Slow cricket, but for N.Z. a satisfactory series

Press, 15 March 1978, Page 18

Slow cricket, but for N.Z. a satisfactory series

By

R. T. BRITTENDEN

With its win at Wellington, and its colourful recovery at Auckland, the New Zealand test cricket team won considerable satisfaction from its drawn series against England.

The three matches were bitterly fought, but the tour gate takings of about 8237,000 hardly relate to the quality of the cricket, or to the tests as public entertainment. Many of those who watched the games were enthralled at the closeness of the conflict; many more were disenchanted by the pace of the play.

It was very satisfactory that a substantial profit will be made — something over 530,000 perhaps, with television fees still to be added — for internal tours such as these depend almost entirely on the weather during the test week-ends and the governing authori'. / will need a substantial balance to counter bad test weather on future tours.

But the tests, with only

a few brief hours of ag? gression, were extraordinarily slow. England scored better over the three games — 27.9 runs a wicket compared with New Zealand’s 23.9. But in other regards, New Zea-

land had something of an edge over England.

New Zealand scored at 32.52 runs an hour, England at 31.08, although England’s bowling rate was slower — 11.3 overs

an hour against New Zealand’s 11.34. New Zealand scored 2.92 runs an over, England 2.74. The figures were affected considerably by the final day of the last test, when New Zealand scored briskly and England used its slow bowlers extensively, for the first time. The figures are depressingly low . On average, only about 90 balls were bowled in each hour, when something in excess of 100 an hour is a reasonable rate.

The run rate, too, was low, partly because both sides were deficient in batsmen of sufficient quality to match and master good bowling, partly through the policy adopted by both sides of having the seamers and fast bowlers stifling strokemaking by bowling awkwardly short of a length. It was a series for the cutter and hooker, certainly not for the front’ foot player. The bowling

on both sides was good — in its appointed form. England’s attack was sharper than New Zealand’s but there was very little difference in the batting. Geoff Boycott set standards for this slowmoving series. In the tests, he scored at llj runs an hour.

Clive Radley, very limited in stroke production, fought his way to a very courageous century at Auckland, but the only other batsman to appeal particularly was lan

Botham, who was the man of the series for England, Graham Roope finished the series with good batting figures, and he played magnificent strokes now and then, but he had enough luck for a whole team.

Richard Collinge was a deserved winner of the New Zealand man of the series award. He bowled with tremendous heart and application. Richard Hadlee had his days at Wellington, and the sorry over-use of him at Lancaster Park probably cost him something at Auckland, where, at any rate, he could not get much from the pitch.

For all the fact that he did not take a wicket, Dayle Hadlee made a major contribution at Wellington, as did Bevan Congdon. But neither Ewen Chatfield nor Lance Cairns looked much more than pedestrian.

Although he had only one substantial score, John Wright batted well enough to suggest he has a good test future. Robert Anderson performed very well, with a brisk runrate, but if New Zealand was better off for opening batsman, Anderson might be of more value in the middle order. He always looked like giving the bowlers a chance.

Mark Burgess and John Parker earned their keep and their tour places, and Jock Edwards, in his one appearance, has made the choice of Warren Lees as first wicket-keeper difficult. Edwards is not far behind Lees in his wi-cket-keeping standards, and he scored two halfcenturies at Auckland — in good batting conditions — where Lees failed six times against England’s bowling. Normally, the best available wicket-keeper must be chosen, but there will no doubt be a temptation to put trust in Edwards, for there are other players in the side who could fill in for the occasional match as wicketkeeper. Lees’s luck has been wretched in the last couple of years, but it will be difficult for the selectors to include Lees the wicket-keeper and Edwards the batsman. Bevan Congdon struggled during this series, but if he could be available for England there is little doubt that regular cricket would bring him back to something approaching his best.

New Zealand had some very anxious moments in this series. The sensational victory at Wellington was followed by a heavy defeat at Christchurch, where the fiery bowling of Bob Willis wrecked the second innings.

But the manner in which a losing situation was retrieved at Auckland argues that the 1978 New Zealand team has a very reasonable prospect of a successful England tour.