LARWOOD HITS OUT

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 76, Issue 106, 8 May 1933, Page 7

LARWOOD HITS OUT

LONG SILENCE BROKEN SENSATIONAL CHARGES STORY OF AUSTRALIAN TOUR M.C.C. AND LEG THEORY Received Alay 7, 11.24 p.m. LONDON, May 7. The long silence has been broken at last. The Sunday Express, under headlines across the whole of the front page, prints an interview which Larwood gave Charles Eade, sporting editor, with a facsimile of Larwood’s letter approving the same after some alteration and expressing thanks for the cheque received. The amount is not stated. Following is Larwood’s statement: “Now I can speak. For months 1 have been muzzled because my agreement with the Marylebono Cricket Club made it impossible for me to write or talk about what happened to me and the rest of the English team in Australia, particularly to me because most, of the temper and venom of the cricket crowds there was directed on my unfortunate head. Yesterday the M.C.C. tour ended and I was released from my obligation not to let the English public know just what we had to put up with.

“Until now 1 have had to suffer in silence the taunts and abuse of the crowds in Australia. Not only the crowds either. The newspapers there joined in a campaign to wreck us. But let me start at the beginning. Definite Plans. “On the way out we talked over the plahs we should adopt to win back the ‘Ashes.’ We knew we were up against a stiff task and that only by a definite scheme could we hope for victory. We decided to adopt the leg theory; that, is. concentrate our bowling on the leg stump. It was Jardine who originally had the idea of building for victory with this plan of attack, though all members of the side took part in the discussions which finally led to its adoption. Voce and I were chosen as the two bowlers likely to bring it to success, so in bowling as I did I was merely carrying out a pre-arranged plan; in other words, was playing fo* my side, which every cricketer is supposed to do. For doing that I have had to endure four months of the anger of crowds of barrackers who knew nothing about the finer points of cricket. Leg-theory bowling probably requires more accuracy than any other form. Wc were able to exploit it with complete success. That’s where the trouble started. “Barrackers on the famous ‘hill’ at Sydney and the cheaper parts of most other grounds, particularly Adelaide, were not there to see cricket. They were there to see Australia win. That is what they wanted. Above all, they were there to see Bradman score runs. All the excitement there had been about Bradman’s writings had stirred the Australian crowds into believing Bradman a super batsman. We showed that he wasn’t. And the mob didn’t like their idol treated that way. Then there was Woodfull. He was expected to stay at the wicket all day while others got the runs, and he was a failure, too. ‘ ‘ Bradman Frightened. ’ ’

“You ask why Woodfull,and Brad man couldn’t stand up to my fast, leg theory bowling.

These are the true reasons: Woodfull was too slow and Bradman too frightened. Yes! frightened is the word. Bradman just wouldn’t have it and was scared of my bowling. “1 knew it, as everybody did. Time after time he drew away from the ball. If I wasn’t bowling when he camo iu Jardine put mu on at once. It might have been supposed that Wood full would have tried to quiten the crowd or indicate some way that he was not in sympathy with those noisy demonstrators, but ho didn’t do so. He was too slow and didn’t like to face me either. Time after time he would duck when the ball didn’t get up at all. Sometimes the ball struck his pads. Ames and I appealed for leg before. These antics were silly and undignified, but coming from the captain, a man of Woodfull’s long record, they only encouraged the crowd to shout all the more loudly at me. Woodfull and Bradman were failures against the fast Jpg-theory bowling. They were upset and the crowds were upset to see their idols fall. Richardson and AlcCabc played me all right. The wonderful Bradman could not. Australia were being beaten so the crowd, not knowing what sportsmanship means, shouted abuse at the men who were winning. “Can you imagine my feelings when 50,000 people booed my every step as I ran up the wicket? Do you know what a bowler thinks about when he realises he is not only playing the batsmen but the crowd as well? On a previous tour I was treated the same way. I was only 24 then and must say the barracking and the orgy of shouts upset me. I was so distressed, in fact, that I could not do justice to myself or my side. 1 couldn’t bowl properly. It was not the conditions or the ground or the batsmen that boat me four years ago. It was the crowd. They tried to put me off, wanted to see me fail, tried to upset me and succeeded. The barrackers boat me in 1928-29. This time I was four years older, more experienced and tougher. The crowd couldn’t upset me by theii unfairness and hostility. When they jeered and booed they merely made me grit my teeth and bowl harder than •ever. Of course I said a few things about them under my breath but took care not to let them see T was affected. l The first tour I was upset. This tim<' T w r as inspired. The next time I shal' probably enjoy it. If I am selected I , shall be ready and willing to go again. T know T have been reported to have said I would never make another tour. It’s a lie. I never said it.

The Newspapers. “Al’any newspapers tried to put words in my mouth, but I have been loyal to my agreement with the M.C.C. and have not spoken out till now. A group of journalists came to interview me at Suez and offered to pay therefor. I could have had a thousand pounds that day but wouldn’t toll them anything. You are the first newspaper man 1 have gi”en an interview to. I

am telling you my story just as I tell it to my friends.

“The newspapers of Australia were up against me just as much as the barrackers. They spread stories of quarrels in the English team oven before we arrived. They were all lies. There was on trouble at all in the team. This campaign only caused the English players to stick together all the more. 1 take off my hat to Jardine for the way he stuck the abuse hurled at him by the crowd. And what abuse, and what a crowd!

“People who have only watched cricket in England cannot imagine the bitterness of the disappointed mob of cricket fans in Australia. Yet they' are allowed to dominate the, game in Australia to such an extent, that the Board of Control protested at our methods. Board of Control! What a title! They cannot even control their own crowds if they want to. Half the members couldn’t tel! you the weigh l of a cricket ball. When the Austra lians come hero they arc treated as gentlemen. When we go to Australia we have to suffer the cheap wit. and abuse of an unsportsmanlike gang which wouldn’t be tolerated a moment here. The Australian people seemed to be, out to throw us nff our game. When they failed they shouted insults and hoped to win that way. They made n lot of hot air about bodyline bowling. That’s rubbish if you like! If 1 howled nt the body, how was it 1 kepi hitting the wickets and getting men leg before? “The fact is the Australians were fairly squarely beaten, their favourite players failed, and the crowds, not interested in the play but the result tried to get back at me because my bowling—to captain’s orders—had had a lot to do with our success. Tbe Australians may not like my bowling. Well, 1 do not like their howling! It isn’t cricket.”