WOODFULL V. RICHARDSON

Northern Advocate, 10 November 1934, Page 2

WOODFULL V. RICHARDSON

TESTIMONIAL CRICKET. TWO STRONG TEAMS. Strong, well matched teams iiayc been chosen for the Woodfull-Ponsford match, which begins on the Melbourne Cricket Ground on November 10. Woodfull’s side—the board bans the official title of Test team—was suggested to the selectors by the captain and Ponsford. McCabe has been included on the assumption that he will be fit to play. He injured his ankle on the boat recently. Woodfull’s XL—W. M. Woodfull, Captain (V.), W. H. Ponsford (V.). S. J. McCabe (N.S.W.), A. F. Kfippax (N.S.W.), L. S, Darling (V.). A. G. Chipperfield (N.S.W.), W. A. Brown (N.S.W.), W. A. Oldfield (N.S.W.), T. W. Wall (S.A.), W. J. O’Reilly (N.S.W.), C. V. Grimmett (S.A.). Richardson’s XL —V. Y. Richardson, Captain (S.A.), J. Fingleton (N.S.W.), L, P. O’Brien (V.). J. Scaife (V.). C. L. Badcock (S.A.), C. Hill (N.S.W.), E. L. McCormick (V.), B. A. Barnett (V.), H. I. Ebeling (V.), L. O’B. FleetwoodSmith (V.), L. E. Nagel (V.). K. Rigg (V.) is twelfth man for both sides. In Woodfull’s side are four batsmen, three bowlers, a wicket-keeper, arid three all-rounders (McCabe, Chipperfield and Darling)—better described as batsmen who cpn bowl. Richardson’s team possesses five batsmen, five bowlers and a wicketkeeper (Barnett). The selectors took an unusual course in including five bowlers in Richardson’s team, but they showed imagination —and appreciation of the tremendous batting strength of the Test side, even without Bradman. In the absence of an all-rounder—they evidently did not consider P. K. Lee (S.A.) good enough—they had to pattern an attack that would keep the ■game moving, and allow for relays of fresh bowlers against punishing Test batsmen. Mild surprises were the inclusion of Clem Hill and Lisle Nagel, but both are fine bowlers, and will infuse variety into the bowling. Hill, a lefthander, 30 years of age, is generally more accurate than hostile, and with more of a swing than a spin from leg. He is a fair bat. Nagel will play. It will be his final game in big cricket because of business calls. Good men omitted were Oxenham (Q.), Lonergan (S.A.), and Nitschke (S.A.); but who could have been left out to fit them in?