CRICKET

Evening Star, Issue 21611, 5 January 1934, Page 4

CRICKET

NOTES AND HEWS

[By Substitute.]

> FIXTURES. January 5 and 6. Otago v. Hawke’s Bay, at Napier. February 16, 17, 19, and 20.—Otago v. Wellington, at Dunedin. The Plunket Shield. •

As was anticipated, Auckland proved a tougher proposition than Canterbury when Otago entered upon its second shield engagement—so tough that Otago was beaten by tile substantial margin of 169 runs. Analysing the play, it seems clear that, although Otago’s batting against Auckland’s anything but formidable bowling was disappointing, the real causes of its defeat were first the appallingly bad catching, and secondly the failure for once in a while of Badcock as a bowler. This latter cause proved the contention that our attack is very largely dependent on the success of the conch’s efforts.

There is also a great deal in the argument that Badcock is inclined to bowl himself too long without spelling, this often resulting in playing a good batsman in.

In the circumstances, the bowling of Dunning, who plugged away in characteristic style with moderate success, and the pleasantly surprising effectiveness of the left-hander, Elmes, was gratifying. Elmes must, have bowled well above his club form, and his one for 18 and five for 40 easily constituted the best bowling performance on the side. Dunning’s figures (four for 81 and two for 90) were, under the conditions named, quite praiseworthy. For Badcock to take only three wickets in the match was an unusually poor performance for Otago’s bowling mainstay, and one wonders whether the cause may not have been stalenoss consequent upon an excessive amount of work at the nets and in club matches. Even a machine gives out occasionally through overwear.

Evidently Moloney’s injured leg troubled him, but Chettleburgh filled the breach as a slow bowler,, and bagged a couple of good wickets in the second, innings. Jolly proved quite ineffectual as the fast bowler.

■ The most disappointing aspect of Otago’s out-cricket, however, was the bad catching, for the improvement lately manifested by our fieldsmen in this branch of the game had led to the hope that there would be no recurrence of the epidemic which had marred Otago cricket on so many previous occasions. Close on a dozen chances must have been put on the carpet by the Otago men in this match, Vivian alone being dropped four times. Excellent ground fielding, though saving lots of runs, could not. jnake up for these fatal mistakes. Improvement in catching is an urgent necessity if shields are to be won or retained.

It is fairly safe to say that had this unfortunate lapse not taken place Otago and not Auckland would have been the undefeated team after the second round of matches. However, these things happen in cricket, though it is less easy to account for the deterioration in fielding and catching which appeal’s to have taken place not only in New Zealand, but in Australia, than to explain the continued ascendancy of the bat over the ball in most of the first-class matches.

Coming to the batting in the recent match against Auckland, there is reason for disappointment in the failure of so many of the Otago eleven as its supporters” had, not without justification, prided themselves on the allround strength of the side, and did not expect it to exhibit such a “ tail.” The outstanding batsman was the voung University player, K. Uttley, who headed the score in each innings with (i2 and 54. Added to the fact that ho is a brilliant field, his performances make his future appear as very bright indeed. However, he is young yet. ami will need io in' nit-in that keenness that characterises his present

play in order to reach the very top flight. Elmes completed a good all-round performance by contributing two useful scores of 24 and 23. The first innings’ effort of ILnight (36) and Badcock (33), and Cavanagh’s 34, Moloney’s 22, and Chettleburgh’s 22 in the second knock were also helpful, but, apart from Uttley, nobody, really got fairly going, and there were too many complete batting failures. Cox, Dunning, Jolly, and Hawkesworth contributed only 45 between them for the second innings. The Auckland bowlers in the second innings obtained quite good averages, the best being Bush’s four for 35, Matheson getting two for 30, and Vivian two for 4, but, as before hinted, these figures surely flatter the bowlersnamed. The batting of . Vivian, Garrard, aifd Mills was a factor in piling up a sufficient score to register a most satisfactory win. As Auckland’s remaining engagement is against Canterbury, so far the weakest of the four provinces, the chances of Otago yet recovering and retaining the shield are not altogether promising. Wellington’s meritorious win over Canterbury after being nearly 100 runs behind on the first innings brands that province as a force to bo reckoned with, and the match with Otago next month should be interesting. But the uncertainties of the game of cricket are so numerous and are so constantly being manifested that Otago need not yet lose hope. Canterbury’s fine batting in the first innings at Wellington indicated that it is capable of piling up the runs, and Auckland’s bowling is ■ not so strong that it might conceivably be conquered, even by Canterbury. Questions of Tactics.

Although F. T. Badcock captains Otago's representative cricket team excellently, there were two points in his leadrship against Cantrbury with which experienced cricketers did not agree (says the ‘ Sun ’). It is held that he should have told his batsmen to go for .the bowling after Otago had gained a lead of over 300 runs, instead of giving so much apparent attention to the possibility of Canterbury’s making well over '4OO runs in the last innings of the match. The other point concerns his bowling so much himself on the last day of the match, especially in the morning. Badcock bowled unchanged from 11 a.m. to 1.15 p.ra. Accurate bowler though he is, he was rather tending to play F. W. Bellamy in, and, in any case, he would have bowled better himself if he had taken a spell occasionally. D.* A. R. Moloney, slow bowler, was off the field on Wednesday, with an injured leg, but Badcock had other bowlers who could have taken a turn-or two with the ball. As Otago was 306 runs ahead when there were only five Canterbury wickets to fall, it could afford to give some runs away in order to keep on getting wickets. Otago had to get Canterbury out before 6 o’clock to obtain, eight shield points. "J. A. Dunning had obtained two of the three wickets which had fallen on Wednesday morning before the sixth wicket partnership developed, and Badcock could have afforded to give himself a spell from bowling then, for a while, and so return to the crease fairlv fresh if Dunning tired. But Badcock kept himself on for an hour after the sixth wicket partnership started, and actually he took only one wicket on Wednesday—and that was before the Bellamy-Cromb partnership began. TVue, he could not use D. A. R. Moloney as a bowler on Wednesday, as Moloney had an injured leg, but he had other bowlers with which to spell himself. And at the end Otago had less than an hour, and a-half to spare.

Canterbury's Slow Bowler. Even if the wicket did give him a trifle of assistance, there can be no question that left-hand slow bowler L. E. Riley bowled very well indeed for Canterbury against Otago in . their Plunket Shield cricket match (says the ‘Sun’). He flighted the ball a little, spun it a little from either side, controlled his length well, and. bowled with admirable persistence and steadiness. He has a beautifully easy action. Riley has improved his bowling since last season, and, as he has plenty of application and aptitude, and is very persevering, he may be expected to improve it still more. Riley is a fine type of cricketer, both on and off the field. Canterbury’s bowling would have been very badly off without him .in this match, but be would have done even better if the catching had been less faulty. It is 'worth noting that lus eight wickets for 168 runs in OtagiTs two innings were those of \. fa. Cavanagh (twice), T. . Chettleburgh (twice), D. A. R. Moloney, I<. 1. Badcock C. J. Elmes, and J. A. Dunning Cavanagh' and Chettleburgh were Otago’s most successful two batsmen in Plunket Shield cricket last season, and Chettleburgh heads the batting averages in chib cricket in Dunedin at pre sent.

Dunning’s Bowling. Says the ‘ Sun ’: —“ In club cricket matches in Dunedin this season J. ■ A. Dunning has taken only nine wickets, at a cost of 35.33 runs each There was, we are told, a good deal of adverse criticism in cricket circles in Dunedin of his retention in the Otago teaip for Plunket Shield matches. Dunning is not a dangerous bowler bn a hard, true wicket in fine weather, and, last season the M.C.C. team showed, in The Auckland test, how little his bow-hug troubles batsmen of the best class. But on a wicket to suit him he can still be dangerous to interproviucial batsmen in New' Zealand, though we could not agree that he should be included in any New Zealand side merely on the chance that he might be able to bowl on a wicket he likes. Dunning needs a drying wicket or one which, while dry on top, still has water under it. In Canterbury’s second innings against Otago on Wednesday, when the conditions were a good deal to his taste, he made the ball ‘ come back ’ quite sharply, and sometimes made it bump well. Even though not one of his wickets was clean bowled, the seven wickets wlncn he took for 145 runs in Canterbury s two innings, but particularly his five tor 95 in the second innings, formed a veryuseful performance for his side. Notes. An instance of batting averages in club cricket being inefficient as a guide to form in representative matches is afforded bv the cases of V. G. Cavanagh and D. A.R. Moloney, of Otago s FJunket Shield team (says the ‘Sun’), in club cricket in Dunedin this season, so far CVvannph is ninth in the batting Moloney is thirteenth iei in the match with Canterbury,

though F. T. Badcock and R- 0. Talbot eacli plaved a more dashing innings, and though K. Uttley scored over 100 runs in the two innings, Cavanagh and Moloney were the soundest two bats in the side, for all that Moloney had some luck in his first innings. Moloney was troubled by an injured leg, but he played good cricket. As a batsman he generally used his reach well in forward strokes, and he also played some good back strokes. Harold B. Lusk, New Zealand represeutative crioketer and champion golfer, succeeds J * U. Collins as assistant mas* ter at King’s College, Auckland (says an exchange). When on the job Harold liUsk was one of New Zealand finest batsmen, his best performance being for Canterbury against not out in 1910-11—an innings that gave Canterbury the Blanket Shield once again. Harold is a brother of Hugh Lusk, the Crown Prosecutor of Napier, and 1899 New Zealand representative cricketer. , , R. H. Cleave, the' young batsman from Thames who scored 77 not but in Auckland’s second innings against Wellington in Plunket Shield cricket, is a player with a nice style and a good straight bat (says a northern writer). He was a junior player in Wellington, but, as a Post and Telegraph Department employee, he was transferred to Thames. In his first innings against Wellington he was very smartly stumped by K. C. James as he raised his back foot in playing forward, but he did not repeat, that error in his second innings; •: . ■ ' L. P. O’Brien, Victorian left-hand batsman, took just on five hours to score his 72 against Queensland against bowling which, while steady and accurate, was not so superlatively good as to justify such,slow play. The invariable slowness of O’Brien’s scoring is likely to tell against him when the Australian team for England is being chosen. ' „ _. , Molonev made two fine scores, 74 and 44, for Otago against Canterbury (says the ‘Star’). They were expected by those who have watched his sound play during the season. He now seems to have got' definitely on his feet as a Plunket Shield cricketer, and he may yet develop into what he was expected a few seasons ago to become —Otago s foremost batsman. Uttley made an impressive debut in big cricket with his scores of 49 and 54. He is a solid with, with determination as well os ability, and has been a lucky find for Otago. , , ■ South Australian bowlers have been more successful than those of Victoria and Queensland against Don Bradman, the difference being marked (says the Sydney ‘Referee’).. In nineteen innings they have dismissed him sis times for less than double figures, these being 0,1, 2,2, 2, and 5., In four other innings he made less than 50 —viz., 23, 33, 35, 47. This gives to the bowlers of S.A. the. distinction of having dismissed him in more than half., of his innings for less than 50 —rmainly ■oh wickets protected from rain. The other nine brought these scores: 56, 61, 73, ■4. 97. 118, 121, 175, and 258. These figures are taken up to last Fridays dismissal by new* bowler Collins for 1 run. . , .. . . Just at the moment, with the Auck-land-Wellington Plunket Shield match being played at the Basin Reserve,. it is interesting to note that the following have plaved for both- Auckland and Wellington;—W. T. Wynyard, H. K. Burton. F. A. Midlane, F. S. Middleton. and E. M‘Leod (saysi the ‘ New Zealand Free Lance ’). Tab ’’ Wynyard has the unique record of having represented both provinces at Rugby football and cricket. By the way, he is a regular attendant at the Athletic, Park in the winter and at the Basin Reserve in . the summer, and although not as sprightly as in his playing days is as keen a critic as ever. His many friends will be pleased to know that ie is keeping well these days. Uf these players Fred Mid I cue will be well remembered by many Otago cricket followers, since he once made a double century lor Wellington against Otago at Wellington just about the time of the outbreak of war.- In Otago’s second innings of the same game J. N. Crawford came to light with another three-figure ■ tally after a great exhibition. “ Despite the absence of the Otago ;oam, which will be playing in Hawke's ;Jay. club matches will be resumed tomorrow afternoon. In the recent match between Wanganui College and Wellington College Harding put together a score of 175 for Wanganui, a record for games between ihe two colleges. He is a son of A. F. Harding, who captained the AngloWel%h Rugby team that toured New in i9OB, and who afterwards settled.in the dominion. Young Harding is also spoken-of as a most promising Rugby player. “ 1 have never seen Gririimett bowl better considering the class of batsmen be was facing. On his day—and he has quite a lot of them—Griimnett is the world’s best slow bowler at the present time It does take the world’s best batsmen to stand up to him. There is no argument about that.”— Ernie Jones (the famous fast bowler of other days), giving his impressions of rlie South Australia-New South Wales testimonial match..