CRICKET

Hawera Star, Volume XLVI, 19 June 1926, Page 13

CRICKET

NOTES: The abandonment of the first test has naturally caused the keenest disappointment amongst the thousands of spectators who had booked or secured seats. It was, ol : course, one of those things over which even an M.C.C. committee or managers of teams has no control, and lias to be accepted with the best grace possible under the circumstances. Everyone lias to draw on his reserve of philosophy and just accept the position. It is, of course, not much consolation, but nevertheless worth recalling, that such things have happened before, and that conditions have been even worse. In 1899, when England had one of the finest teams that ever represented her, a. team which appeared to have no “tail,” the third test had, to be abandoned without a ball being delivered. That was at Manchester. At Lords in 1902 also, the second test, after the first had been drawn, was confined to an hour and threequarters’ play. It is worth recalling that in that space of time A. J. Hopkins had dismissed two great batsmen, G. B. Fry and Ranjitsinhji. without scoring, while A. G. Madmen and I'. 8. Jackson took the total to 102 unbeaten when play ceased for the match.

A BARDSLEY COMMENTARY

“The spinning ball on English wickets is going to be a real clanger to Australia this summer, especially to our younger batsmen, for the English atmosphere helps the bowler to swing, and he is likely to do a bit on wickets which players like Woodfull, Ponsford, and Arthur Richardson, for example, have never experienced before. “I can imagine a young batsman, low down in the batting order, facing Macaulay and Tate, and being appalled to find that they are able to swing the ball in the air practically right throughout. the duration of the innings. ' “Bowlers in Australia are only capable of swinging whilst the ball retains its gloss. Owing to the hardness of our fielding grounds and wickets, together with the fact that a picket fence marks the boundary, you can quite realise that it only requires a couple of boundaries (using a cricketer ’s expression) ‘to put whiskers on the tall. ’

“Woodfull is the most improved young batsman in Australia to-day, and I am certain that he has before him a great career as an opening batsman in test matches. Here is an example of perseverance rewarded, for no one has taken greater pains to improve his batting, or gone, 1 may say, to such extreme lengths to learn its technique. Even in the winter Woodfull practises on a privately-constructed pitch in his home. Like Richardson, he learned his cricket on matting wickets in the bush.

“Ellis is a magnificent wicketkeeper; many good judges say lie is as good as Oldfield, and he can bat a bit, too. If anything happens to Oldfield, Australia will be all right with Ellis. “Everett is the ‘surprise packet’ of the side. Until a day or two before the team was finally selected nobody thought of him as a candidate. He is a good young fast bowler in the making.’’

ENGLISH VISIT OF 1882-83. Lillywhitc’s English team of ISB2-S3 played only' seven matches in New Zealand, winning four and drawing three (says an exchange). Taking the play throughout the colony, which was greatly interfered with by wind and rain, it cannot be pronounced a success. Several good individual scores were made, but, taking the play as a whole, it fell short of expectations. The bowling proved too good for our batsmen. Shrewsbury and Barlow each made 77, and the former was also close up with 70. Bates, 66 and 47, and Seotton, 40, were also among the best performers with the bat. Dewer (Auckland) contributed 31 runs, which was the highest scored against England. The eleven played several matches in Australia previous to and after visiting the colony.

LOB BOWLERS. In the last 25 years there have been only two great bowlers of lobs in English cricket —D. L. A. Jcphson and G. H. Simpson-Hayward—and it is difficult to decide which of the two was the better. Jcphson took in all 297 wickets for 24.97 runs each, SimpsonHayward's •“ bag” being 415 wickets for 21.50 runs each, but the latter never gave a performance equal to Jeph,son ’s —six wickets for 21 runs against the Players oil a perfect wicket at Lords in 1899. ” Simpson-Hayward had such strong fingers that he could “flick” a cricket ball as other men do billiard balls.

A NEAT. SARCASTIC TOUCH. i England’s strategy in order to win the test matches is evidently to keep the bowlers dark, says “Woomera” in the Australasian, with quiet sarcasm. The Australians are not even to see in the street Tate, Macaulay, Kilner, or Woolley until they meet in deadly combat in the first test match. The photographs of these famous bowlers will not be published. Not even Collins will be able to find out whether they take sugar in their tea or eat Australian apples. The Australians are to be kept so completely in heathen darkness that when they meet the English bowlers they will not only be in a state of doubt as to whether they are left-handers or right-handers, but they may wonder whether they bowl with both hands at once. Indeed the English bowlers will be so shrouded in mystery that their names will not even be. whispered. The English strategy is indeed profound. One expert solemnly assured the barrackers of England that the fact that Woodfull was dismissed for 3 was not beneficial for Middlesex It only spurred on the other. Australian batsmen to make more runs. But now Macaulay at least will have played for Yorkshire in the second match. One really expected him to have been tried in the test.

AUSTRALIAN BOWLING. AN EXPERT’S ANALYSIS. ARE ARMSTRONG AND McDONA*LD COMPENSATED FOR ? Of the many points of special interest both general and individual surrounding the early matches of the tour none, perhaps, has attracted such intensive interest as the performances of our men with the ball (says Dr. L. O. S. Poidevin in an Australian paper).

Last tour the bowling of the Australian side, consisting of seven units of attack, answered all the demands made of it in a satisfactory manner. Five of these same units —Gregory, Mailey, Hendry, Ryder, and Macartney, named in the order of their usefulness on that tour —are again present in this combination and the universal query stated succinctly turns on the dubious practical point as to whether the two absentees, McDonald and Armstrong, v ill be satisfactorily replaced by Everett, Griinmett, and Richardson, the three new units ill the attack. McDonald, it is true, pn figures was the most hostile unit in the 1921 attack. It is asking a very great deal, perhaps too much, of Everett, to expect him satisfactorily to replace McDonald's skill. Everett is a -well-set-up athletic young man, capable of developing considerable pace with his bowling, but it can scarcely be claimed for Mm that he has ever shown anything approaching either the bowling skill or stamina of McDonald. His results so far have not been encouraging, but due allowances must be made for the adverse playing conditions, i.e., conditions unfavourable to the success of fast bowling. Possibly Gregory misses the mutual assistance of McDonald at the other end. The latter, of course, is still eligible to play for Australia in the tests. I mention this because there seems to be much general dubiety on the point. The test match rules governing the matter, which were framed by a confmittee of which I was a member at Lords in 1909, are: “A cricketer unless debarred by rule 2 is always eligible to play for the country of his birth,'' and rule 2 states: “A cricketer who lias played in a test match for a country cannot play for any other country without the consent of each of the contracting parties.” In this connection test matches are defined as “matches played between representative elevens of England and of Australia, and of South Africa, also between representative elevens of England and of Australia, and of South Africa, also between representative elevens of Australia and South Africa.” Thus McDonald is eligible to play for Australia. He could not play for England, though qualified by residence, without the consent of both Australia and South Africa. In the circumstances there does not . seem the least likelihood of his taking part in this test series. It is the Australian hope that his services will not be needed.

Grimmett, as successor to Armstrong, also has a very high standard of efli(jieney to live up to. Armstrong on the last tour headed the bowling averages in all matches with 106 wickets at 14.56 runs per wicket. Strictly speaking, Grimmett is not exactly the same type of bowler as Armstrong. The latter * was a straight-out leg-break bowler; he dicl not “turn” the ball much, but he kept a wonderful length, and when not getting wickets himself found another avenue of usefulness by inducing a state of masterly inactivity in opposing batsmen, and thus assisting the bowlers at the other end. Grimmett, on the other hand, is an exponent of the “bosie” type of bowling. It is ability to bowl off-breaks and legbreaks with apparently the same finger and wrist action that constitutes idle ‘ ‘ bosie ’ ’ bowler.

The real secret of the effectiveness of the bowling lies not in the deadliness of either the leg-break or the offbreak in itself, but in the fact that not only docs it leave the batsman in doubt as to what the ball is going to do until it pitches, but also actually creates in the mind of the batsmaq a preconceived notion that it is going to break one way, while he is subconsciously uncertain which. The effect is to cramp his play, and leave him a minimum of time in which to decide on his stroke. But to be successful it must be good length, and that is the chief difficulty in its exhibition; otherwise it is certain to be very expensive against class batsmen. The bowling of Grimmett in England has been scrutinised with very critical eyes. So far it has not met with the anticipated success, nor has it created any very favourable impression. It has been reported that his bowling has been lacking in length, although developing much break from the pitch. That break, and the spin producing it, need regulating. It is no surprise, of course, when Mailey gets a good “bag” of wickets with his amiable-looking though hostile deliveries. There is ever a definite design in his attack, which is always framed in accordance with his estimate of the opposing batsman’s ability. His aim, as it should be with bowlers of his type, is to get opponents to play him “on spec,” i.e., to lure them to come forward, though not far enough to smother the break. His execution does not always equal his ideas, but in the Hampshire match he evidently had opponents “guessing.” He is a more accomplished “bosie” bowler than Grimmett, of much wider experience, and with a wealth of past performance, both here and in England, to his credit. Last tour, for instance, he captured 146 wickets at the siliall cost for a. bowler of liis type, of 19.68 runs per wicket. A repetition of this success will be quite in accordance with expectations.

Richardson, the third balancing unit for the Joss of McDonald and Armstrong, has not yet had any settled trial, being in one match and out the next, but there is promise of the fulfilment of expectations in his success against the M.C.C. team on Saturday. To sum up, therefore, it is still an open and interesting question whether the three new units can adequately replace the two successful okl ones. Meanwhile, Macartney continues to take advantage of the conditions with his admirable left-hand bowling, which has so far been the outstanding successful feature of our attack.