Big Cricket Attractions of This Month

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 93, 14 January 1936, Page 14

Big Cricket Attractions of This Month

(By

THE WATCHMAN.)

4 N experienced, impartial and reliable ■ZX observer who saw the first day or play between the touring English team and New Zealand at Dunedin, considers that nothing could account for the sensational collapse of the home team in the first innings. After J. 11. Parks and A. D. Baxter had dislodged the first'three batsmen cheaply, he says, H. D. Beau simply shot the rest out by sheer speed, illustrating the vulnerability to, bowling of real pace of most batsmen in New Zealand. „ „ , j According to this man the New Zealand bowling was quite good for a time, but the trundlers were let down in the field, and the batsmen speedily attained, such a supremacy that they did what they liked, taking every possible risk and succeeding, mainly because the epidemic ot dropped catches continued. • He .says A. W. Roberts bowled really well agaiust the early batsmen. In his first turn of four overs with the new ball he gave away six runs without taking a wicket. Brought back again half <au hour later he bowled D. Smith witli a beautiful ball, and a few balls later had W. Barber dropped by C. 8. Elmes, usually a most reliable sli P, Coming on again with a new ball at -W he again had Barber dropped in the slips .1. Cowie fumbling the ball, which rebounded to W. E. Merritt, who also tailed to hold it. Even when the batsmen were hitting at almost everything, however, Roberts kept the scoring rate to three runs an over. Cowie, the fast medium bowler, did not impress him so much. The Aucklander, he thought, lost venom after the shine had gone off the ball. He opened with some tire, J. H. Parks nearly playing one ball into his wicket and then being droptied behind the sticks in the next over. In his succeeding turns, however, he dil not appear likely to dislodge batsmen playing with reasonable care. C. K. Jackman, always inclined to be either “right on it’’ or “right off it, had an unhappy day behind.the sticks, tor beside dropping a catch, be fumbled the ball, both when receiving it from the bowler and when, taking it from fieldsmen. . The slow bowling did not appear to trouble the visitors, who, confident in the comfort of a good start, played it with freedom, J. Hardstaff, E. R. T. Holmes and J. H. Human m particular being aggressive, using their feet to get to the pitch of the ball. The visitors, he thought, owed much to the Professionals, who. assisted by timely let-offs in the field, built up such a solid foundation for the innings that the following batsmen were able to take every risk in attacking the bowling.

Previous Tests. , New Zealand’s score of 81 against the English team at Dunedin was the lowest made by a New Zealand side against an English team touring New Zealand. In 11)29-30 New Zealand collapsed sensationally at Christchurch before 11. J. G. Allorn, who took five for 38, but the score was 112, li. C. Blpnt making 45 not out. New Zealand made only 84 anu the South Island only 51 against P. F. Warners team in 1902-03. , The match on Friday, baturday and Monday at Wellington, recalls previous games between New Zealand and English teams at Wellington. In 1902-03 England won at Wellington by an innings and 22 runs. New Zealand’s first innings was notable for the great display of D. Reese, of Christchurch, now president ot the New Zealand Cricket Association, who made 148 in dashing style. The visitors compiled 380, a very sound display ot 125 being given by Warner, who was comanager of D. R. Jardine’s team on its visit to Australia and New Zealand, and who is now one of the English selectors. New Zealand’s collapse for 84 in the second innings was mainly due to C. J. Burnup, the first man to bowl the ball which swings away late toward the slips in New Zealand. He took five wickets for eight runs, three being caught m the slips. In 190(5-07 at Wellington New Zealand scored its first and only win against an English team by 56 runs in an exciting match. New Zealand made 16a, L. G. Hemus, of Auckland, scoring 38, and K. Tucker, of Wellington, 23. The Englishmen scored 160, seven batsmen getting double figures, but none a really big score. New Zealand then hit up 249 a particularly fine innings being played by A. Haddon, of Auckland, who made 71, and A. Williams, of Wellington, who scored U not out. Both were struck several times by fast bumpers, and more than once had the baf knocked out of their hands, but they carried on most courageously. Ine English team, against good bowling backed up by smart fielding, lost four for 44 and nine for 159. A “do or die” last wicket partnership added 41 amid great excitement, but New Zealand won by 56 runs. J. W. H. T. Douglas, later captain ot England, bowled especially well in this match, taking seven for 49, and five for . 75 He bowled fast-medium with great resolution, and on a popping wicket was an uncomfortable man to face. tor New Zealand A. 11. Fisher, of Otago, was effective in both innings, taking four for 25 and five for 61. E. Upham, ot Wellington. secured six for 84 in the first innings. In 1922-23 at Wellington, A. C. McLaren, the old English captain, made his great 200 not out against New Zealand, showing all the dash of a man half age, for he was then 51. The Englishmen scored 505, T. C. Lowry, then at Cambridge University, getting 54. Nine bowlers were used, the most’successful being S. Brice, of Wellington, who took three for 135 in 36 overs. New Zealand scored 222, D. R. Garrard, of Auckland, making 47, of Auckland, 38, not out, E. G. McLeod, of Wellington. 22. and J. b. Shepherd, of Otago. 33 and 127, J.S. J. Hiddleston. of Wellington, scoring 38. and R. U. Brnnt, of Canterbury, 25. The English team won by an innings and 156. A. P. Freeman, the small slow bowler who has since taken hundreds of wickets in county cricket without appearing very often tor England, secured five for 114 and five for

“The Brice Mystery.” This English team played, two matches against New Zealand in Wellington, ami before the second there developed what has become known as “the Brice Mystery.” This concerned Stan Brice, of Wellington, who was bowling particularly well that season. He was not named when the selection was announced and this raised a storm of criticism. It was currently supposed that the responsibility lay with N. C. Sneaden, ot Auckland, who was captain as well as a selector of the New Zealand team. Suggestions were made that when he appeared on the ground the angered spectators who thought an injustice had been done a capable player, would, indicate what they thought of him. Brice then had published a letter in which he appealed to all followers of the game not to be associated with any suth demonstrations. ‘■Nothing could be more degrading to cricket and to Wellington," he wjjote. This New Zealand team was chosen by correspondence, a very unsatisfactory method under any circumstances, and while the storm about the omission of Brice was developing, Snedden announced that he. had retired from the team anu resigned his position as a selector. In a statement lie said he was not consulted about the team after he bao imide a tentative selection by letter, with the proviso that it was subject to revision depending on the form of the bowlers in the match between Wellington and the English team. lie announced that, on his form, he considered Brice should have been selected for New Zealand. Brice was then included and in the Englishmen’s only innings, of 401. he took two wickets for 75 runs in 33 overs. Lowry played a particularly, sound in nings in this match, making 130. □'he New Zealand scores were IGG and 215, E. H. L. Bernau, the left-hand bowler and batsman from Napier, making Gt in the first innings, and D. 0. Collins, of Waigarapa. GO, and IL C. Blunt., of Canterbury, GS. in the second. The English team won by an innings and 20 runs

Another Memorable Pay. In 1929-30, when A. 11. H. Gilligans team played New Zealand in .Wellington,

c. S. Dempster, of Wellington, and J. E Mills, of Auckland, made a great stand of 276 for the first wicket on the firs day. The pair started very slowly, bur when settled down played freely and confidently to all bowling. Mills was especially attractive, hooking and gliding effectively, hitting 12 fours in making 111. Dempster, not so artistic, but very sound, hit eight fours in making 136. New Zealand at the end of the first day had 33J up for three wickets. Next day the score was carried lo 440, M. L. Page playing very steadily lor 67. The Englishmen made 320, E. (V. Dawson scoring 44. K. S. Duleepsinjhi 40, G. B. Legge 39. M. S. Nichols <S not out, S. Worthington 32, and A. H. H. Gilligan 32. . . New Zealand, in the second innings lost four wickets for 164, Dempster plating a bright and sound innings, of 80 not out, and then declared. The Eng; liahmen lost four for 107, Duleepsinjhi 56 not out,,and the match was drawn. This was the only bad mistake Gilligan made in his handling of the bowling on tour, for he did not put h. E. Woolley on until Dempster and Mills ha: passed ‘their centuries, and then the ta J left-hander took seven for 76. Gilligan confessed later that it was an error, ot judgment, but be had some justification for his action, for Woolley himself thought he would not be effective on the wicket. Against Wellington on the same ground he had found that be could not get nip from the pitch. G. R. Dickinson, the Otago fast bowler, took three wickets for 66 runs, but he did not impress the Englishmen greatly, for they regarded him as more of a slinger than a bowler. F. T. Badeock secured four for 80, bowling very accurately for 36 overs.

The Wellington Team. Mr. A. AV. Duncan has strengthened the "Wellington team to meet Otago, compared with that which played the English team and Canterbury, by including N. Gallichan, of Palmerston North, in place of J. A. Newman, of Nelson. It is questionable if Gallicban is not a better lefthand bowler, for, whereas Newman is inclined to bowl good batsmen in on good wickets, Gallichan always attacks the stumps. In addition he is a better batsman and fieldsman. The "Wellington team still lacks some solidity in batting. Though D. A. R. Moloney and M. A. O’Brien opened quite well against Canterbury, neither is, in experience and method, a * true, opening batsman, and each would play his natural game better lower down in the order. J. A. R. Blandford has had some successes at an opening batsman, but is better placed lower down. The. shortage of experienced and proved opening batsmen means that 8. Ward has to go in first wicket down, a position for which he is not thoroughly equipped for big cricket, though he has made some handy scores in representative matches. Probably 1-e would be better at number four or five than number three. The appearance of two opening batsmen of real class would be the answer to a selector’s prayer inWellington. . The selector is persevering with W. Rainbird, who was not a success last season and who has made only 53 runs in six innings in representative matches this year. Nevertheless, there is something to be commended in the policy of picking a young player and persevering with him. Roger Blunt always said that the Canterbury selectors had to carry him for several matches before he made good. It cannot be suggested that Rainbird is another Blunt, but he may have the capacity to develop, and the selector, who evidently thinks so, has some justification for taking a risk in testing him. Too often selectors have tried young players and then dropped them because they did not make good immediately. Gailicban, of Palmerston North, is a case in point. He was picked for New Zealand. and, while he did not exactly fad, he did not succeed spectacularly, like W. E. Merritt. The selectors then forgot all about him for several seasons, and now he has been restored to the Wellington team.' He is a good bowler now, but be would probably be much better had he not been lost sight of just when continued experience in good cricket would have been of most use in his development. Newman, on the other hand, adopting the practice of 'travelling across to Wellington from Nelson to play club cricket kept himself before the selectors, and usurped the place in Wellington and New Zealand teams which would probably have been held by Gallichan.

BATTING IMPROVED | Comment on Selection (By The Watchman.) Changes in the team for Wellington, compared with that which played in Dunedin, strengthen the batting, especially by. the inclusion of J. L. Kerr, who was not available for the first maten against the Englishmen. The Canterbury opening batsman is the soundest on that position in the country at the moment, especially to fast bowling, which he plays with a certainty unusual among batsmen who have not regular experience of this form o£ attack. He replaces J. E. Mills, of Auckland, who failed in both innings in Dunedin. This deprives the side of a regular left-hand opening batsman. E. D. Blundell, of Wellington, has been brought in in place of J. Cowie, of Auckland. Cowie is fast-medium, and Blundell nearer-true medium. The change is hardly unexpected, for Blundell is bowling with more nip from the pitch this season than for many years, and he has a proved partiality for the wicket on the Basin Reserve’. In addition, the. Englishmen rather fear hjm after his performance against them on that ground in the match won by Wellington. The slip fielding will have to be better in Wellington than it was in Dunedin, however, if full advantage is to be gained from the inclusion of Blundell.

A. W. Roberts, of Canterbury, has been retained. He will be the other opening bowler in normal conditions. His inclusion is not surprising, for there is reliable evidence tha_t he bowled really well for both New Zealand and Canterbury against the Englishmen. In Dunedin, however, catches were dropped from him, especially in the slips. Roberts keeps an excellent, length, can bowl for long periods, and swings the ball late. He must, however, • have good support in the field. J. A. R. Blandford, of Wellington, has been included as wicketkeeper in place of C. K. Jackman, of Canterbury. It was known that the selectors would give both an opportunity, and the change was expected, as Jackman made mistakes in Dunedin. Blandford is a much better batsman. The omission of W. E. Merritt, the slow bowler, makes possible the introduction of M. Wallace, of Auckland, wno has been scoring heavily in matches for the Phinket Shield. Wallace is young and promising, a dasher in methods, and would have been unlucky not to be selected for one game after his development from last season. Merritt has not been bowling well this season, judging by his display against Wellington. Then he appeared to roll the ball instead of spin it. but bis exclusion means that the side is without the most experienced and • able slow bowler in the country when he is on form. The slow attack will now depend on I. B. Cromb (right-hand) and 11. G. Vivian (left-hand), with D. A. R. Moloney and C. Elmes as changes. It seems likely that the twelfth man will be a Wellington plaver. . The side is still not as strong as is desirable in regular opening batsmen, but the batting is much stronger than for the first match. The fielding should also be better.

In the trials for selection in the Victorian athletic team for the Australian championships in Melbourne, Howard Yates cut out the 100 in 9Jsec. As there was a strong following wind, the achievement. in spite of Ihe fact that the track was heavy and sodden, cannot be regarded as a record. Carlton was credited with 9 2-sscc. at Newcastle (N.S.W.) in 1931, but here again a tail-wind queered the pitch.