THE TEST MATCHES

Evening Star, Issue 17542, 23 December 1920, Page 6

THE TEST MATCHES

AUSTRALIA’S BATTING SUPREMACY. Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. LONDON, December 22. (Received December 23, at 10.55 aim,) The newspapers write in a chorus of praise for the Australians’ , batting, particularly Armstrong’s, which ‘ The Times ’ describes as the most brilliant of the match, and the greatest he has over displayed. Other papers liken Armstrong to Dr W. G. Grace. Despondency is expressed as to England’s prospects in the remaining tests, on account of Australia’s batting strength. AN UMPIRING INCIDENT. SYDNEY", December 25. (Received December 23, at noon.) Tho_ Waddington run out incident in the hrst innings of the Englishmen led to much comment. Waddington disputed the decision with the umpire (Jones), whose Tu l\ n S was widely questioned. Wilson’s cable described the decision as shameful. (Received Decertiber 23, at 1 p m ) Wilson, vice-captain of the M.C.C. team, who cabled to London expressing the decision ro Waddington’s run out, has apologised to the umpire for the severity of his comments. A GREAT " GATE.” SYDNEY, December 23. The attendance at the five days’ cricket totalled 112.000, and the gate amounted to jb10,086. [The record attendance at test matches hitherto was at* Melbourne in DecemberJanuary, 1911-12, when 96.265 persons attended, and the_ receipts totalled £4,353. Increased admission charges were made for the game just concluded. —Ont.ookv.k.] ENGLAND’S DISAPPOINTING BATTING. SYDNEY. December 23. (Received December 25, at noon.) . The ‘Telegraph’ says: “England's innings not worth discussing, -Rhodes alone playing enterprising cricket. Judged by the standard of his colleagues his innings was a masterpiece The best we can say of the Englishmen is that they fought to the end, but not in a generous mood, several disputing decisions which ■went on to the end of the match. They did not show first-class cricket, and forced the opinion that England is not worth 300 runs in any one innings. Parkin was a failure, and never looked like bowling anyone.”

The ‘Herald ’ says: “Australia, collectively and individually, outplayed' England this time, but though the margin of victory is tremendous it is not to be taken as a criterion of the remainder of the series. It has previously happened that the English team were outplayed in the first match and won the rest. - England lost _ the match on Saturday when their batting got into -difficulties "with. Mailey. Thence the victory of Australia seemed assured. Missed chances contributed to the victory. Collins, MacartneyT and Kellaway were allowed to compile scores which should have been reduced 50 per cent.” The writer pays a fine eulogv to Hobbs, who ranks with the greatest players of the past. He prophesies renown for Gregory and Mailey as first-class bowlers. The best team on the day won all along the line. Douglas’s team is vet below its proper form. Neither side is" as good as_ in 1911-12. All have deteriorated, which is due to the absence of serious cricket during the war. The Australian batsmen gave a good, sound, defensive display. Armstrong’s innings was the most polished display of the match; seldom, if ever, have we seen a better' performance. ENGLISH PRESS COMMENT. Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. LONDON, December 22. In its comments on the test match the ‘Guardian’ says: Thd English team were absurdly below their true form. An ordinary county eleven could hardly have fared worse. The ‘Evening News’ says: The Australians were superior in every deportment except fielding.