England Wastes Chances With Pointless Batting

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30058, 16 February 1963, Page 12

England Wastes Chances With Pointless Batting

[Specially written for the N.ZP.A. by W. J. O’REILLY]

SYDNEY, February 15.

Half-way through Davidson’s first over today England looked set for a profitable time at the batting creases. Davidson got each of the first four deliveries to move in slightly in the air but when they hit the pitch they came off so slowly that one felt justified in writing off the fast attack as a match winning asset.

Dexter elected to bat after winning the toss. With his team faced with the job of forcing all the “running" in this deciding match one imagined he must have thought deeply about giving the opposition first batting. But let there be no doubt in anyone’s mind that he did not make the right decision. What then could possibly be the reason for his batsmen bogging down in one of the most pointless batting displays I have seen in test cricket?

Was it the early loss of Cowdrey? Cowdrey established as a tremendously valuable number four had been lifted to open with Sheppard. This looked a good move. But it lost all merit when Cowdrey was out to an awkward attempt to deal with a lifting ball on the leg stump from Davidson. Unrealistic Cricket

Admittedly this was a bitter blow for England. But I am not prepared to accept that as the reason for the unrealistic cricket that followed.

Cowdrey, in the 28 minutes he was there, had shown no inclination to meet the ball firmly. He seemed unduly aware of the need to take care on his leg stump. Twice in one over Australia’s new boy, Neil Hawke, had given him a fright as he tried to move safely inside an indipper aimed at the middle and leg stumps The irst shot he made to open his score was a sloppily-execu’ed push to get the ball away to square leg.

Lt could not have been Cowdrey’s dismissal but Cowdrey's method of starting the innings going that was thoroughly indicative of what happened for the remainder of the day. Perhaps, therefore, the tactics employed had been adopted before the day’s play began. Could it have been the pitch? My only answer is that any sympathy should all be given to the bowlers who could make nothing of it at any time. Davidson got no encouragement from it nor did McKenzie. The ball came off so easily that it was an utter waste uf time trying to get one to bounce. The spinners, Benaud, Simpson and O’Neill, got one to turn occasionally but any advantage was offset by the impossibility of getting the ball to turn quickly. No batsman had any difficulty in following the ball carefully off the pitch and meeting it with a middle bat. Should one sympathise with batsmen because the ball comes off too slowly to make stroke-making an easy job? My idea is that once the batsman stays there long enough to get the pace of the pitch correctly he should be able to set about his business much more hopefully than the bowlers. Dexter never looked like the great player we saw earlier in the season. He seemed to carry on from where he left off abruptly in the Adelaide second innings when he played himself right out of form trying to ba£ with exaggerated care

Perhaps he was out of form when he came to the wicket. Rumour said he had performed unhappily at the nets before this irame Whatever i» was he seemed to lose all trace of form as the inn-

ings continued. At one stage he missed a juicy full toss from O’Neill which pitched just outside the off stump. Dexter could do nothing right. His timing was embarrassingly astray throughout the long innings. The pity of it was he could never summon up sufficient confidence to get down the wicket to meet a challenging situation. Changed Barrington No-one could have been prepared for the changed Barrington. In Adelaide, at a time when aggression meant nothing so far as match winning was concerned, he scored the best century of the series. Today he contented himself with batting the ball innocuously back along the pitch, viewing everything with the suspicion of a man convinced trouble lurked everywhere. Full marks, however, must go to him for carrying out the policy so comprehensively I had the impression that Barrington got no enjoyment out of this innings. It seemed to worry him that he had to hold his powerful pull shot in reserve and more than once he showed that he would have loved to hit hard into the pitch off the slow bowlers. England’s tactics were unworthy of a team capable of winning its way to a deciding test. I can find no reasonable explanation for the tactics adopted in a game which meant so much to the side.

It would be presumptuous to hint the Englishmen were overawed with the situation —men of their experience would be more likely to welcome the challenge offered them But it would be just as easy to accept that as an explanation as to try to pin it on the slowness of the pitch. Surely this game called for an all-out effort from England's batsmen, especially when they had the Australian attack cornered on a pitch which offered no help.

It seemed to me their "goslow” tactics were part of the team plan right from the start. I feel sorry now for the people responsible for its adoption. Bowlers Did Well The Australian bowlers did< a creditable job in bowling' so accurately at the stumps throughout the day that there was an increasing psychological pressure that weighed so heavily on each batsman. But you can take it for certain that once he had bowled his first over in today’s play no bowler imagined that the day would have ended so much in Australia’s favour. Hawke did an excellent job.. He beat the bat many times with his inswinger and appealed several times for leg-before wicket. Twice in one over he went through Barrington’s defence and he capped it with a magnificent diving catch to claim Sheppard as his first test victim. England seems to have frittered away its winning chances already. Its bowlers have been presented with a formidable job to keep Australia’s batsmen In check, facing what looks likely to be a disappointing first innings total. I doubt that Australian batsmen will approach their job in the same manner as England did today.