HAMPSHIRE 157

Grey River Argus, 28 May 1938, Page 9

HAMPSHIRE 157

O’REILLY 6 FOR 65

Bradman Nears 1000

LONDON, May 26.

Wann sun, following the rain yesterday, induced Bradman, who won the toss, to send in Hampshire. Only the ends of the wicket were flimsily covered.

McCormick opened at a moderate pace. Two of the first three balls struck McCorkell. The policy appeared to he to score as many as possible before the wicket turned vicious. Arnold attempting a big hit off O’Reilly played a ball on to his wicket. McCorkell, when ten, was dropped by Walker off O'Reilly, but in the same over was well caught at, first slip. Paris was clean bowled by a beautiful ball from O’Reilly, whereat, ho lunged. Playing courageously Steele and Hill added 31, when in the last over before lunch, Hill was well caught in the long field. Steele and Baring were out with the addition of only three runs after lunch, and O’Reilly getting Boyes caught, ended Ihe innings after 135 minutes. Hampshire’s score was creditable in the circumstances. The wicket, while not sticky, certainly assisted the bowlers.

The pitch seemed to have recovered a little when Australia batted Fingleton and Brown opened cautiously, but later Brown became aggressive and outshone his partner, who while safe, waited for the runs to come. The spin bowlers were not called upon until 78 were on the board, Boyes, a slow left-hander, immediately dismissed Brown. , ’ Ten thousand were present after tea, when most of the venom had departed from the wicket. Fingleton and Bradman carried the score along steadily, though they were careful in facing the spinners, Boves and Hill. The total of 100 occupied 110 minutes. Bradman was uneasy and mistimed a number of shots. Fingleton played mostly dead bat. strokes. Later the pair, especially Bradman, livened up, and the hundred partnership was realised after 95 minutes. The batsmen scored freely in the closing stages. Bradman at stumps needed 53 runs for 1000 in May. Scores;—

HAMPSHIRE—First Innings. McCorkell, c Chipperfield, b O’Reilly ™ Arnold, b O’Reilly Paris, b O’Reilly ™ Creese, b O’Reilly ■Pothecary, c Walker, b O Reilly lb Moore, b Fleetwood-Smith ( 5 Steele, run out 31 Hill, c Fingleton. b White H Boyes c Bradman, b O’Reilly ... H Baring, b White ® Heath, not out 4 Extras 13 Total • 157 Bowling: McCormick 0 for 16, McCabe 0 for 9, O’Reilly G for 65, White 2 for 19, Fleetwood-Smith 1 for 35. AUSTRALIA—First Innings. Fingleton, not out 81 Brown, c Pothecary. b Boyes ... 47 Bradman, not out 71 Extras ® Total for one wicket ... 204 England’s Bill for Tests What Award Says ' PLAYERS’ WAGES. I wonder what those two great professional cricketers of a past day, Tom Hayward and J. T. Hearne, thought, and perhaps said, when they heard that professionals in the Tests this summer are to be paid £5O a match II would be strange if their minds did not take them back just 2 years, when there was a strike for increased payment to Test players. Hayward and Hearne are the only professional survivors of the memorable 1896 Test at the Oval, which, old cricketers will recall, was preceded by a strike of five famous players, writes A. J. Lacey in the London “Evening News”.

Four of the five who wrote to the Surrey committee demanding a rise in Test match pay from £lO to £2O were Surrey professionals, George Lohmann, Tom Hayward, Bobby Abel and Tom Richardson. The other was William Gunn, of Notts. Surrey resented the manner of demand and refused to consider it. For a time it seemed that England would be seriously weakened for a match on which the Ashes depended. Happily Hayward. Richardson and Abel wrote making their peace and put themselves in the hands of the committee. They were included in the team, and when the demand had been withdrawn the Test pay was raised, to £2O. Lohmann, who did not make hi? peace until later, and Gunn did not play. But thanks to Hearne and Bobby Peel, who nut the Australians out for 44 in the last innings, England won the match and the rubber. It was a glorious victory. Even in those days, the Australians, without embracing professionalism, received a bonus which was envied by the English professionals.

W.G.’s EXPENSES. T»-e strike aroused a tremendous controversy among the public, and one result was to raise the question) of expenses allowed Io amateurs. Charges of shamateurism are no product of modern sport. So much was, indeed said and written on the sub-: ject that the following statement was made by Surrey concerning the finan-J cial relations between the Surrey, Club and W. G. Grace: „ | “On the occasion of Dr. W. G.i Grace playing at the 0va1... Dr Grace has received the sum of £lO a match to cover his expenses in coming to and remaining in London during the three days. Beyond this amount, Dr. Grace has not received, directly or indirectly, one farthing for plaving in a match at the Oval.” The rate of Test match play remained at £2O a match for a long time. For the first Australian series after the war in 1921 the plavers received £3O, and those who played in

the 1930 series got £4O a time. For | Tests against the other countries the l pav has usually been less. | This year, when no more than two lor three amateurs are likely to be ' good enough for the Test team, EngI land's wage bill for players, twelfth i man and reserves, is likely to cost i about £6OO 'a match. With hotel and I travelling expenses the English team | will cost some £BOO a match.