CRICKET.

Auckland Star, Volume XLII, Issue 191, 12 August 1911, Page 16

CRICKET.

G. A. Faulkner, the South African cricketer, was married at Capetown recently, and afterwards sailed for England. It is understood he will qualify to play for either Middlesex or Surrey as an amateur, but will be available to represent South Africa in the triangular tournament next year. Between twelve o'clock and half-past six, at Lord's, recently, twenty-nine wickets fell for 291 in the match between M.C.C. and Oxford University. In a match in England a fast ball from Robson bowled P. F. Warner, and carried one of the bails over thirty yards. When the last mail left England, Thompson, our new coach, appeared in both the lists of averages, having a batting average of 31.11, highest score 112 and a bowling record of 18.71 for 30 wickets. Self's bowling average was 21.91, but he wae not mentioned in the batting, while Pearson was fourth in the batting with 51.00, but did not appear in the bowling list. The manner of George Gunn's dismissal in the second innings of Mr. G. L. Jessop's XI. in the Trial match at Sheffield in June was marked by a curious incident. He was the striker, and his vis-a-vis, James Seymour, thinking there was a chance of a run, raced down the wicket,and reached the other end, going a few feet past Gunn, who had gone a short distance out of his ground. The wicket at the non-striker's end was put down, and Seymour, feeling that the fault of the disaster was entirely his, retired. After a consultation between Mr. Warner, the captain of the fielding side, and the umpires, " The Field" states, Seymour was recalled from the pavilion and Gunn went out.

If a considerable departure from the rigour of the game is ever to be made it is not to be expected in a " Test" match, and ii the object of the recent trial at Sheffield was to reproduce the serious and " dour" conditions of England v. Australia in order to prove the nerve of young players, " The Field" says, the question may be asked, "Why, on Shipman's early retirement, another player, Hearnc (J.W.), was allowed to bat and bowl in his stead? Here was a fine opportunity of putting one side, at any rate, on its mettle, but it was thrown away. There is a little cherub, or rather, imp, that presides over cricket, and rarely lets such an occasion slip. Accordingly, Hearne was enabled to turn the whole course of the match, and to make this possible Strudwick was inspired to bat as he had never batted before, the parr co-operating in a last wicket stand which brought victory to the side that had seemed certain to lose, When Strudwick and Hearne play together in a real Test match let us hope that they will repeat the performance." Of all the young cricketers I have seen during the past ten years none has impressed me more than J. W. Hearne (writes the Rev. R. S. Holmes, in "Cricket"). Why do I say this? Not simply because of his centuries against Notts and Yorkshire—great as both performances were—but because he has the temperament of a fine cricketer. Watch him at the wicket; he may follow a big stand, or, as in last week, he may go in after Warner and Tarrant have failed. No matter; at once he is the master of the situation, is never in a hurry to score off the first over, has all the Belf-control and stolidity of a veteran. In a word, he possesses temperament Skill may be acquired, but temperament is innate. And yet how seldom do committees seem to attach any value to this indispensable quality. Given moderate ability to start with, and temperament, and there is no reason why a youngster should not by practice become first-class.

The "AtHetic News" takes the English selectors severely to task for their selection of Tarrant, and 1 says:— "But one nomination concerns a principle. Is Frank Tarrant qualified to play for England? We arc Inclined to express the opinion that he has no right to assist England in the Test matches. Why, then, should he appear in a Test Trial game? "Tarrant says; *I am qualified to play for England by my residence here. I have lived in London since 1902.' No one can dispute this statement.

"'Pelham F. Warner ventures to remark: 'Tarrant's selection is quite correct. His name has not. been given out in error and so no alteration is contemplated. His inclusion in the trial will not conflict with the rules set down by the Imperial Advisory Board.' Presumably the Middlesex captain, who is one of the selectors, ought to know the decisions of the board.

"But we were under the impression that Englishmen would represent England in the Triangular Tournament. Birth or a permanent family home in this country should surely he the basis of qualification. If England can legitimately play Tarrant, there is no barrier to the selection, of D. C. Collins and P. B. Johnson, 'both natives of Wellington, New Zealand; of P. B. Le Couteur, the Rhodes scholar from Australia; J. A. Cuffe, of Queensland; and S. G. Smith, of the West Indies, wao are all essentially colonials.

"Moreover, what is right for England must be right for Australia. Why should the Commonwealth be prevented from playing J. N. Crawford? Possibly the fact that he has assisted lgw ß*»T" t would defer himj, but at the rd» time ifcj

3hould not <be forgotten that G. B. Llewellyn was once chosen for England, although he did not play. Last winter Ihe assisted South Africa, his native. ; land, and quite properly. "Tarrant's ability is unquestioned, but his right to assist England is quite another matter, as_he was brought to this I country to qualify for Middlesex. And supposing that England, -with Tarrant, did defeat Australia in the Triangular Tournament, would such a victory rei dound to the credit of Englishmen! We I trow not."