FENDER ON AUSTRALIAN XI

Manawatu Times, Volume LV, Issue 7201, 26 April 1930, Page 13

FENDER ON AUSTRALIAN XI

“IT has always been my belief I that while the essential qualities required in a cricketer playing most of his cricket in England or Atistralia are materially the same, the order of importance of the fundamentals is different. The first essential of a successful player in England is versatility, while that of a successful player in Australia is more a mechauical perfection of technique.” Thus writes P. G. H. Pender, Surrey’s cricket captain, in summing up the strength and weakness oi ! the Australian test team in a recent edition of the “Sporting and Dramatic News.”

“I may os well say right at the start that I was prepared for, and anticipated, the selection of all the players except three. I do not remember that I have ever seen either Walker, McCabe or Hurwood in action and, though descriptions of their prowess had forced one to realise the possibility of their inclusion, it would not bo fair to remark upon their selection with only hearsay as a basis for my opinion. “it was natural that a spare wicket-keeper had to be found, and I had seen and been greatly impressed with Davidson, of New South Wales, whom I thought to be quite capable of taking Oldfield's place should the necessity arise.

“The other two places were ones which I had expected to be filled by Oxenham and Blackie, for, although neither of them has yet visited this country, their methods arc such that, in my opinion, they would have been very valuable here. The first time I saw Oxenham I formed the opinion that he was of a type which must necessarily be better on English wickets than Australian, and, as time went on, especially during tho fourth Test in Adelaide, I felt more and more certain that he, above all other aspirants for the tour, with the possible exception of Wall, looked like being their best bowler over here if they brought him. My reason for this was

Team’s Weakness and Strength Pertinent Observations on Ryder’s Omission —Will Aussies Take Back Ashes ?—Surrey Captain Thinks Not

that he seemed to bowl three paces, mixing them up a great -deal in the course of each over. At tho same time, while keeping an extraordinarily good length, ho seemed to spin the ball enough to produce a certain amount of effect even on Australian wickets.

“I argued that the amount of spin which he imparted to the ball was bound ta have more effect in England than in Australia, so that he would certainly turn tho ball over here (and he appeared to be doing it both ways). "This, coupled with tho fact that his length was always good enough to prevent any of Chapman’s men taking liberties with him, led me to the opinion that I hold. “He was not so tall as Parkin, nor was his fast ball so fast as that of the Lancashire bowler. But in method and in ability to , disguise his speed he was extremely similar, and his slow ball nearly always had the batsman ‘out there too soon.’ “Blackie’s exclusion could only have been on tiio score of his age, though both in his case as well perhaps as in that of Oxenham, fielding ability may have influenced the choice. Blackie is both a bad field and a bad bat, while Oxenham is a moderate field, and probably only ranks next after Oldfield in tho selected side as a run-getter.

“If Australia really has two better bowlers than these, England may find the Australian attack to be a great deal more powerful than seems, at present, to be anticipated. "Taking tho selection as a whole, it would seem as iff Australia has at her disposal sufficient batsmen to ensure that all the first four Tests shall be drawn. I would anticipate that unless translation to English wickets produces' some revolution in their form and merit, tho batting order for the first six places must be Woodfull, Jackson, Kippax, Ponsford, Bradman and Richardson. “As stroke players on perfect Wickets. viewed in tho light of their Australian form, this must be the ease, though when one realises that while being perfect stroke players all of them, they must necessarily, owing to the conditions under which they have been brought up, be lacking, except in the cases of Woodfull and Ponsford, in versatility, it is possible that one of the newcomers may fail to adapt himself. “The doubt on this score as to the ability of Victor Richardson to command a place in the side in Tests must surely have been a big reason for the fact that the South Australian skipper is onlv vice-captain. Richardson is a fine leader of his State side, and his imagination as well as the ability to inspire his men with the enthusiasm of vital example.

“I cannot quite see, in building up their Test side in England, how the Australians are going to give places oven to all the first six that I have previously mentioned. If they do, it means that they cannot have more than four bowlers, for a wicket-keeper, of course, would in that case complete the eleven.

“I do not think they will contemplate the idea of copying Chapman’s policy in Brisbane, because for one thing they are hardly likely to be driven into tho same corner that lie was on that occasion, nor are they likely to bo prepared to gamble so much on the stability of the weather as he forgivably did. Also, they have no Jack White to depend on. “Woodfull will have Grimmett, Wall, Hornibrook, and Hurwood, to choose from as bowlers with a’Beckett, Fairfax and McCabe as all-rounders. Judging by what I saw last winter I should imagine that Grimmett, Wall and Hornibrook must find places in the Test side, at least at the start, though if Hurwood also earns a place there will be a distinct element of weakness in batting about the last five in the order.

“It looks as if one of the batsmen first mentioned will be scrapping with the three all-rounders for one place between them, if Hurwood is a success, though, of course, should he or one of the other bowlers fail to produce proper form, that will leave two places to be filled by the all-rounders. 1 do not think from what I saw that either a’Beckett, Fairfax or McCabe are likely during this tour so to im-

“But if there was any doubt as to his ability to be certain of his place in Tests in England, it was naturally right that someone sure of playing in the Tests should have been made captain. Woodfull may be a good captain, we hardly know; but whether he is or not he has not the electrical temperament of Richardson, “There has been a great deal written about tho omission of Ryder, but whatever else may be said about them, no one. of recent years, has been able to suggest that the Australian authorities have any room for sentiment when engaged upon picking Test sides. Ryder’s record in the last series would have been ample to ensure the captaincy for him next summer had his form as a cricketer during last summer been sufficient to have gained him a place in the side. All other things' being equal, Ryder would naturally have been given the job if he had been able to get into the side at all, but apparently those who watched him anxiously in the field were unable to deem him good enough for inclusion. No doubt fielding had a good deal to do with it as well, for he is no longer what he used to be,'even in the slips, and his bowling is, of course, now only for use as a last resource.

better fielder out of the slips than Vic. Richardson, while Fairfax, Ponsford, a’Beckett, Woodfull, Jackson and Kippax are well above the ordinary. Bradman runs and sometimes picks up brilliantly, but he was not a very safe catch last time I saw him. The fielding of the side as a whole may not perhaps quite compare with that of the Africans in the early part of the tour, but it should certainly be up to the average of post-war Test sides. “I rather feel that unless English wickets solve some of their difficulties for them in a somewhat abrupt manner, their greatest problem in picking their Test side is going to be one of policy. A great deal depends upon whether or not two out of their three all-rounders are going to progress sufficiently to earn places in the Test matches. If this happens the selection will simplify itself along the lines of five batsmen, two out of the three all-rounders, and three out of the four bowlers, though if they are. not fortunate over a'Beekett, Fairfax and McCabe, they will be faced with a very awkward situation. “Whichever way events turn, however, so far as the Australians are concerned, I rather think that England, with Hobbs and Sutcliffe (or Wyatt), Hammond, Woolley, Tate, Larwood and Goddard as a nucleus, should be able to make certain that the Ashes are kept in this country.”

prove as to be able to command places as all-rounders in the same way as has been done by certain of the players in that category whom Australia has sent us in tho past. “All-rounders were the great and glorious strength of Australian cricket in the past. It looks possible that, as against Chapman’s side, so in 1930, lack of players of this type will be 'one of the. outstanding points about their side. Theoretically the ideal Test side in these days, without borrowing from fairy tales, should bo a wicket-keeper who can bat. five batsmen, of whom one could turn his arm over in . an emergency, three bowlers, fast, medium and slow, and two all-rounders, one 75 per cent, bowler und 25 per cent, bat, and the other fifty-fifty. It seems quite certain that so far as the fielding is concerned, the Australian selectors have chewed hard the cud of reflection after Chapman’s visit. “I doubt if England can show a