PROGRESS REPORT

Evening Post, Volume CIV, Issue 29, 3 August 1927, Page 9

PROGRESS REPORT

STILL DOING WELL

*A SALUTARY WARNING"

(Written for "The Post" by Colonel Philip Trevor, C.8.E.)

(Copyright.) , LONDON, 22nd June.

There is no disguising the fact that the defeat of the New Zealanders by Northamptonshire is a very considerable disappointment. On that occasion their batting. failed for the first time in the tour. Of course, if you ar« an ianate pessimist you may indulge in all lands of dismal forebodings because of thia very marked defeat. I am not a pessimist, and if I am an optimist I hope at least I am not a tiresome one. My opinion of the batting of the New Zealanders on a fast, true wicket remains exactly what it was on the first toy of their tour when they opened at Maidenhead. I have never had to modify that opinion, and. cannot see any reason why I should modify it now. UNEXPECTED FAQiTTBE. la these days it is not bo much quality of bowling that matters as method of batting. A half-volley or a longhop is a half-volley or a long-hop, whether Tate or your "Saturday afternooner" is bowling, and though Tate can, and does, make a good length ball do more than a "Saturday Afternooner" makes it do, that fact in itself is not sufficient to condemn method in batting. We have had an unusually long spell of fine weather in England this cricket season. Consequently I am not yet in a postion to criticise the New Zealand batting on a slow or sticky wicket one way or the other. I have to admit, however, that the New Zealanders failed in a way in which I did not expect them to fail when they were beaten at Kettering. They did moderately well, though not more than moderately well, in their first innings there. They were faced with a total of 237, and they managed to secure a slight lead at half-time. They proceeded to get their opponents out for the 3eeond time for 260 runs. Consequently they were asked to make only 247 runs to win the match. As a matter of fact, tliev only got 164, and so were beaten by as many as 82 runs. The whole day was at their disposal for the getting of those runs, yet at lunch-time the Now Zealanders had lost six wickets for TOS. Subsequently, the doughty Dacie and that most useful crickot'er M'Girr (who has come to rank more as a batsman than as a bowler) went for the bowling in typical New Zealand fashion, and achieved, at any rate, j momentary success. However, their ef- | fort came too late, for tho real damage had been done before their partnership had begun. A BATTING FALLACY. At the risk of being paradoxical, I will advance the statement that the New Zealand batsmen would have done better had the task in front of them been more difficult. It is the readiness to attack, and the power to attack which have given these New Zealanders a sudden and a welcome place in cricket over here. Had the early New Zealand batsmen played their own game lit Kettering on the third morning of tho match I do not believe they would have lost it. The man *who can wield Excalibur handicaps himself when he substitutes a rapier for it. For once theso New Zealanders allowed themselves to be seduced, by; a particularly

I English batting fallacy—"Keep up your wicket and the runs will come, especially when the time at your disposal is unlimited." I said at the beginning of the tour that so long as New Zealand 'batting retained its defiant attitude it would also retain its dominant position. I also expresed the hope that experience of our methods would not induce the New Zealanders to alter their own. Well, they have broken their own laws and they have got a 'licking" in. consequence. I hope and believe that the defeat at Kettering they will regard merely as a necessary and salutaiy warning. " FINE BOWLING SIDES. The weather was unkind to the New Zealanders at Leicester, and owing to rain there was no play on the third day of the match. Had it kept fine I think the New Zealanders would probably have won that match.' With a wicket in hand they «»ad a lead of 294 runs. I could wish that they had achieved this particular victory, for Leicester arc the best bowling side against which the tourists have played. Of course, I rank Yorkshire first—easily ] first, of .our counties. Bobinson, Mac-1 aulay, Ehodes, and Kihier! No other | county side has four such bowlers. It is a near thing for the second place between Lancashire and Notts. Maodon- ! aid, of Lanes., is a great asset. So ia Larwood, of Notts. These two men are the best fast bowlers now playing cricket in England.' ■ 6 GOOD PERFORMANCE. I put Leicestershire fourth on the bowling list, and so it was a good performance that the New Zealanders accomplished in getting 371 runs'against that bowling. More encouraging stillto them was what Henderson and Blunt did with the ball when Leicestershire batted. Leicestershire do not rank as I one of our great county batting sides, chiefly, I think, because their numbers 1, 2, and 3 on the .batting list are not inthe habit (as in the case of Yoik- 1 shire, Lancashire, Notts, Surrey, and Middlesex) of giving the side a fine j start. But in this instance Shipman, Berry, and Armstrong rose to the oc- ! casion and made it look as if their side I might establish a first innings lead. However, just when things looked bad for New Zealand, Henderson and Blunt bowled so effectively that Leicestershire had all they could do to save the fol-low-on. The tourists certainly had a bit of a setback when they batted a second time. M. L. Page, who has indeed found himself, was again in fine form and but for him New Zealand would have had the most unusual experience of a batting collapse. Even as matters stood, they then belied their reputation aa rungetters. For all that, I repeat that I believe they would have won the match had the weather kept fine. It is not my opinion that they aro falling away. On the contrary their bowling is slightly improving, chiefly, I think, because they are practically accustoming themselves to our English batting methods and are taking steps to counter them. Lowry continues to captain the side,'efficiently nnd he is careful not to tire out any particular bowler.