ENGLAND’S CRICKET TOUR OF SOUTH AFRICA

Manawatu Times, Volume 64, Issue 112, 15 May 1939, Page 5

ENGLAND’S CRICKET TOUR OF SOUTH AFRICA

The team that W. R. Hammond brought to South Africa during the 1938-39 season was the first fully representative English side to tour the country, writes Louis Duffins in The Cricketer. It was a side particularly strong in batting, possessing an attack of considerable variety, containing several superb fielders and led by a shrewd captain, who in addition was fortunate to win the toss the first four times in the five Test matches. England won a handsome victory by an innings and 13 runs in the third Test match. Three other Tests were drawn. In the final game played to a finish South Africa established its highest score of 530 and the best twoinnings aggregate of 1011. England was set to score 696 runs in the fourth innings for victory. When the game was abandoned on the tenth day after it commenced, because of rain, England wanted 42 runs for victory and had five wickets in hand. I remember with what apprehension we looked forward to South Africa’s performances. The English batsmen by Hutton had come straight from their triumph against Australia in the Oval Test match, and it was a lean year for South African bowlers, the best combination of whom would overstock the team with a medium pace attack. By delaying the decision of the rubber until the last game, South Africa did considerably better than was expected. While the English side was in some ways disappointing the bowling proved weaker than had been anticipated—the outcome of the Test match series was largely due to a notable revival by the home team’s batsmen, who before the summer ended had formed themselves into the strongest batting eleven to play for South Africa for 20 years. Compared with English and Australian teams, their play was still predominantly defensive in character, and in spite of their success, England had the more talented side. CONTRASTING FORM.

In many ways this was the most successful cricket tour in South Africa. Stirred by the compliment which the English selectors paid the country in choosing what was virtually their best side, unprecedented crowds watched Hammond’s team wherever they played. Unlike their predecessors they suffered a minimum of injuries. The injury to Hutton while playing against the Transvaal prevented his taking part in the first Test match, and was the most serious casualty of the season. Wilkinson landed in the country with a minor injury that kept him out of the early games, and Wright also missed a few matches for a similar reason. The financial returns for the visit had not been previously surpassed, and the general effect of the tour was to give a widespread stimulus to cricket throughout the country.

The Test matches, which culminated in the freak timeless game at Durban, provided a spate of runs, and some contrasting performances. The first match at Johannesburg was conspicuous for the negative tactics employed by both teams. There was more excuse for the South Africans than the English players because Melville’s team, having lost the toss and having had 422 runs scored against them in the first innings, had no hope of winning the match in four days. On the whole, however, the match was notable for a lack of concerted effort to bring the game to a conclusion. Among the meritorious individual achievements were the two separate centuries scored by Paynter, and the rich distinction earned by P. A. Gibb, who scored 93 and 106 in his first major Test match. He was given a place at the eleventh hour owing to the injury to Hutton. It would be uncharitable to blame him for the way the game developed, but there is no avoiding the fact that by taking 276 minutes to score his 93 runs Gibb did much to start play with a defensive flavour.

Immediately after the first match the two teams left on the 1000-mile train journey to Capetown and took part in the second game, which was also drawn, though considerably in England’s favour. On the first day 31 hours’ of play were lost through ) ain affecting the wicket, although it had been covered prior to the start. Hammond kept the South Africans in the field throughout the curtailed portion of the first day, the whole of the jecond day, and in order to use the heavy roller, presumably In the hope that it might affect the wicket, he continued the Innings for an over on the third morning before declaring, with 559 runs for nine wickets. The Jesuit was that the South Africans rgain had little hope of attaining any other decision but a draw, and this they successfully accomplished. Hammond’s tactics were open to criticism, lor quite apart from any purpose he may have achieved by rolling the wicket, he appeared to have an excel-

AN UNQUALIFIED SUCCESS

FULLY REPRESENTATIVE SIDE

lent chance of attempting to win the game by declaring at five o’clock on the afternoon of the second day when the English score was 455 for six wickets, and his opponents had spent a gruelling day and a half in the field.

Hammond himself scored ait accomplished 181; Ames, who throughout the tour never failed to bat with aggression and enterprise, 115; and Valentine, 112. In the course of the South African innings, Mitchell batted 4i hours for his 42. His reluctance to score obviously safe runs or to run more readily between the wickets put the bowlers in command of the game, and did not operate against the summary collapse that followed his dismi In other innings Mitchell proved himself South Africa’s most cultured batsman. CHANGE OF SPIRIT IN THIRD TEST. There was a complete change of spirit in the third Test match at DurI ban. Again Hammond won the toss, I and such aggressive tactics were eml ployed by the English batsmen, that •the game was all over in three days. A magnificent third wicket partnership of 242 runs between Hammond and Paynter enabled the English captain to declare at 469 for four wickets. Paynter went on to score 243 and to surpass the 211 made by Hobbs at Lord’s in 1924, when he established .the highest Test innings between the ; two countries. The South Africans collapsed before the fiery bowling of Fames on a wicket that assisted the | ball to lift. They were all out for 103 j— the lowest total of the series—on a field where they later compiled the j record score of 530. They made an • excellent recovery in their second innings, but could not avoid defeat. Hammond was the giant of the game. His contributions in generalship, batting and uncanny slip fielding eclipsed the other many fine individual feats of the game. The South Africans had several costly lapses in the field, and in their first innings displayed a wholesale weakness in playing rising deliveries on the off.

The fourth match was curtailed by rain and drawn. A full day and 2i hours were lost. It was remarkable, however, for the spirited efforts of the South Africans, whose faultless fielding helped to dismiss England for 215, and who followed this up with a superlative display on a drying wicket. A. Melville, who for the first time opened the innings, and P. G. Van der Byl. the former Oxford Blue, scored 108 for the first wicket, and played one of the best partnerships of its kind in South African cricket. They defied the efforts of the spin bowlers to capitalise conditions heavily in their favour. Veritv who was expected to cause havoc, did not bowl -as well on the drying wicket as he did when it later improved to become an easy pitch. The honours this time went to the South Africans, who found a highly competent wicketkeeper in R. Grieveson. WHAT THE RAIN DID. The last game of the series at Durban developed into a cricket freak, not, as may be hastily inferred, merely because it was played to a finish, but because owing to rain falling on the evening of the third day the rolling gave the wicket a complete new lease of life. There has been a tendency to condemn timeless Test matches when often, and certainly in this case, the j wicket has been the villain of the 1 piece.

For the first time an English team played all its Test matches on turf wickets. Only two of the seventeen official fixtures—against Rhodesia at Bulawayo, and Salisbury—took part on matting wickets, and it is expected that this will be the last time this type of wicket is used in matches against visiting teams. The grass wickets throughout the Union were generally on the slow side. Perhaps the fairest pitch for batsmen and bowlers alike—because it was the quickest—was encountered at Maritzburg. Many South African groundsmen have had only limited experience in the cultivation of turf wickets, and it was, I am persuaded, ignorance which led to some irregularities in their preparation. There were cases—at Kimberley, Bloemfontein, and Pretoria—where wickets, or portions of them, were watered and rolled after the games had started. After the discovery was made at Pretoria that the groundsmen, acting on instructions, rolled and watered the wicket each morning, an apology was made to the M.C.C. team by the South African cricket authorities. During the Test match at Capetown water from a hose was for a while, sprayed on an area near the wicket. ' It was done in good faith and stopped immediately it was discovered. These shortcomings are not mentioned to decry the organisation, but as a reminder to the authorities of the need for stricter control in the care of turf wickets. An eight-ball over was used for the first time during an overseas tour in South Africa and was an unqualified success.

Though Hammond may have erred tactically in the second Test match, he was throughout the tour an exemplary captain. He maintained rigid discipline, set his field shrewdly and was for ever besetting the batsmen with new strategies. Indeed, he introduced new methods to South African cricket by his policy of continually changing his attack and using his bowlers in short spells. STRONG BATTING STRENGTH. If the strength of the English batting was to some extent emphasised by the shortcomings of the South African attack and the easy wickets, it is safe to say that no team visiting the Union

since the war has been able to start the Test match order with six such accomplished batsmen, such effective masters of their respective styles as Hutton, Gibb, Paynter, Hammond. Ames and Valentine. By the end of the tour it was possible to add to these Edrich, who, after having been persevered with, despite consistent failures in the Test matches, played a superb innings in the final gamePaynter was the most prolific batsman in the Test matches. Gibb was somewhat surprisingly, but —Mly successful, and Valentine, like Ames, achieved an excellent record by ’adining to depart from his natural aggressive style of batting what ever the circumstances. Paynter was an outstanding player of the tour, for he not only scored runs freely with a lefthander’s effective unorthodox strokes, but was unrivalled for his speed and throwing in the outfield. Although Hutton did not score a century in any Test innings, because of the liberality with which he exploited his wide range of strokes he always looked to be the most dangerous batsman in the side. In this country and noticeably in the provincial matches he batted with eager enterprise, sometimes daring recklessness, so that many spectators were pleasantly surprised at the absence of the grim defensive cricket they had associated with his record innings at the Oval. Like Ames he was always a delight to watch. It is doubtful whether any member of the team possessed as many strokes as Hutton. There was not much change in the batting of Hammond as we saw it in 1935, unless it was that in the Test matches he became more guarded, more soundly reliable and less ready to give free rein to his natural genius.

MOST ACCOMPLISHED BATSMAN. I thought one of the most accomplished batsmen on the side was N. W. D. Yardley. He began the tour in brilliant style. He was unlucky to be excluded from Test elevens, while the selectors were persevering with Edrich, and towards the end of the tour—not through lack of technical ability—his batting fell off. Yardley ought to be one of England’s leading batsmen. H. T. Bartlett, too, had limited opportunities. He hit with exceptional power and was a most entertaining batsman, but he had to compete against keen competition for a place in the Test eleven. In fact it so happened that he was the only one of the fifteen members of the party not to play for England. Probably because the South Africans still remembered the devastating bowling of Grimmett and O’Reilly, the English attack did not seem formidable. Indeed, considerable encouragement was given the country's batsmen early in the season when it was seen that Fames was not as fast as had been expected and that Wright was subject to lapses of length. Fames developed his speed slowly, and went on to become a great force in the attack, despite the little assistance given to him by the wickets. His bowling had a profound influence on the winning of the third Test match. Verity was the most consistently accurate bowler. For many hours, match after match, he pinned down the South African batsmen with his mechanical precision. Wright, at his best, was the most dangerous of the spin bowlers, but he found difficulty in maintaining consistent control of the ball. Wilkinson, on the other hand, made notable strides on his first tour. Without possessing Wright’s variety he bowled with unerringly good length, he was a brilliant fielder with elastic reach and he seems uestined to become a prominent player in English cricket in the future. Goddard performed two hat-tricks, and was steady rather than thrustful. Hammond bowled considerably less than was justified by his subtle inexpensive overs. The wicket-keeping of Ames was always reliable and often brilliant. Gibb, though he did not attain the same standard, was an excellent and ■ zealous substitute. Edrich excelled in 1 fielding close to the wicket. Ham- ! mond was superb in the slips, and Paynter, Wilkinson, Hutton and Valen- ■ tine shone in a team of outstandingly 1 competent fielders. SOUTH AFRICANS BENEFIT. [ The South Africans, who started the season with a new captain, without an established wicket-keeper, and with , limited material for the attack, had , good cause to be pleased with their , performances. Melville won a personal ; triumph as captain, batsman and bril- . liant fielder. At one time or another all the experienced Test cricketers played with distinction and in three ; newcomers, P. G. Van der Byl, the | former Oxford Blue, R. E. Grieveson, who coupled with his splendid wicketkeeping stylish, productive innings, and N. Gordon, an indefatigable medium pace bowler, the country found three highly talented cricketers. At the end of the season there was every reason to expect that South Africa would be able to send a strong team to England in 1940*

Australian Boxers for N.Z. Mr. W. Harper, an official of the Dunedin Boxing Association, at present in Sydney, has stated that there is a possibility of a team of Australian amateur boxers being invited to New Zealand soon, writes Ted Turner. The Dunedin official saw Australia’s most brilliant amateur boxer, Liam Wilson, a bantamweight I and N.S.W. champion, brilliantly defeat Queensland champion, Freddy Davey, in a special six-round challenge contest at Leichhardt Stadium. Mr. Harper was most impressed by Wilson. N.Z. Sporting Life and I Referee. J

Auckland’s Gain. That Auckland has gained by the arrival of T. Pearson from the South seems evident on his performance at centre three-quarters for Grafton in the main attraction against Technical (says the N.Z. Herald). Pearson played for Canterbury last season and for Waikato in 1937. With A. Prentice, Auckland’s regular representative in that position, unable to play for some time yet on account of illness, it seems that the problems of the selector, Mr. F. W. Lucas, are solved.