INCLUSION OF LARWOOD

Taranaki Daily News, 19 June 1934, Page 7

INCLUSION OF LARWOOD

CONTROVERSY STILL RAGES ‘CHOICE OF ELEVEN, NOT ONE’ COMMENT OF A SELECTOR OPINIONS VERY DIVERGENT By Telegraph—Press Assn—Copyright. Rec. 7 p.m. ■ London, June 18. The News-Chronicle reveals that the selectors had definitely decided to include Larwood in the team for the next cricket match, but Sir Stanley Jackson, one of the selectors, referring to Larwood says the selectors meeting to-day to pick the English team “will select eleven men, not one.” “It is simply absurd to suggest that the Australians are afraid to face .Larwood,” says Lord Hailsham, president of the M.C.C. “His statements are grossly discourteous to the Australians.” “The only person who prevented Larwood from playing in the first test was himself,” continued Lord Hailsham. “Larwood said he was unfi‘ when the team was chosen and I have always understood that that was why he was not Mr. P. F. Warner, in the Daily Telegraph, says the whole of the present tour has shown how glad the English are to see the Australians again and on what pleasant lines the tests are playable. No individual, however great a cricketer, should interfere with that amity. “Howcan* Larwood’s allegation of Marylebone’s shilly-shallying be justified,” Mr. Warner asks, “when Marylebone cabled the Australian Board of Control stating that any implication that made a direct attack on a batsman was improper and incorrect? “Larwood’s assertion that conspirators are trying to hound him s put of the game is absurd. It is difficult to "understand the attitude of Carr, who knows perfectly well the difference between the leg theory and what the Australians call bodyline.” Mr. Douglas McCraith, a Nottinghamshire committeeman, says Larwood has ,been badly treated throughout. “Marylebone has now sacrificed him on the altar of Imperialist sentiment,” he adds, ‘ I watched Larwood hundreds of times and I have never seen anything unfair.” NO POLTICAL DISCUSSION. Mr. J. H. Thomas, Dominion Secretary, says that neither directly nor indirectly has there been any discussion with politicians in regard to Larwood either in Australia or here. “It is unfortunate that Larwood has dragged politicians into his grievance against somebody,” he said. Sir Stanley Jackson declared: “I am most sorry that Larwood has put a name to these statements. It cannot do him or anyone else or cricket any good.” “While the Board of Control’s agreement prevents players from expressing their opinion on Larwood’s latest outburst the general feeling in the Australian team is one of relief that no more will be seen, though perhaps a good deal more will be heard, of this stormy petrel in tests,” says the Australian Press Association. “There has not been the slightest suggestion of friction on the tour thus far and the effect of the Larwood thunderstorm may simply be a final clearing of the air, allowing the tests to proceed according to clean, hard schedules.” "Insofar as the Board of Control* is concerned I do not think that anything mentioned in the Larwood articles calls for comment by me,” said Mr. H. Bushby, manager of the Australian team. “The position arising from the recent English tour of Australia is closed as far as the Board of Control and the M.C.C. are concerned. We have had a very happy tour so far and I d 6 not intend to be drawn into a controversy on incidents we regard as closed. I do not acknowledge any political influence.” Referring to an unauthorised version of the team’s reaction to Larwood’s article, Mr. Bushby emphasised that he alone was authorised to make a statement to the press. “Despite the fact that Bradman played at Northampton I think his thigh injury is more serious than expected,” Mr. Bushby added. “He entered a London nursing home to-day for electrical treatment but I am medically advised that it is questionable whether he will be available for the second test.” VISITING MANAGER’S OPINION. Mr. Tom Clarke, the well-known journalist, writing in the Daily Mail, says: “The Australians have been given to understand that bodyline bowling, which is a dangerous and intimidating form of attack, is no longer accepted as cricket. Moreover, the majority of the county captains have decided that it is not cricket. The Australians came here on that understanding and if it is broken they will have the right to walk off the field.”/ , „ “It is a pity Larwood has followed Jardine in burning his boats,” adds Mr. Clarke, “but temperamental ebullitions cannot stampede public opinion from the right.” Describing Larwood as the best bowler in the world, Voce, who claims to be an old friend, said: “Larwood saved a lot of trouble in the first test by declaring that he was unfit, which prevented an invitation to play. Bowes bowls the legtheory and I believe that is why he was not invited to play in the first test. “If it is not that some of the smaller towns are dependent on the incomes from the test match, I would say that the answer ought to be: ‘Stay away from the tests.’ The gates will be lower without Larwood. Would Australia omit Bradman to 'humour us? If this is the end of Larwood’s career it will be the most disgraceful thing that has ever happened in English cricket. “McCabe is Australia’s own answer to leg-theory. I have seen him hit Larwood and me all over the ground. I believe that Chipperfield can hit legtheory, that Woodfull and Ponsford cannot and that Bradman is nervous. It takes a quick-footed batsman to deal with it. Through Larwood we are only giving Australia what MacDonald gave us in 1921,” Voce concluded. “Larwood’s declaration that he will not play simplifies the task of . the English selectors,” says the Morning Post. “The country must do its best to win without him. Most reasonable Englishmen would rather lose the tests than further exasperate Australian opinion.”