Cricketers Making Life Difficult

Press, Volume CIV, Issue 30767, 3 June 1965, Page 17

Cricketers Making Life Difficult

[From R. T. BRITTENDEN, N.Z.P.A. Special Correspondent J EDGBASTON, June 2. The New Zealand cricket team has been a peculiar mixture from the time it began its long tour at Madras and its strange reluctance to exhibit its best qualities consistently was never shown more clearly than in the first test which ended at Edgbaston yesterday.

Some of its irregularities were caused by health and climate during the first section of the tour. But a team which is without doubt genuinely capable of extending England has had a sorry record of fits and starts in the not very merry month of May.

One of its principal problems has been that of vary-1 ing pitches, Its best all-! round performance so far has i been the Lord’s match with! the M.C.C.—good batting and successful bowling. Stark Contrast But at Edgbaston the inefficiency of the first innings batting was in stark contrast to the splendidly efficient and well-organised second innings display. This was a match New Zealand should not have lost by so wide a margin. The bleak and wintry weather for the first four days made life difficult for bowlers and for batsmen, but from New Zealand's point of view the chief villain was the extraordinarily slow pitch which drew the teeth of the New Zealand pace bowlers as soon as Reid had lost the toss and started his attack on England’s batsmen. It was an important toss, for the pitch took turn early in the match and by the third day Barber was turning quite violently at times. Although the ball generally came on at a moderate pace there were some deliveries which

(whipped through, and it was, unsettling for batsmen. New Zealand has no spin of quality, and has good pace bowlers. England’s pace bowling looks very thin at present, but it is much stronger than New Zealand in spin. So the odds were on the home team before a ball was bowled. Notwithstanding EngHand’s solid score of 435, the [New Zealand pace bowlers performed very well. New Zealand’s first innings i batting was indecisive and ini efficient. Some dreadful : strokes were made and after an opening partnership of 54 I the whole side was out for an I addition of only 62 runs. ; Batsmen Hamstrung j Titmus bowled extremely [well, but he was allowed to [make his own arrangements I from first to last. Into a fairly strong wind he often swung the ball away and straightened it or turned it back. He forced batsmen back repeatedly and he kept changing, [sometimes twice in an over, from over to round the wicket and back again, as well as using the width of the crease intelligently and setting tight attacking fields. So hamstrung were the batsI men that Cartwright and Bar[ber picked up wickets be- [ cause near-mesmerised playj ers made half-hearted at- [ tempts to hit them. It was a sorry debacle on a pitch which did not present any pace problems and which gave Titmus only a little turn. So New Zealand had to fol- | low on for the third time in seven matches and it was not unreasonable to expect a further failure with England so much on top and well over 300

runs needed to escape the final humiliation of an innings defeat. New Zealand’s magnificent recovery is now part of our cricket story and there is no knowing how much further this resistance might have been extended had New Zealand not been rather unkindly treated by the umpires. Dreadful Decision In the middle of the fourth afternoon an appeal against the light was upheld but the game was restarted in a dreadful light and it was then that Sutcliffe’s gallant display came to an end. Late in the afternoon another appeal was allowed, yet again the game had to be resumed and this was a dreadful decision because the light was then worse than when the players had left the field. It was disturbing that so many New Zealand batsmen reached 40. yet so few went on from there when the hardest part of their job was behind them. However, one must be grateful for the solidarity of batting and for the methods used. It was decided that no good purpose would be served by going as lambs to the slaughter and so from the start of the second innings a challenge was thrown out to England’s bowlers. Titmus was the main threat and it was Titmus whose performance was most affected by New Zealand’s resolute effort. He again had impressive figures if the number of overs he bowled is considered. But he finished with only two for 85 and there was never the same mastery about his bowling because whenever he tried to cramp and confine the batsmen as he had done earlier one of them or both would break his field up by sweeping through his leg cordon, hitting him straight or pushing him [to the off side for a quick ! single. ‘ Pollard Finest It was fine batting and Polj lard was the finest of them ! all. He is a courageous and I conscientious young man who I has now learned that he is good enough to hit as hard as the best of them, and his was in terms of the future as well as of the present an exciting performance. New Zealand must go ahead now for its batsmen have proved themselves. No doubt England’s pace bowling will look more effective on the faster wicket of Lords but the advantage of a quicker surface would probably be of i more benefit to New Zealand I than to England. | Trueman is still a great i showman and a capable bowler, but he was played with ease at Edgbaston and his final figures were flattering to him. Rumsey did not get much work but he has a nice action and looks capable when fully fit of some real speed and lift. Little was seen of Cartwright. But if New Zealand is to make a late run to make this I a successful tour the first innings failures must stop. Edgbaston must surely have given the batsmen more faith in themselves. Now it is up to them to keep the runs flowing and hold the cacthes: the pace bowlers could do the rest.