CRICKET Australian Bowler Compares Teams Of 1921 And 1948

Greymouth Evening Star, 8 October 1948, Page 8

CRICKET Australian Bowler Compares Teams Of 1921 And 1948

The question whether Warwick Armstrong’s 1921 team was stronger than Dori Bradman’s 1948 side is parallel with the problem of whether Dr Grace slept with his beard under or over the sheet.

Opinions may be expressed in both eases, but we have no photo-finish evidence in either case sufficiently convincing* for a unanimous., verdict, writes Arthur Mailey. However, although the positional importance of the doctor’s facemat may be international since many bearded foreigners haven’t the foggiest notion of cricket, the more domestic question of Armstrong versus Bradman at. the moment demands, a certain amount ’of close -scrutiny.

’'And the quickest approach is b.i asking how many of Armstrong’s men would find a place in Bradman’s team if -all were playing in the same era. Without taking into consideration the relative strength of their respective opponents, despite the fact that they are only as good as they are allowed to be, I feel that Gregory and McDonald were better opening bowlers than Lindwall and Miller. But with assistance of Johnston, Bradman’s fast attack was the more efficient.

Lacking Johnston’s Pace

The 1921 team had no left-hand bowlqr as useful as Jdhnston, the nearest approach being Macartney, who lacked only Johnston’s pace. Macartney, however, was more efficient under all conditions than Toshack.

Bradman hardly required the services of a slow leg-breaker. With Gregory and McDonald (fast), Armstrong and Mailey (slow), and Macartney (medium left-hand), Armstrong had a better balanced attack, but what Bradman’s team lacked in. so-called balance, it made up for in individual efficiency. If an attack consisting of four very fast bowlers can dismiss a side more cheaply than a well-balanced attack, it must be admitted that after all we must judge an attack, as in war, on the amount of destruction it causes.

However, since we have to make individual and not collective comparisons, we cannot play McDonald, Gregory, Lindwall, Millei; and Johnston as bowlers in our combined team. Therefore, I would play Gregory because of his extraordinary slipfielding and devastating batting, Lindwall because he is a better batsman and fieldsman than McDonald and Johnston, whose versatility could be exploited with the varying conditions. Dropping McDonald out of this team sticks in my throat, and the omission of Miller as a fast bowler is also repulsive, but there is only one new ball and five bowlers can’t make the best of it.

Without any apologetic confessions regarding modesty, Mailey might be considered in this team as a slow right-hander ahead of his companionable friends Ring or McCool, but if Grimmett or O’Reilly were available, I would give the matter further consideration. To this attack I would add Macartney and Miller in case they were needed.

With the attack completed, the batting is the next question. Collins, Taylor, Pellew, and Andrews must make way for Bradman Morris, Barnes and Miller.

More Efficient ’Keeper Oldfield is probably a more efficient ’keeper than Tallon. Regarding captaincy, I think Collins was slightly ahead of Bradman, with Armstrong a close third. This may surprise many people. Collins was equally as shrewd as Bradman, and had a more resilient philosophy. . Collins had a better appreciation of abstract' values and was more picturesque because he gambled and was less likely to be perturbed than Bradman. His steel was tempered in hotter fires. Collins, unlike Bradman, did not enjoy personal success. Had the reverse been the case, 1 am doubtful whether Bradman, with Collins’s ordinary batting skill, would have climbed to the heights of captaincy. But with all these somewhat abstract attributes, I prefer Bradman for his batting. Bradman’s tenacity, shrewdness, and observation outstripped Armstrong’s determination, bluff, and lack of compropiise. In addition, Bradman was a far better batsman. The Bardsley versus Morris question has many sides. I prefer Morris because of his mental approach to batting, which offsets Bardsley’s tremendous determination. Morris has no suspicions. Bardsley was laden with them. Both were great batsmen, with amazing fighting qualities. Bardsley fought with a frown and a disarming smile. Now out of the melting pot comes: Bradman (captain), Morris Barnes, Bardsley, Maccartney, Miller, Gregory, Lindwall, Armstrong, Oldfield, Mailey, Harvey (12th).