M.C.C. REPLIES

Southland Times, Issue 22041, 14 June 1933, Page 7

M.C.C. REPLIES

MISLEADING TERM “BODY-LINE BOWLING” NEW LAW UNSUITABLE BARRACKING CRITICIZED (United Press Assn—Telegraph Copyright.) London, June 12. The Marylebone Cricket Club, in a 700-word cable in reply to the Australian Board of Control, says that it has carefully considered the board’s cable of April 28 and also the reports of the English captain and the managers. It adds: “We consider that the term ‘body-line bowling’ is misleading and improper. It has led to much inaccuracy of thought by confusing a short, bumping ball, whether directed to the off, middle or leg stump, with what is known as the leg theory. The term ‘body-line’ would appear to imply a direct attack by the bowler _ on the batsmen. The committee considers that such an implication applied to any English bowler in Australia is improper and incorrect. Such action on the party of any bowler would be an offence against the spirit of the game, and would be immediately condemned. “The practice of bowling on the leg stump with the field placed on the leg side, as is necessary for such bowling, is legitimate and has been in force for many years. It was generally referred to as the leg theory. The present habit of some batsmen to move in front of the wicket with the object of "gliding straight balls to leg tends to give an impression that the bowler is bowling at the batsman, especially in the case of a fast bowler when the batsman mistimes the ball and is hit. Proposed New Law.

“The new law recommended by the board does not appear to the committee practicable. Firstly, it would place an impossible task on the umpire; and secondly, it would place in the hands of the umpire a power over the game more than dangerous which any umpire might well fear to exercise. The committee has had no reason to give special attention to the leg theory as practised by fast bowlers.” The committee will watch carefully during the present season for anything which can be regarded as unfair or prejudicial to the best interests of the game, and proposes to invite opinions and suggestions from county club captains at the end of the season with a view to expressing their opinion at a special meeting. Regarding the report of the captain and the managers, the committee, while deenly appreciative of the private and public hospitality shown to the Englishmen, is much concerned about barracking, which is referred to in all the reports and of which there is unanimous deprecation. “Barracking is unfortunately always indulged in by spectators in Australia to a degree unknown in England,” states the committee. “During the late tour it would appear to have exceeded previous experience, occasionally being thoroughly objectionable. There appears to have been little or no effort on the part of those responsible for the administration of the game in Australia to interfere or control this exhibition and the team naturally regarded this as a serious lack of consideration to them.” Barracking Should Be Moderated.The committee is of the opinion that cricket played under such conditions is robbed of much of its value as a game unless the barracking in Australia is stopped or greatly moderated. It is difficult to see how a continuance of representative matches can serve in the best interests of the game. The committee regrets that these matters have to be dealt with by correspondence instead of a personal conference. If duly accredited representatives of Australian cricket would confer with the committee it would be welcomed by Marylebone. A prominent member of the M.C.C. told a representative of the Sun Service that the sub-committee’s report on body-line bowling would prove helpful in overcoming the trouble. AUSTRALIAN COMMENT POSITION “RATHER AGGRAVATED.” BOARD MEMBERS SURPRISED. (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 11.5 p.m.) Sydney, June 13. Official cricketing circles in Australia declare that the Marylebone report leaves the position precisely where it was a month ago; indeed rather aggravates it. The Sun’s cricket writer, _ A. G. Moyes, says the report emphasizes the necessity for sending a delegation to England. Don Bradman agrees with this view, and expresses the opinion that W. M. Woodfull is the very man for the job as he has had practical experience of body-line bowling. Bradman adds: “Marylebone is clouding the issue with a complaint about barracking,” and asks how anybody is going to stop angry protests from 50,000 infuriated onlookers whose grievance is mainly against intimidatory bowling. “If the M.C.C. wants to stop Tests on the ground of barracking, how much more necessary is it to stop them until dangerous bowling tactics are controlled? That is a question for the Board of Control to answer.” Bradman’s views are shared by other leading officials here and in Victoria South Australia. Members of the Board of Control are surprised at Marylebone making . the report public before submitting it to the Australian Board. Two members of the board express frank disappointment at its contents.