TEST CRICKET STORIES

Evening Star, Issue 18173, 13 January 1923, Page 10

TEST CRICKET STORIES

ROME '-REansnEOENCBa The great hitler of England, G. L. Jariop, has been spinning some most interesting storied of hk experiences in test matches with the Australians. This one is talien from a recent Issue of ’/The Cricketer/ In tho season of 1909 I ployed l my last test match against Australia, who that year canid over under tho loa4«rehip of ’M. A. Noble. If not so strong as the 1899 and the 1902 sides, ipwas nevertheless a fino all-round, combination, which showed 1 itself to bo superior to us ini four of tlie five test matches. Meeting with defeats at tho handa of Surrey and. tho M.C.G. before tiro first test, and also in tljat match itself at Birmingham, the Australians, up to tho second match at Lord's, hacT exhibited most unpromising form. Tho ono bright feature of the opening matches was the knowledge that in \V. Bardsloy and V. S. Hansford, two- left-hand batsmen had been, unearthed who promised to worthily fill tie g?ps caused by the absence of 'Clem Hill and Joe Daviirg. In the first test, played at Birmingham on a rain-damaged wicket throughout, Australia failed to taka advantage of the chance presented to them ol batting first on a wicket sod done d by rain. So much rain had fallen overnight, followed, by a further heavy downpour on the first day, that play was not feasible until after 5 o’clock, and, then only for little more than half an hour. In that time Australia leal two wickets for 22, one of these two being lobby Cotter, who had been cent in wi'ln the object of forcing the game on the “dead” wicket. Under the influence of tho early morning sun tho wicket next morning'became difficult, and though Warwick Armstrong defended stoutly _ for over an hour. Hirst and Blythe met with small resistance, and their innings came to a close before lunch for 74. HOBBS MAKES HIS DEBUT. Making his flint appearance in a test match, Hobbs—who opened our innings with Archie MocLarcn, reinstated as Eng-land-’s captain—was out without scoring, to bo shortly followed by tho oaptqin himself and Charles Fry, the score at the interval being three wickets for 17 runs. After (though no one did anything much “ to write home about”) we did succeed in gaining a useful lead of 47 runs. Ibis was the first time that we realised that Warwick Armstrong was something bettor than a more change howler, whose principal use was tho keeping down of runs. He took in this innings five wickets for 27 runs, and with that perfect length of his proved uncommonly difficult to play. The wicket had improved towards tho end of our innings, and it war, at this period that ho bowled so well. An hour and a-hal{ play remained when Australia commenced her second innings, and before bad light caused tho stumps to ho pulled up she was leading by 20 runs, with eight wickets in hand, the two which fell Being Macartney and Noble. The latter was oat to an astonishingly fine catch by A, 0. Jones off Hirst’s bowling. Standing at forward short-leg, in a position one might reasonably term “silly midon,” “Jonah” just got Ills right hand to a good shot of the Australian captain when the ball was but a lev; inches from the ground. Their second wicket had fallen at 16, and it was then that Banelord .and Syd. Gregory commenced 9, partnership which produced 81 runs, the only sustained effort of that second inningSj for Hirst and Blythe again bowled splendidly, and Australia was all out for 151. HOBBS AT HIS TOP. Wo had; an interesting spectqcio afforded us when we commenced to battle lor the 105 runs required to win, inasmuch as the two batsmen selected to open tho inning.?—Charles Fry and Hobbs—were both bustling for “specs.” There were a few anxious moments before both of them "got off the mark,” hut once that ordeal was over they settled down to play fine cricket, knocking off the runs m 90min without being separated. That innings of Hobbs was brilliant, and should hare sufficed to have secured for him a regular place in the England, team of that year, but he was dropped after figuring in the next two games, Tho Selection Committee were again not in happy vein this season, and, aa in 1002, appeared to have an unhealthy craze for alterations. Despite this initial success, the team chosen for tho second match at Lord’s differed in five instances from that at Birmingham. This was, in tho cases of Charles Fry and Blythe, unavoidable, for circumstances prevented cither from playing; but the enforced absence of the latter did not emphasise Oho more strongly the curious blunder in omitting Wilfred Rhodes from the team., A. further error was committed in taking the field without a fast bowler, and 1 altogether that Lord’s side was an ill-balanced lot. Australia reaped an ample revenge for the Birmingham defeat, and their nine wickets victory was well (jeserved. The chief features of that game were the fine not out century of Hansford and the admirable bowling of Warwick Armstrong, wbo in the second innings look six wickets for 35 runs.