Jump to content

Page:The Crisis in Cricket and the Leg Before Rule (1928).djvu/39

From Wikisource
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
THE EFFECT OF THE PRESENT RULE
31

In a previous chapter it has been pointed out how often the much to be wished for change in the l.b.w. rule has been misunderstood, and it is constantly forgotten that nobody can be given out l.b.w. if he keeps his legs clear of the bowler's territory. The resolution carried through by an insufficient majority was worded as follows: "The striker is out if with any part of his person (except the hand) which is between wicket and wicket he intercept the ball which would hit his wicket l.b.w." Mr. Knight seemed not to have recognized this for in the Pall Mall article he wrote: "If you changed the l.b.w. laws and gave a man out in the event of the ball striking his legs, and which would otherwise have struck the wicket . . . that would entail an endless number of l.b.w. decisions fatal to the batsman . . . there are quite enough of them now." There is no mention here about the necessity that the legs must be between wicket and wicket for a batsman to be given out l.b.w.

"There are quite enough of them now," and this refers to cases of l.b.w.!

It is true that cases of l.b.w. are frequent, but they ought to be more so, as long as batsmen follow Mr. Knight's teaching. Some balls that pitch off the wicket batsmen try to play with the bat, but fail to do so, but following Mr. Knight's advice the legs are brought up and save the wicket, acting as a second line of defence. Other balls the bats­ man, pointing the bat to the sky, stops with the legs only, and in this case the legs are used as a first line of defence. Hayward did this and saved his wicket, by his own confession, hundreds of times and many batsmen do the same.

And yet some people blame the bowlers!