FOLLOW ON BY CANTERBURY

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24821, 11 March 1946, Page 6

FOLLOW ON BY CANTERBURY

+ Anderson And Shand BatJVell FIRST INNINGS COLLAPSE Only the more sanguine of Canterbury; supporters expected the home team to start as well as it did in its first innings against Australia on Saturday; the most pessimistic would hardly have thought that the last eight wickets would fall for 36 runs. Canterbury's - batting in the morning was full of promise, but in the afternoon, until the last hour, it looked something much less than mediocre, and at the end of the day the side, with six wickets down for 136 in the second innings, was still 138 runs behind the Australian first innings score. Canterbury’s first innings realising 141 runs. When Brown declared the Australian innings closed at the overnight score of 415 for eight, Canterbury began batting on an easy paced wicket. Cromb and An- i Clerson opened the innings, and gave Can- I terbury a very excellent start. Although they were never really on top of the bowling, both men played with ease and confidence, Anderson, in particular, giving an outstanding display. Lindwall, a fast bowler with a fairly low trajectory, opened at great pace, but only the shorter ones got up to any extent. Cromb batted in mature fashion. He made only 19 runs, but with Anderson, won the first point by surviving the opening attack.' and a second when a spell of seven overs from O’Reilly was also withstood. Cromb made one really memorable shot, a boundary off C’Reilly’s second ball. He went right back on to his stumps and forced it to the mid-wicket boundary in his most masterly style. It was fine cricket, and although the batsmen had an escape or two, they were untroubled by the bowling. Once Cromb pushed Toshack to the off and called for a run, but the volume of Anderson’s refusal seemed designed to. blow Cromb back into his crease. Every ball was watched intently by the huge crowd; it was a tense and exciting struggle. The partnership was broken after 90 minutes’ play, with the score at 52. At lunch Anderson, who had batted excellently, was 33. He scored many singles backward of point, and made several powerful pulls, one, from O’Reilly, being signalled as a six, but ultimately recorded as a four. Lindwall had been treated with respect, but played quite confidently. Toshack had been very inexpensive, his first spell of 12 overs costing only seven runs, and O’Reilly had been played very well indeed. The score at the interval was 60. Fast Scoring After lunch Smith, who had passed through a trying 15 minutes before the | break, was well beaten by a ball from Lindwall which came across fast from the off to take the leg stump. O’Brien was then associated with Anderson in some very fast scoring. After several attempts at hitting similar deliveries. Anderson connected with one from Lindwall that reared high outside the leg stump. In the same over he pushed one square to the off boundary, and scored a third four off the last ball of the over, more or less throwing his bat at another outside the leg stump which rose to head height. O’Brien scored two fours off an over from McCool, but then Anderson popped one from O’Reilly in front of Barnes at silly mid-on, and the fieldsman snapped it up. The partnership had added 39 in only 29 minutes. Anderson’s display was his best of the season; he was strong on the leg side, and in addition to his frequent scoring shots behind point, he made some nice cover drives, although most of these were cut off He batted gracefully and well, moving into the ball confidently. O’Brien made a half-hearted attempt to hit McCool and was caught, and Butterfield was bowled by a temptingly flighted leg break from McCool. The batsman tried to pull it, but the ball came round his legs and bowled him. Scott made an ambiFous attempt to hit O’Reilly, and paid the penalty. Sharp survived for a short time but was bowled when playing back to a good length leg break from O’Reilly. Burtt was caught in two minds by a top spinner from Barnes and was a’so bowled, and Mcßae was out leg before to the same bowler. Shand was last out, after staying at the wickets for almost an hour, a considerable portion of which was spent in watching the backs of departing batsmen and awaiting the arrival of the incomers. He showed a commendable tendency to hit the ball, however, and was the only batsman to look worthy of the name during the hour in which Canterbury’s score was taken from 100 for two to 141, all out. Even when wickets were not falling, the umpires were faced with a veritable chorus of appeals for leg re wics?£ t, but remained unflurried, these appeals was upheld. the successful bowler, Barnes, walked over to the umpire, solemnly removed his hat. and gave him an affectionate pat on the head. Canterbury’s batting was extremely disappointing. No one expected them to perform miracles against the strong Australian bowling, but as soon as Anderson,. out the remainder showed a re-gr-*Lta^.le lack of fight. Barnes finished with the astonishing figures of three wickets for no runs, and appeared immensely pleased with his success. Lindwall and O Reilly provided a complete contrast in every respect. Lindwall obtained his wickets by the use of bowlin dynamite, O’Reilly by a system of insidious sapping. His variations in flighting and pace were subtle, and he spun a figurative web around most of the batsmen. In the period after lunch he took three wickets for five runs off seven dyers. McCool was not as impressive in the morning as later in the innings, when he kept a better length and appeared to spin the ball more effectively. Toshack bowled well in the morning, but did little but appeal after lunch. The Canterbury innings lasted 208 minutes The Second Innings Runs came less reluctantly, but wickets continued to fall quickly, when Canterbury followed on after tea. 274 behind. Cromb was out early, a great disappointment to the crowd, and Anderson lost his,wicket when using, just once too often, the pull shot off rising balls from Lindwall. Toshack continued to appeal. When two Canterbury wickets were down for little more than 20. Miller bowled for the first time, at a pace perhaps as great as that of Lindwall. He obtained Smith’s wicket, the batsman again missing one that took his leg stump. O’Brien did net last long, a very fast one from Miller, which appeared to come back a little from the off. taking his leg bail. The acore at this stage was 33 for four wickets, and Canterbury had lost 12 successive wickets, in the two innings, for ©nly 69 runs. Miller was spelled after taking two for Bix off four overs, and Shand, with Butterfield, held the attack up for the first time during the afternoon. The scoring rate had, however, been very good: the 50 was raised in only 53 minutes. Butterfield was very subdued, scoring all his runs in singles, but Shand scored faster than in any other representative game this season. As usual, he employed two shots almost to the exclusion of all others, the leg glance and his own particular glide behind point, but he made the most of the few overpitched balls sent him, hitting them hard to leg. The partnership added 50 in 39 minutes, but Butterfield then lost his wicket in precisely the same manner as he had done in the first innings. He was bowled round his legs by a leg spinner from McCool. Scott had not been long at the wickets before he scored three boundaries off an over from McCool. He went down the wicket: and pulled the first ball to leg for four; I he next followed a leg break across, and 1 punched it hard past point to the boundary. The third ball off the over was * also pulled to the fence, and two singles ’ made 14 off the over. The spectators ; « were delighted. Shand continued to bat j ’ very well, and his equanimity was not > ; disturbed when Lindwall came back 1 ‘ again. He reached his 50 in 66 minutes. ‘ and shortly before stumps the partner- . ship had added 50 in only 23 minutes. With the fourth ball of the last over of , the day. however. Canterbury suffered , another grievous reverse: Shand touched . a ball from McCool into the hands of ; Tallon, the wicket-keeper. Shand played i an excellent innings, full of character and courage. He looked very much at home at the wickets, and had restored, to a certain extent, Canterbury’s self-respect His 60 were made in 70 minutes. . In the second innings Lindwall was more expensive, although he continued to , bowl very fast, and move the ball t considerably in the air. Miller showed < extreme speed, and Toshack. although not t bowling as well as in the morning play, T was fairly inexpensive. McCool snun the j ball well, but gave some runs away. and O’Reilly had only four overs. Canterbury’s 136 runs were made in only 110 < ( minutes, but between lunch and 5 o’clock i . the batting was very disappointing. The 1 1 ability of the side hardly bears compari- s son with that of Australia, but it is cer- r tainly capable of much better things. \ Scott was going well, with 23 to his s credit, at stumps. The Australian fielding throughout the day was excellent. ~ the returning to the wickets being par- < ticularly r

VISITING PLAYERS ENTERTAINED

The visiting Australian cricketers were entertained at the Pioneer Sports Club on Saturday evening by the Canterbury Cricket Association. They were welcomed by the president of the association, Mr R. H. North. Mr E. C. Yeomans, the manager of the Australian’ team, replying, said that the players were enjoying the tour. The team, he said, was the best available, and Canterbury had had to bat against firstclass, test match bowling. Mr W. A. Brown, the captain, referred to the excellent bowling of the Canterbury players before lunch on the first day’s play. He was very pleased with the arrangements made for the players at Lancaster Park, which was one of the best grounds they had played on. Messrs W. J. O’Reilly. A. L. Hassett, and A. Mailey also spoke. VICTORIA’S BIG SCORE (Special Correspondent N.Z.PA.) (Rec. 7.30 p.m.) ADELAIDE, March 10. The Victorian cricket team made G 97 against South Australia on the Adelaide oval, a record score for Victoria on this ground. The previous record was 646 for eight wickets in 1927. The score was made in 493 minutes on a good wicket, though light rain twice held up play. Stackpole’s 159 took 227 minutes.

In reply. South Australia started badly, losing both opening batsmen early. Victoria, in the first innings, made 697 (Harvey 163. Stackpole 159, Tamblyn 90, Fothergill 74; Ellis five for 210, Noblet three for 119). South Australia in the first innings lost five for 75 (Klose 24. Tribe 2 for 22).

BADCOCK’S NEW JOB (Rec. 8.30 p.m.) LONDON. March 10.

F. T. Badcock. New Zealand test cricketer. is going to Ceylon to coach for the Ceylon Cricket Association, says the "Evening News.’ The appointment will be an entirely new one. Badcock’s duties will take him among all clubs and schools in Ceylon.

Scores;— AUSTRALIA First innings (total for eight wickets declared) 415 CANTERBURY , _ „ First Innings J- B - ,9 r ° mb - c Brown, b Lindwall .. 19 W. McD. Anderson, c Barnes, b O’Reilly .. 61 J. Smith, b Lindwall 6 F. P. O’Brien, c Lindwall, b McCool .. 12 L. A. Butterfield, b McCool .. R. C. Shand, b Barnes .. 18 R. H. Scott, c Toshack, b O’Reilly . T. M. Sharp, b O’Reilly 3 T. Burtt, b Barnes 5 D. A. McRae, lbw, b Barfles 0 A. E. L. Britton, not out Extras (byes 5, leg byes 2, no ball 1) 8 Total .. 141 BOWLING ANALYSIS „ O. M. R. W. R. Lindwall .. 17 5 35 2 E. Toshack ..17 6 20 W J, O’Reilly ..16 7 28 3 C. McCool ..18 3 50 2 S. G. Barnes 2.1 2 0 3 O’Reilly bowled one no ball Second Innings Cromb, c McCool, b Toshack 6 Anderson, c Hamence, b Lindwall .. 12 Smith, b Miller 8 O’Brien, b Miller .. .. .. 2 Butterfield, b McCool 14 Shand, c Tallon, b McCool .. 60 Scott, not out 23 Extras (byes 5, leg byes 4, no balls 2) 11 Total (for six wickets) • "136 BOWLING ANALYSIS O. M. R. W. R. Lindwall .. 7 — 34 E. Toshack .. 10 2 24 i K. Miller .. .. 4 — 6 2 S. G. Barnes .. 4 — 9 C. McCool 8.4 — 47 2 W. J. O’Reilly 4 — 5 Lindwall bowled two no balls. The umpires are Messrs T. Burgess and H. W. Gourlay.