ROWDYISM ON THE CRICKET. FIELD AT SYDNEY.

Thames Star, Volume X, Issue 3139, 11 March 1879, Page 1

ROWDYISM ON THE CRICKET. FIELD AT SYDNEY.

The exhibition of rowdyi^ Jjj* occurred on the cricket-ground at B>. -«,J last Saturday is" a disgrace to Awtrahh. cricket. And it is the more to be regretted by all true admirers of a noble game in that the match a(f which it took place was between an amateur eleren of England and eleren of New South Wales. Some recollection of the grand reception the Australian Eleren receired in the old country, one would imagine, would hare restrained the colonial mob from so violent an exhibition of partisanship in the presence of the Gentlemen of England. But no. New South Wales can product good cricketers, but the lower class of tho populace of Sydney has unfortunately acquired a notoriety for exhibitions of-

partiality and unfairness, and it appears that, the'better her representatives acquit themselves in the cricket field the stronger the spirit grows. In the first intercolonial cricket match ever played at Sydney an evneute was nearly occurring over a precisely similar occurrence, a run out, and was only prevented by the Melbourne captain giving way, and allowing the batsman to go in a second time. The Mnrshall fiascos are well remembered, we have no doubt, by most old cricketers, and at the matches referred to it was positively dungerous for some of the Victorian eleven to walk the streets after they had won the match. We had hoped that time had cured to some extent this tendency to extreme partiality and rowdyism on the part of the Sydney populace at cricket matches, but we •re sorry to find we are mistaken. Not content with rushing the ground, the jnob actually proceeded to acts of violence. Lord Harris, we hear, was assaulted, and the umpire roughly handled, because he gave Murdock run out. Coulthard has the character of being a very good .umpire, but even allowing that in this case he made a mistake, it is what all umpires are liable to, and surely we might expect that the people of Sydney are so well versed in the minntim of the game they would have accepted the umpire's decision as a conscientious one, and have bowed to it. But the game was going slightly against them at the time, and Murdock happens to be one of the most reliable of their batsmen, »nd had scored heavily in the first innings. The excitement became great, and the "win, tie, or wrangle" spirit could not brook the idea of the New South Wales eleven, with the great Spoffonh in its ranks, being defeated. The rowdy portion oi the spectators set the example, and rushed the ground, and there was an end to the play. The re Bwf(able portion of the spectators, no doubt, most bitterly regret what has tak«'ii place, and will do their utmost to S -otlie the wounded feelings'of the Gentlemen of England ; but, unfortunately— a id we write from experience—they form but the minority, and are powerless to prevent thei rowdyism and brutality of the mob.

Jt is some consolation to Victorian cricketers that they can look back for five ai/d twenty years with the reflection that a similar scene to that which took pWe at Sydney hap never happened on a Vicicrian cricket-ground. We have seen strong expressions of dissatisfaction at some umpires' decisions here, but the s» rotators have never proceeded to acts of violence and rowdyism, and we hope sever will. Better that the game of cricket should be wiped out of existence if it cannot be played in a manly and gentlemanly manner. And deeply as all true and respectable people must deplore the treatment to which the Gentlemen of En eland have been subjected on a colonial cricket-ground, the feeliDg is intensified by the reflection that they are representatives of that dear old country from which an Australian Eleven has so recently returned, and where the treatment they experienced was in so marked a contrast to what the Gentlemen of England have met with in Sydney.—Australasian.