THE FOOT-FAULT

Waikato Times, Volume 119, Issue 19900, 1 June 1936, Page 7

THE FOOT-FAULT

I, AUSTRALIANS SURPRISED. i i l ...... F i TEAM MANAGER‘S OPINION. 1 3 3110111‘ HAVE COST TiiE MATCH. ‘ . i limited Press .salni—Elee. ’i‘el. Copyright. ' (Received June i, 1 pm.) i GERMAN’I‘OWN, May 31. i The Australian Associated Press 3 interviewed Mr (J. E, Sprouie, manager ‘ of the Australian team, who said: i “For the life of me I cannot un—derstand their foot—fault rule. it 1 might have cost us the match. If a ‘man toot-faults six times during a ‘ match, according to the interpretation 1 of the judge, then it is not likely that ‘ho foot-faulted throughout, and why ‘weren't they all called? The poor 1 kid was simply penalised unneces‘s‘artly. I cannot understand how a ‘ Judge with cardboard against. one eye teem see the ball in play and the In~ 1 ti. n of the feet at the same i me. The}; ieiaim that he has one foot over the ‘ line before he hits the ball, but that in not so. ‘ “It the penalisetion of toot-faults ‘is for the purpose of preventing an advantage in running in to the net, how far advanced toward the fore—eourt was Quist at any time after the foot—faults were called on him? As a matter of fact, 'he was so anxious to prevent penalty that he deliberately sacrificed most of his opportunities to run up after his service. i “it Quist is a foot-iaulter. then Make and Allison certainly are, but i we never called foot—faults on Allison. The Australia International Federation ‘has defined foot—fault, but ils inter—iprotaiion here is mysterious." ‘ wlll Not Protest. i Mr Sproule added, however. that he would not protest. Asked what his feelings about to-morrow were now, he said: "Well, after this match how would you feel?" . ______ 1 FURTHER PLAY TO-DAV. 1 AUSTRALIAN VICTORY LiIKELY. QUIS‘T‘S FINE PERFORMANCE. (Received June 1, 1 pm.) GERMAXTO\VN. May 31. Strenuous efforts are being made to induce the return to America of the Australian team for the national singles, but Crawford informed a cor—respondent that it is simply out of the question. The general feeling prevailed in tennis circles to—night that only a mist-honor. can rob the Australians of victory to-inorrow. Quist‘s excep—tionally tine play is considered to have immeasurably improved his chances 01‘ accounting for Budge, while Aili— SOIL unless he displays something oi the form which was his when he de—tented Perry for the United States na—tional singles championship in 1935. cannot prevail against Crawford.