Editing Bodyline (section)

===The cable exchange===
At the end of the fourth day's play of the third Test match, the Australian Board of Control sent a [[Electrical telegraph|cable]] to the [[Marylebone Cricket Club]] (MCC), cricket's ruling body and the club that selected the England team, in London:

{{blockquote|Australian Board of Control to MCC, January 18, 1933: <br>
Bodyline bowling assumed such proportions as to menace best interests of game, making protection of body by batsmen the main consideration. Causing intensely bitter feeling between players, as well as injury. In our opinion is unsportsmanlike. Unless stopped at once likely to upset friendly relations between Australia and England.<ref name="f218">Frith, p. 218.</ref>}}

Not all Australians, including the press and players, believed that the cable should have been sent, particularly immediately following a heavy defeat.<ref>Frith, pp. 218–19.</ref> The suggestion of unsportsmanlike behaviour was deeply resented by the MCC, and was one of the worst accusations that could have been levelled at the team at the time. Additionally, members of the MCC believed that the Australians had over-reacted to the English bowling.<ref name=BBC/><ref name=Williamson/> The MCC took some time to draft a reply:

{{blockquote|MCC to Australian Board of Control, January 23, 1933: <br>
We, Marylebone Cricket Club, deplore your cable. We deprecate your opinion that there has been unsportsmanlike play. We have fullest confidence in captain, team and managers, and are convinced they would do nothing to infringe either the Laws of Cricket or the spirit of the game. We have no evidence that our confidence is misplaced. Much as we regret accidents to Woodfull and Oldfield, we understand that in neither case was the bowler to blame. If the Australian Board of Control wish to propose a new law or rule it shall receive our careful consideration in due course. We hope the situation is not now as serious as your cable would seem to indicate, but if it is such as to jeopardise the good relations between English and Australian cricketers, and you would consider it desirable to cancel remainder of programme, we would consent with great reluctance.<ref>Frith, pp. 218–22.</ref>}}

At this point, the remainder of the series was under threat.<ref name="p259">Pollard, p. 259.</ref><ref>Frith, p. 227.</ref> Jardine was shaken by the events and by the hostile reactions to his team. Stories appeared in the press, possibly leaked by the disenchanted [[Iftikhar Ali Khan Pataudi|Nawab of Pataudi]],<ref>Frith, p. 215.</ref> about fights and arguments between the England players. Jardine offered to stop using bodyline if the team did not support him, but after a private meeting (not attended by Jardine or either of the team managers) the players released a statement fully supporting the captain and his tactics.<ref name="Frith, pp. 214–15">Frith, pp. 214–15.</ref><ref name="Douglas, p. 146">Douglas, p. 146.</ref> Even so, Jardine would not have played in the fourth Test without the withdrawal of the "unsportsmanlike" accusation.<ref>Douglas, pp. 145–46.</ref>

The Australian Board met to draft a reply cable, which was sent on 30 January, indicating that they wished the series to continue and offering to postpone consideration of the fairness of bodyline bowling until after the series. The MCC's reply, on 2 February, suggested that continuing the series would be impossible unless the accusation of unsporting behaviour was withdrawn.<ref>Frith, pp. 226–28.</ref>

The situation escalated into a diplomatic incident. Figures high up in both the British and Australian government saw bodyline as potentially fracturing an international relationship that needed to remain strong.<ref name="Frith, pp. 241–59"/> The [[Governors of South Australia|Governor]] of [[South Australia]], [[Alexander Hore-Ruthven, 1st Earl of Gowrie|Alexander Hore-Ruthven]], who was in England at the time, expressed his concern to British [[Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs]] [[James Henry Thomas]] that this would cause a significant impact on trade between the nations.<ref>Frith, pp. 242–248.</ref><ref name="p2601"/> The standoff was settled when [[Prime Minister of Australia|the Australian prime minister]], [[Joseph Lyons]], met with members of the Australian Board and outlined to them the severe economic hardships that could be caused in Australia if the British public boycotted Australian trade. Following considerable discussion and debate in the English and Australian press, the Australian Board sent a cable to the MCC which, while maintaining its opposition to bodyline bowling, stated "We do not regard the sportsmanship of your team as being in question".<ref name="p2601">Pollard, pp. 260–261.</ref><ref>Frith, pp. 255–259.</ref> Even so, correspondence between the Australian Board and the MCC continued for almost a year.<ref>Douglas, pp. 145–47.</ref>