Page:The Crisis in Cricket and the Leg Before Rule (1928).djvu/37

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
EFFECT OF PRESENT RULE
29

the Pall Mall Gazette of the 16th of June, 1923. In this article Mr. Knight repeats what he wrote in the Badminton Library, and refers to the Jardine incident and writes: "Mr. Pardon assumes that Mr. Jardine simply held his bat out of harm's way and deliberately walked in front of his wicket and let the ball hit him on the pad." Mr. Knight then writes:—"Now with all respect to Mr. Jardine I say that this was a wrong procedure, if all he could hope for and rely on to stop him from being bowled were his legs, neglecting the function of his bat altogether." But the account in The Times giving the description of how Mr. Jardine saved his wicket on the first occasion with his pads and was just too late with his right leg in the next over and was bowled, says nothing of the bat at all, and the description leaves the impression on the readers' mind that no attempt was made to play the two balls referred to with the bat. But even if Mr. Jardine did this he followed the advice given by Mr. Knight in the Badminton (p. xlvii) where he writes: "When leaving the off ball alone it is strongly advisable to keep the bat well up in the air above the head and cover the unguarded wicket with both legs." If Mr. Jardine did make some attempt to play the ball with the bat, which was not apparently noticed by The Times' reporter, he followed the advice given on page xlii of the Badminton book, to bring the legs back together in front of the wicket and behind the bat, "to act as an extra defence." Mr. Jardine, whether he made some attempt to play the ball with the bat or not, has Mr. Knight's approval, the only difference being that the legs were the first line of defence in the first case, and the second in the second case.