BRADMAN’S REPLY

Southland Times, Issue 22011, 10 May 1933, Page 5

BRADMAN’S REPLY

LARWOOD’S OUTBURST NOT AFRAID OF FAST BOWLER FINGLETON’S RETORT (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright ) Sydney, May 9. Don Bradman, writing in the Daily Telegraph, states: “I resent very much Larwood’s accusation of being afraid and emphatically deny it. Actually my method o'f playing Larwood exposed me to more danger than the orthodox way. Anybody who understands cricket knows that. However, Larwood’s statement was apparently a financial success even if it was a failure otherwise. If Australian Test umpires disclosed everything that occurred on the field it might not assist Larwood in his supposed revelations.” J. H. Fingleton says: “Larwood seems to be making so much money lately that he can afford to throw his mental balance to the winds. We have no delusions about the intentions of Larwood and Voce, who . sought for over after over to stave-in Australian ribs, while their English cohorts —a number of them as disgusted as we were with such tactics—were herded like sheep at short leg. Australian players could indulge in a heap of mud-slinging, but to what advantage? The whole business is sickening.” “CRIME AGAINST CRICKET” ATTEMPTS TO CAUSE FRICTION. (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 8 p.m.) London, May 9. The editor of Sporting Life in a front page pronouncement headed “Crime against Cricket,” protests against the sedulous attempts of a section of the Press to cause permanent friction between the cricket authorities in England and Australia, and adds that he can to some extent sympathize with Larwood, but his remarks were illtimed, unwise, provocative, and not cricket. BODY-LINE TACTICS ENGLISH TEAM DIVIDED. LARWOOD ACCEPTS CHEQUE. (United Press Assn. —Telegraph Copyright.) London, May 8. D. R. Jardine and Mr R. C. M. Palairet visited Lord’s and saw several of the committeemen of the M.C.C., including the president, Lord Hailsham, and lodged a report of the tour. The full committee will consider the report on May 15. Despite reiterated testimony as to the team’s comradeship and solidarity, inner circles suggest that when the managers and players appear before the Marylebone Committee a sharp division of opinion will be found regarding the tactics employed. It is expected that Mr P. F. Warner will reveal that he and several players objected to body-line bowling on which Jardine was insistent, allegedly with Mr Palairet’s support. H. Verity, interviewed, said: “I think Australia is a better side than the results indicate and will be far harder to beat in England.” W. R. Hammond declares: “Australia has a great side and is building up a lot of youngsters of exceptional talent.” Harold Larwood states that the Sunday Express cheque has “been returned to me and this time I mean to stick to it.”

Mr Thomas Moult, in the Daily Telegraph, says a special meeting of Marylebone to consider the reports of Messrs Jardine, Warner and Palairet will be held directly Mr Warner returns from America this week. On a general principle Mr Warner, Wyatt and Sutcliffe are definitely opposed to the use of the leg-theory in England. The emphatic denial that Larwood bowled outside the leg stump during the Tests and therefore at the batsman’s body has cleared the air considerably. For Marylebone to be convinced of the fairness of the method it now only remains to be established that Larwood did not make the ball rise in order to endanger the batsman’s head. Larwood's deliveries were seldom higher than a batsman’s thighs and it was the spectacular manner in which the batsmen ducked that made his bowling look dangerous. Marylebone will also consider the circumstances of Larwood’s interview.