AUSTRALIANS WIN.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20364, 23 July 1934, Page 1

AUSTRALIANS WIN.

Two Singles Victories Over Americans. DAVIS CUP CONTEST. United Press Assn.—By Electric Telegraph—Copy right. (Received July 23, 11.30 a.m.) LONDON, July 22. The Australians won the first two singles matches with the United States in the inter-zone final of the Davis Cup lawn tennis competition, which were played at Wimbledon yesterday. The results of the games were:—* T. Crawford (Australia) beat F. X. Shields (U.S.A.), 6-1. 6-2. 12-10. Y. M’Grath (Australia) beat S. B. Wood (U.SA ), 7-5, 6-4, 1-6, 9-7. Although the Americans were strong favourites prior *o the commencement of the inter-zone # Davis Cup final, the Australians, -by their convincing wins in the two singles yesterday, are now regarded as almost certain to challenge Britain next week. Turnbull, Quist and Ilopman, and perhaps M’Grath, anticipate competing in the GerTnan and other championships on the Continent in the irjeanw hile. The “Sunday Chronicle” says:— “ Crawford is still the best player in the world.” The newspapers agree that M’Grath has improved beyond measure. He defeated Wood by sheer confidence and exuberance. Probably alphabetical priority accounted for the otherwise ominous fact that the American flag was above the Australian on the Wimbledon Club’s flagstaff. It was an oppressive thundery day and the court was pathetically piebald and bare on the baselines as well as a greater part of the forecourts. The attendance was wretched.

Crawford took the first three games with delightful placements, deadly driving and plucky volleying. Shields, with a burst of cannonball services, won the fourth game, but Crawford took the set in eleven minutes. In the second set Crawford returned Shields's fiercest drives with unfailing accuracy and completely dominated the American. In the final set there was more sting in the American’s game and he led 7-6. lie fell (his fourth fall in the match) when running for a lob and this helped Crawford to break through after the American was leading 40-love. The service pendulum was restored until two brilliant cross-court strokes on the return of service let Crawford break through in the twenty-first game, and he won the next and the match on his own service. •

M’Grath and Wood began in an atmosphere of cathedral quietness because each was testing the other’s strength. It was noticeable that M’Grath’s service had become much stronger. He broke through Wood’s service to establish a 6-5 lead and then hold his own service excellently for the set. M’Grath’s aggression in the second set non-plussed Wood, 2nd he went to 5-1. Then he lapsed to 5-4, but took the set cn his service without loss of a point. In the third set Wood repeatedly aced the Australian, who seemed to have lost all his earlier dash. M’Grath also began badly in the fourth set. giving Wocd a handy 5-2 lead. M’Grath suddenly recovered and drew level. M’Grath’s weakness overhead frittered away his chance of winning the match when 7-6, but after losing two match points in the sixteenth game he finally broke through and obtained a surprising win. COMING CHAMFION. (Received Julv 23, 12.30 p.m.) LONDON, July 22. S. X. Doust, writing in the “ Daily Mail,” says: “It will not be long before M’Grath is world’s champion.”

WIN ALMOST ASSURED. Australia Will Depend on Crawford. Australia are almost assured of victory in the inter-zone inal for the Davis Cup as a result of M’Grath’s surprise win over Wood, second man for the United States. Crawford has now only to win his second singles match to clinch the victory for his country. If there arc no surprises, Australia should win the final by three matches to two. It is unlikely that Australia will‘win the doubles match to be played to-day. Crawford and Quist are not a strong doubles pair, having been beaten at Wimbledon by Y. G. Kirby (South Africa) and R. Miki (Japan), and they will be facing Lott and Stoeffen, the Wimbledon champions. Presuming that America win the doubles, the task of bringing victory to Australia will fall on the shoulders of Crawford. Shields was beaten 2-6 4-6, 6-4, 6-3, 6-4 by Crawford in the semi-final of the singles at Wimbledon, and should not be troubled to beat M’Grath, unless the Australian displays superlative form. Wood may give Crawford a hard fight, however, for Perry took five sets to beat him in the semi-final of the men's singles at Wimbledon. Wood won the title in 1631, and is the most stylish player in the American team, all his strokes being very correct. If Australia win they will meet Great

Britain in the challenge round for the Davis Cup. Last jear the two countries met in the final round of the European zone, and Britain won by three matches to two. In the singles, Austin lost to Crawford and beat M’Grath: H. G. N. Lee, deputising for 1 Perry, lost to Crawford; and Perry beat I M’Grath. Hughes and Lee won the doubles for England, defeating the Australian pair, Quist and Turnbull, in four sets. M’Grath is now a good deal better singles player than he was a year ago, but, on the other hand, Perry has now definitely asserted his superiority over Crawford. These factors, and the fact that Britain would be by no means so certain to win the doubles, should make this year’s match, if it is played, very interesting.

FOOTFAULT DECISION. LONDON, July 14. There has been much discussion on the footfault decision against Crawford, and everyone is agreed that it was made at a , most unfortunate time—when the English player required one point to win the championship. The Australians admit, however, that a footfault should be called at any time. Other players declare that as a camera is unable to detect footfaults infallibly, it is a shade of odds against the umpire being right. The “ Daily Sketch ” describes the incident as being like a “ stab in the back.” It adds that expediency sometimes overrides law, and in this case justice might well have been tempered with mercy. It was a pitiful ending for both players. The “ New’s-Chronicle ” declares that it was not a footfault, and that it was unfortunate for Perry to win on the decision when he had the match in his pocket. Writing to the “ Daily Mail,” S. Doust characterises footfaulting as exasperating and unjustified at times. The tennis writer of “ The Times ’* says everyone wished the jjudge had been looking the other way. It was the most costly footfault in the history of Wimbledon. STEDMAN WINS TITLE. Malfroy Beaten in Final at Manchester. LONDON". July 21. A. C. Stedman (N.Z.) won the championship at Frinton-on-Sea, beating 11. F. Cullev (U.S.A.). 6-1. 6-4. C. E. Malfrov (N.Z.) was beaten in the final of the Manchester tennis tournament by Lyttelton-Rogers, 6-4, 4-6, 7-5. Playing with Lyttelton-Rogers Malfroy won the doubles, 4-6, 6-2, G-2, 10-8. In the Anglo-Japanese match IT. W. j Austin beat J. Fujikura, 6-4, 6-2, 6-1. F J. Perry beat J. Yamagishi, 9-7, 61, 6-8, 7-5.