Influence of Turner most evident in cricket at Carisbrook

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33092, 6 December 1972, Page 16

Influence of Turner most evident in cricket at Carisbrook

(By

R. M. CAIRNS)

The first round, of three matches, in the Motor Corporation knock-out competition provided far better and closer cricket than the equivalent matches last year. The end results must have been most satisfying for the sponsors and the New Zealand Cricket Council. Also there was a series of tense finishes, and surprise results—very necessary if the competition is to breed public interest. In England, it is inevitable that a round of matches in the John Player Sunday League—eight games on a Sunday—will produce some really exciting cricket. There are only six games in the New Zealand season, so it was gratifying that Northern Districts, in pressing Auckland so closely, and Otago and Canterbury should have been still locked in battle till 630 p.m. That Northern Districts should have gone so close to victory, and a place in the final, was certainly the

surprise of the day. But Central Districts’ easy win against Wellington was certainly not expected, and Otago was probably not as strongly favoured as Canterbury. Otago’s chances looked even less bright when B. F. Hastings won the toss, because long experience in other countries has proven that it is rather easier to win after batting first. That Otago did win was due more to its captain, G. M. Turner, than to B. E. Congdon, who was surprisingly named “man of the match.” Certainly, Congdon made 63, but did not bat at his best and was fortunate not to fall to the young Canterbury leg-spinner, D. J. Gatenby. He also took three wickets, again without bowling that well, and each of the wickets was that of a tail-ender. Turner was named captain for the knock-out matches because of his experience in that type of cricket. And it was largely due to his firm control in the field, and sound deployment of rather limited bowling resources, that Otago so contained the Canterbury batsmen and emerged as a

likely finalist against Auckland. The feature of Turner’s play that was most obvious to the spectators, casual or heavily involved, was his batting, though. It was probably the finest attacking innings he has played in top-class cricket in this country; and it was a brief sight of the Turner who is so highly rated in England. He leaned into the faster men, M. G. Webb, specially, and R. J. Hadlee, with all the time in the world at the beginning of the Otago innings; and while Turner scored freely to all points, his square-driving was glorious to watch. Though one-day, limitedover cricket is little guide to a Plunket Shield team, the Canterbury bowling was of a mixed quality. D. R. Hadlee will clearly do a fine job as a fairly brisk mediumpacer for Canterbury, and his batting, based on playing straight and hitting hard, will be a further asset. His brother, Richard, was occasionally a little loose, but the real disappointment was Webb. There were two or three balls of real pace, but he otherwise lacked a

good line and, New Zealand representative or not earlier this year, he will have to work very hard, and improve a great deal, to hold his place. To balance the disappointment of Webb, there was a very promising performance by Gatenby. He was not as inventive, in the sense of variety, as he can be in club cricket, but Gatenby gave a steady, controlled exhibition. A great deal of his bowling was to New Zealand’s top two test batsmen. Turner and Congdon, and he could have had both these prize wickets. He got Turner, when the opener—in an untypical moment—gave his wicket away in a slightly unnecessary bid to hit Gatenby; and Congdon was missed being stumped when he was 37. Had Congdon gone then, Canterbury would have been well back into the game, and Gatenby its bowling hero. On such narrow threads do these games — and this one, in particular —hang; but at least it showed that Gatenby is well prepared to bowl for Canterbury in the first-class season.