthy of record that as student he also excelled, having passed the junior examination, taking A’s in all his subjects (seven), and getting other honours. At the University his intellectual qualities were rated very highly; and in all sections of his life his sturdy character was recognised. He had written one excellent book —“The Making of a Cricketer,’’ and had he lived to enjoy a serene old age he must have turned out a few more books, more redolent of the actual play, and worthy of Australian cricket and ita riches.

It is a singular coincidence that Dr. . Leslie Poidevin, who died three years ago, was a similarly able batsman, good enough- to play for Australia against England, but did not. He, too, was a writer, on the game of similar excellence, erudition, and charm, and fulfilled the role of specialist writer on Test cricket and other high-class play for the “Sydney Morning Herald”—a post Dr. Barbour later succeeded to. , Is there a suggestion in these coincidences that journalism is an exacting mistress for men who become specialists in the noble game of cricket, while fulfilling the onerous responsibilities of their own profession of medicine? It is probably just a coincidence.