CRICKET "ASHES."

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 231, 30 September 1930, Page 7

CRICKET "ASHES."

AFTER THE TESTS.

Plans in England for Recovery of

Prestige.

TRIBUTE TO AUSTRALIANS. (fanited P.A. , —Electric Telegraph-Copyright, (Received 10 a.m.) LONDON, September 29. P. F. Warner, the well-known cricket writer, in a book, "The Fight for the Ashes, 1930," which has just been published, says there is no need for despondency about English cricket. He suggests as an eleven for the 1932 tour, on which England must concentrate; immediately, the following players: —Dulcepsijihji, Hammond, Sutcliffe, Wyatt, Leyland, Ames,. Allom, Peebles, Robins, Allen, and Crawley. Warner aeals exhaustively with every first-class match in which the Australians were engaged, in addition lo the Tests, much of which he prepared from the "Morning Post" extracts of which had been cabled to Australia. He pays glowing tributes to Woodfull's captaincy and personality. "There never was a more popular and betterliked Australian captaii. in England," the writer says. "His characteristic walk, charming smile and general demeanour made friends in legion. I imagine it is impossible to have a nicer captain for one's vis-a-vis, the sort of captain for which an eleven would do anything." (Summing up the individual players other than Bradman and Grimmett, to whom he devotes lengtl./ praise, Warner says Kippax was the stylist of the team. McCabo was the finest straight driver, and was going to be a great batsman. Jackson was somewhat disappointing .here, but genius was inherent in him. Fairfax was one of the best all-rounders, with a lovely bowling actions and a batsman most difficult to dismiss. Horn i brook, states Warner, has a beautiful action, but his length was not always what was expected of the leftham.ur. Oldlield is the greatest wicketkeeper in the world. a'Beckett is a great, fieldsman. The Australian fielding on the whole, he considered good, without being exceptional, slip fielding ijeing a weak point. He approves four-day Tests, with a limitless fifth if necessary. Covering the wickets before, the start places too great a premium on the toss, makes the game too artificial and destroys somewhat the element of uncertainty. Warner deplores attacks on the selectors. Certain writers appear'lost to all sense of proportion. Such misguided criticism lowers the dignity of the Press, which in the past has done a great deal for cricket. Unfortunately cricket is in grave danger of being "stunted." It upsets cricketers when they find that if they miss a catch, or inakj a duck, they are treated though they had lost the British Empire. Summing up England's personalities, Warner discusses Chapman's captaincy, and declares that in the first Test no captain could have done better. There was a marked falling off at Lord's., Though at Leeds Chapman was himself again, his Old TrafTord captaincy dropped (iO per cent below his kirst Test standard. "It is difficult," writes Warner, "to account for the variation. Indeed, I am at a complete loss to explain it. He seemed to lose his tactical sens- , , and did not associate himself mentally and physically with the bowlers," The writer proceeds to criticise Chapman's interview with a newspaper representative when dropped. "I fancy everyone regretted it, no one more so than Chapman when his feelings cooled down. Subsequently Chapman wrote for the same newspaper a fair and temperate description of the L :st." But, concludes Warner, oiu had the impression that Chapman was being used as a "stunt," a position which his best friends deprecated sincerely. ,That the office of captaincy of the English cricket team suffered momentarily some loss of dignity and prestige cannot be doubted. Warner regrets Wyatt's ill-luck in having Duckworth off form, and concludes by stating that if Duckworth bad caught one, or at any rate two, cf the three catches offered England might have won the match.