COMMENT ON THE MATCH.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLI, Issue XLI, 11 May 1921, Page 5

COMMENT ON THE MATCH.

WARNER'S VIEWS. LONDON, May 0. Warner says the Aus.tral.aiiß seized their chance it was a bad day for Surrey, but just such a chance as cricket in its inexhaustible variety might serve up to any side. While the Australians were batting the sun was ghining j powerfully and the wicket was getting more difficult every moment. Sandham and Fender made a brave effort to pull the Kame round. Most of the Surrey batsmen made the mistake of playing back to Armstrong's bowling, when is well pitched and comes straight on. The best way to cope witH such a delivery is to play forward or half cock to it, as Sandham did. McDonald naturally prefers a hard wicket, but he showed that he can bowl on a soft one. His success in England seenns assured. . One must protest against the constant intervals. Surrey went in to bat at 3.20, yet the tea interval was taken at four o'clock despite the fact that stumps were drawn at six. Cricket ia"~ booming, but such a procedure will kiib stone dead the public enthusiasm for. the game in one season. The Daily Chronicle, commenting on Surrey's collapse, said: "A brilliant side was pathetically helpless before Armstrong on a drying wicket. Arm-. strong's six wickets for 38 eternally entombs the idea that the Australians .cannot do their utmost on a sticky l>'t of j\turf. Woolley could not do better. The i fielding was of the a:r-tight brand, su- , perb and alone worth admission money, ! at enhanced rates.