Australian Cricketers’ Averages In First-Class Matches

Manawatu Times, Volume 59, Issue 222, 22 September 1934, Page 12

Australian Cricketers’ Averages In First-Class Matches

TEAM'S EVENNESS OF STRENGTH

UpHE Australian cricket team played 30 first-class matches in its nowcompleted tour of England and Scotland, winning 13, drawing 16, and losing one (the second Test). In eight of the drawn matches much time was lost because of rain. With second-class games included the team’s matchrecord is: Played 34, won 14, lost 1, drawn 19. The match results of the tour compare well with those of previous teams.

Broadly the performances of the team have been very much in accordance with expectations. The team’s batting was strong; sufficient demonstration of that is the fact that six members of it scored over 1000 runs each in the firsteiass matches of the tour, and two others probably would have done so but for illness. Us attack, although not of much variety, and lacking especially a really fast bowler and a first-class bowler of definitely medium pace, was much more effective than some people, even in Australia, anticipated.

In possessing six batsmen who scored over 1000 runs each, and three bowlers who took over 100 wickets each, in the first-class games of the tour, the team had an evenness of strength in which it has been surpassed by very few of the 17 official teams from Australia which had visited England previously Its fielding, too, was good. The team’s batting and bowling averages for first-class matches only in the tour are as follow: — BATTING.

•Not out. BOWLING. Runs. Wickets. Avge.

I B. A. Barnett none for 3. 1 These averages are not guaranteed as completely accurate, but they are as

accurate as they can be until the cabled scores for the later matches have been compared with English papers yet to arrive. The figures on which they are based have been checked with the averages published in English papers at the end of the fourth Test, and those for the latei malches have been compared with the statistics kept by an independent keeper of averages. So far as possible, the cabled scores since the fourth Test have also been compared with those sent to Australian papers. In the process ot comparison it lias been noticed that one or two Australian papers have had continuing errors in the averages they have been publishing from week to week. It appears necessary to explain, for the benefit of readers who are not versed in the procedure for arriving at averages in cricket, that in the computation of a batsman’s average the number of not-out innings is deducted from the total number of innings, and the aggregate of runs is then divided by the number of completed innings. Anyone who is disposed to a comparison of the Australian batsmen’s aggregates wi'h those of members of previous Australian teams in England, .or with those of English nlavers in firstclass matches in England in a season, should remember that many Australians engaged in previous tours have had a greater number of innings. Sometimes the leading batsmen in an Australian tour of England have had from 45 to 50 innings, or even more. The members of this year’s team often had only one innings in a match with a county side. It will be noticed that no member of the team had more than 37 innings, and some of the better batsmen in the side did not have 30 innings in first-class matches, whereas Ihe leading professional batsmen in England usually have more than 50 innings in a season—some of them more than 60 —and thus have much more opportunity tn raise their aggregates wot] above 2000 runs.

Some notes on the performances of n few of the batsmen who have played in England before appear elsewhere on this page. A reminder may be given here of the probability that Kippax would have well exceeded the thousand runs in first-class matches if he had not been ill for a time, and that Chipperfield doubtless would have reached the thousand but for the same reason.

One of the interesting aspects of the bowling averages is the closeness of the figures for the leading three bowlers. It should be remembered, however. that Fleetwood-Smith did not play ir. any of the Tests. Another interesting aspect is that the faster bowlers, Wall and Ebeling, had exactly the same

number of runs hit off each, but labeling took 20 wickets more than Wall did. Thirty-three centuries were scored for the Australians in the first-class games, the list being as follows:

S. J. McCabe (8)—240 v. Surrey. 192 v. M.C.C. • 142 v. Lancashire 137 v. England (3rd Test) 124 v. Leveson-Gower’s XI. 108* v. Leicestershire 108 v. Kent. 105* v. Gentlemen. D G. Bradman (7)—304 v. England (4th Test) 244 v. England (sth Test) 206 v. Worcestershire 160 v. Middlesex 149“ v. An England XI. 140 v. Yorkshire 132 v. Leveson-Gower’s XI. W. H. Ponsford (s) 281' v. M.C.C 2GG v. England (sth Test) . 229* v. Cambridge Umv. 181 v. England (4th Test) 125 v. Surrey. W. A. Brown (5)—119 v. Lancashire 143 v. Northants 105 v. England 105 v. Cambridge Univ. 100* v. Notts. W.M. Woodfull (3) —228* v Glamorgan 172* v. Lancashire 131 v. Gloucestershire. A. G. Chipperfield <2)-175 # v. Essex^ L. S. Darling (2)-117 v. Sussex. , A. F. Kippax (D—2so v. Sussex. •Signifies not out. Kippax also scored 101 not out in the second-class game, against Durham. In the 1930 tour, Bradman made 10 of the 27 centuries scored for the Australians in first-class matches. The team’s averages in all matches ot the tour are as follow: — BATTING.

Also bowled: W. H. Ponsford one for 0, B. A. Barnett two for 36. A. F. Kippax one for 40. and W. A. Oldfield. \V. M. Woodfull. and W. A. Brown one over each I without taking a wicket.

D. G. Bradman Inn. N.O. H.S. Agg. 27 3 304 2020 Avg. 84.16 W H. Ponsford 27 4 231* 1784 77.56 S. J. McCabe 37 7 340 2078 69.26 W. M. Woodfull 27 3 228* 1268 52.83 A. F. Kippax .. 23 4 250 961 50.52 A. G. Chipperfield 26 4 175 899 40.85 ( W. A. Brown 36 2 119 1303 38.47 L. S. Darling 31 1 117 1022 34.00 B. A. Barnett 20 6 92 470 33.57 W. J. O’Reilly 18 9 25* 237 26.33 W. A. Oldfield 16 3 67 295 22.69 E. H. Bromley 20 1 56 312 16.42 C V Grirhmett 20 3 39 255 15.00 H. I. Ebeling 39 1 41 265 14.72 T. W. Wall .. 12 3 24 84 9.33 L. O'B Fleetwood Smith .. .. ’ 13 6 7* 24 3.42

W. J. O’Reilly .. .. L,. O’B Fleetwood1868 109 17 14 Smith 2036 106 19.20 C. V. Grlmmett 2159 109 19.80 H. I. Ebeling 1290 02 20.80 T. W. Wall .. 1290 42 30.71 L. S Darling 825 9 36.11 S. J. McCabe 794 21 37.80 E. H. Bromley . 245 5 49.00 A. G. Chipperficld 595 12 49.58 Also bowled: A. F." Kippax none for 13,

Inn. N.O. H.S. Agg. Av’ge D G. Bradman .. 29 3 304 2106 81.00 76.44 W H. Fonsford .. 30 5 281* 1911 S J. McCabe .. 38 7 240 2094 67.54 W M Woodfull . 28 4 228* 1343 55.95 A. F. Kippax .. W A. Brown 26 40 5 250 3 119 1113 1392 53.00 37.62 A. G. Chippcrfield B A. Barnett .. 28 23 4 175 0 92 902 573 37.53 33.70 L. S. Darling .. 35 1 117 1135 33.38 W. J. O’Reilly .. 20 9 47 290 26.36 W. A. Oldfield .. 18 4 67 313 22.35 19.33 E. H. Bromley .. 22 1 97 416 C V. Grimmett 21 3 39 279 15.50 H. I. Ebeling .. T. W. Wall .. L. O’B. Flectwood21 13 2 41 3 24 6 8 288 84 32 15.15 8.40 4.00 Smilh •. “Not out. 14 BOWLING. Runs. W’kts. Av'ge W. .T. O'Reilly . 1901 118 16.11 t. O'B. Fleetwood119 18.05 Smith 2149 C. V. Grimmett . 2245 115 19.52 H. I. Ebeling 1463 71 20.60 L. S. Darling 401 15 26.73 T. W. Wall .. . 1370 43 28.54 E H. Bromley . 305 9 33.88 A. G. Chlpperfield .. 695 15 46.33