Ill Luck At Old Trafford

Press, Volume XCVII, Issue 28660, 9 August 1958, Page 5

Ill Luck At Old Trafford

OLD TRAFFORD, July 29. QNOE again England has demonstrated her immense supremacy in this series, this time by the margin of an innings and . 13. runs. It was cruel luck on the New Zealand team that, after it had put up an improved performance in the first four days, it should then be caught on a sticky wicket on the fifth. , There was some surprise at the omission of Miller. Presumably the idea was to restore Sutcliffe to the opening position. From this angle the move was reasonably successful, for Sutcliffe made his two best scores of the series. Although Miller’s record is not great in the tests, it is better than Harford’s, who has made nine runs in his last six test innings. With New Zealand’s batting so shaky, it seemed folly to drop a batsman and play an extra bowler. Moir deserved his selection, for he had just taken five wickets at Lord’s and was in better form than Alabaster. A leg spinner was obviously required at Old Trafford, but it lordly seemed necessary to play a third pace bowler as well. For the first time in the series, New Zealand had first use of a good pitch and. if it did not exactly make the most of it, at least it did well enough to show that in a fine summer it might have put up a better show in the series. Mac Gibbon Mac Gibbon, who made a fine 66, has completely justified his selection for the tour, which #bout six months ago was still in doubt. He has bowled more overs, taken more wickets both in county games and tests, and made more runs- in tests than anyone else in the team.

At close of play on the first day, New Zealand was better placed than at any othen stage in a test. If 220 seemed a small score for a complete day’s play on a good wicket, that was not all the fault of New Zealand. The England bowlers sent down only 103 overs during the day—a disturbing thought when one realises that Loader and Tyson will join Statham and Trueman in the coming M.C.C. tour. Slow cricket is not always the batsmen’s faulty ■ V

But if New Zealand was able to make good use of the wicket England was able £o make better, and the New Zealand bowlers were able to make little impression on Richardson and Watson. Reid kept wicket, in place of Petrie, although May had offered to allow Ward to act as substitute. Here a golden opportunity to give the young deputy ’keeper test match experience was missed. With the series decided, Reid should not have had scruples about .it being an unfair advantage. Wet Days There has yet to be a Saturday of a test which has been uninterrupted by rain and in this test we had the worst one yet. It was a bad blow to the finances of the tour, for a good crowd was expected. Wheij play began it looked as if New Zealand might get some quick wickets for three catches were given and one accepted. But further rain cut play down to 40 minutes and it was 3 p.m. on the Monday before the game could be restarted. The pitch was by then a “pudding” and only Reid was able to extract any life.

May’s batting was sheer genius, and he hit with incredible power. Some of his strokes were rustic, but they were truly hit, with never a suggestion of danger. There was more rain on Monday night, but a drying wind and bright sunshine not only made a prqmpt start possible but produced a wicket tailor-made for Lock, who would have bowled far more illustrious sides out on it.

The least said about the batting the better and again a number of batgmen assisted their own downfall. Reid again failed to set the right sort of example to his team and his innings was unsuitable both as captain and as a number four batsman. Perhaps he should bat lower down m the next test, at number six, say. His average for the tests is only 8.6, and his 14 in the first innings of this match is hia highest to date. This is not good enough for a supposedly leading batsman.