ALLEN JUSTIFIED BY SUCCESS

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21974, 24 December 1936, Page 11

ALLEN JUSTIFIED BY SUCCESS

DECISION TO FORCE FOLLOW-ON GENERAL APPROVAL BY ENGLISH PRESS AUSTRALIANS' WEAKNESS ON SOFT WICKET (UNITKO I'KESS ASSOCIATION— COPVEIOHT.) (Received December 23, 8.35 p.m.) LONDON, December 23. Some writers condole with Australia on its ill-luck in the test match and pay tribute to Allen. The cricket writer of "The Times" expresses the opinion that either the Australians batted lamentably in the first innings or the bowling was phenomenal on a quiet wicket. He suggests that a third explanation of their failure may be that the pitch was apparently less shaven and hard pressed than is usual in tests in Australia, so that when the Australians were playing on the soft wicket the ball did not come through sufficiently quickly, leaving them in two minds about its pace. "The Englishmen have been splendidly led, in spite of the discussion whether Allen was right in declaring and again sending hi the Australians," continues the writer. "I believe the Australian captain in a similar position would have batted again and made as many as possible, leaving England an impossible task in the dreaded fourth innings, but that is the difference in outlook between British and Australian captaincy. - "Allen doubtless felt that there was * chance of rubbing the Australians' noses in the ground and quickly finishing the game. His spirit must be acclaimed even if his judgment was faulty, considering Australian conditions. Moreover, he won, so more need not be said about a mistake which is now hypotheti"Chief Credt to Allen" "The Times," in an editorial, declares that Allen has been almost scandalously successful and again confounded the critics. It adds: "The laugh is now with the audacious Allen and the team which was previously described as weak, not representative and not satisfactory, and patronisingly criticised before the first test. -The ehief credit goes to Allen, who showed that he has not overrated the moral ascendancy which the Englishmen acquired at Brisbane." A. P. F. Chapman, in an article in the "Daily Mail," considers that Allen erred in making the Australians follow on. Nevertheless, he admits that the decision was justified. He adds: "I am worried about Ley land pnd Ames not scoring faster. Nevertheless, the rubber seems fairly certain for England, but you can never be certain about cricket, and I know those Australians."

The "Daily Mail," in a leading article, emphasises that the Australians do not know when they are beaten. "England so far has had all the luck. We had better not warm our hands over the ashes until they are ours," it adds. The "Telegram," in an editorial, welcomes the victories, which would (generally brace up English cricket, previously suffering a depression caused by the bodyline controversy I and England's indifferent displays against the Australians in 1934. The "Manchester Guardian," in a leading article, says: "In making the Australians follow on, Allen gambled on the belief that he.had the enemy 'on the run,' and had catches been held, he might have been proved •correct." Effect of Weather England's victory was featured on the front pages of all the evening newspapers under page-wide streamers. The Star's" streamer read: "Our Test Men's Merry Christmas."

The "Evening News" devoted six columns to a description of the play, and pictorial and verbal comment in a cartoon under the caption, "The Circus Comes to Town," depicting Allen in uniform as ringmaster leading two kangaroos labelled "Sydney" and "Brisbane" behind a lion beating a drum. The sporting writer of the "Evening News" says: "The weather gave some assistance, but it cannot be blamed to any extent for the score. Australian batsmen are so apprehensive of a drop of rain that all batting science disappears when any is about. "I am glad to record the excellent feelii-.g of the Sydney crowd. They were unwilling to agree that we had the better luck of the game. Bradman is still good, but he is not so unbeatable and unbowlable. O'Reilly is not the danger that he has been represented to be if he is watched properly. Oldfield is as good as ever, that is, he is still the best wicket-keeper in cricket."