CRICKET

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIII, Issue 24, 24 December 1932, Page 4

CRICKET

LEG THEORY. ENGLISH BOWLERS’ METHODS. The captain of the English cricket team (I). R. Jardine) upon arrival at Launceston a few days ago, public!y defended the tactics of Ins howlers and declared that the “leg theory” had been invented by Australian newspapers. In welcoming the English players, General W. Martin, president of the Northern Tnsmanian Cricket Association, referred to the English leg tion referred to the English leg theory tactics. “Any team has a right to play any theory as long as it does not infringe the rules of cricket,” he said, “the leg theory tactics of the Englishmen are equally open to the Australian bowlers to emulate. These can be overcome, and this has been proved by the way McCabe, Cummings, and Finglcton handled this type of bowling. . ’ Mr Jardine, in reply, said: ‘The leg theory seems to have had its birth in Australian newspapers. We knew nothing about it; but have read about it since. Exactly the same type pf attack has been tried times without number, from Test cricket to village cricket. Where we have been successful brs lieen in the playing of the leg fia'd. and up to date these tactics have been rather disastrous to batsmen. The practice is nothing new. and there is nothing dangerous about it. I hope it goes on being successful.”

The tactics of the English bowlers operating with a leg-side field have produced divided opinion among former international players in Australia.

Mr T. AY. Garrett a memlier of the first Australian Test team, who has been one of the strongest in condemning the Englishmen’s tactics, when shown the remarks of Air Jardine, said: “I believe that the English team had deliberately decided upon this system of attack before they commenced the tour. Ido not mind leg theory, unless it is bowled deliberately at the batsman in order to frighten him The only other occasion that I have seen similar tactics employed was when the English left-

hander, F. R. Foster, howled here in 1911-12. This present leg theory is not in accordance with the ethics of the game, and the Tests are becoming too much'of a battle or a business. If this sort of thing is continued, with both sides taking it up, in ten years time there will he very little left of cricket as we know it no-v.’ Mr AYarren Bardsley, who played in. 30 Test matches against England, said: “I agree with Mr Jardine and *itli former Australian colleagues wig have said that they do not see anything unfair in the leg theory tactics. AAe have had plenty of leg theory bowling before, and batsmen have been often hit, but- little has been said alxnit it, because it was the batsman’s fault. The leg stump is a weakness with most / batsmen, nml there is nothing in the rules to prevent a howler exploiting it I feel sure that if the bowlers keep up these tactics the batsmen will soon master them. After all, it is something for the batsman to know just what type of bowling he is to receive.” EX-COUNTY CAPTAIN’S AHEAV. Lieutenant-Colonel D. C. Robinson, a former captain of the Gloucestershire County cricket team, said on arrival in Sydney that he could not understand the criticism of the methods of the English fast liowler, Larwood.

“He is not doing any more than any other bowler with his pace would do.” he said. “Bowling a very wide .ball across the wicket towards the leg 'stump, his object is to induce the batsman to step across to the off side, under the impression that the ball will go past. Ido not think there is any deliberate attempt to bowl at the batsman’s body.” Colonel Robinson was once described by AA’arwick Armstrong ai< the “biggest man in cricket.” He is about Cft Gin in lieiglrt, with broad

shoulders. He is on a holiday visit, < and desires to see the second Test \ match in Melbourne before returning to London. He was a member of J. W. H. T. Douglas’s M.C.C. team which toured South Africa in 1912. He retired from active cricket four years ago, but is still keenly interested in the game. Colonel Robinson said that he regretted the Australian custom of playing Test matches to a finish, without a time limit. Playing “against the clock” was one of the best features of tlie game, and the absence of a time limit cramped a batsman’s style, slowing up the game. The English public would not stand for it. Hammond had a delightfully free style until he came to Australia five years ago, but the Australian Tests changed all tiiat.