SPLENDID BATTING

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 19 December 1936, Page 9

SPLENDID BATTING

MACARTNEY CRITICAL

ENGLISHMEN AT SYDNEY * HAMMOND 147 NOT OUT SECOND TEST COMMENCES (United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright) SYDNEY, 18th December. For the second time in the series, England won the toss and took full advantage of a “shirt-front” wicket, when the Second Test commenced today. A feature of the day’s play, which was favoured by ideal weather, was a magnificent century by Hammond, who was at the wickets nearly all day. Partnerships of 91 by Barnett and Hammond for the second wicket and 129 by Hammond and Leyland for the third wicket placed England in a very strong position. Australia suffered another misfortune. Badcock is suffering from stomach trouble and was ordered to bed at the luncheon interval and is unlikely to play before Monday at the earliest.

The attendance was 35,107. Fagg and Barnett opened to McCormick and Sievers and appeared to be getting set when Fagg made a poor stroke at a ball outside the off stump and was well caught in the slips. Hammond started confidently, playing several perfect cover drives and soon the batsmen were treating the bowling very severely with the exception of that of O’Reilly, who quietened down the scoring rate. After lunch, Barnett had the misfortune to play a ball on to the wicket. He batted for 107 minutes and hit 5 fours.

Leyland began quietly, scoring most runs on the leg side behind the wicket and continued sedately until after the tea adjournment, when he went leg befofe to McCabe. He batted for 154 minutes and scored 3 fours. Hammond and Ames played quietly until stumps, when the former had been batting for 268 minutes and had scored sixteen fours. Details:— ENGLAND First Innings Fagg, c Sievers, b McCormick .... 11 Barnett, b Ward •. 57 Hammond, not out 147 Leyland, Ibw (new rule), b McCabe 42 Ames, not out 8 Extras 14 Total for 3 wickets 279 Fall of wickets: One for 27, two for 118, three for 247. Bowling

ENGLAND’S FINE “KICK-OFF”

luck on Allen’s side

BATSMEN RESPECT O’REILLY

(By J. B. Hobbs—Copyright—Reproduction in whole or part forbidden.) SYDNEY, This Day. “The Second Test is on and thanks to Allen winning the toss, England ‘kicked off’ splendidly. Up to lunch, we saw interesting cricket for a while until we lost Fagg. When the players trooped off, we had 100 on the board, which represents a good start. McCormick sent down five very fast overs to start with. He was able to get plenty of life out of the wicket and bowled very short, making the ball fly in a menacing fashion. In his first over, a short ball got up dangerously and hit Fagg a glancing blow on the forehead when he tried to hook a shot. I do not like to see our batsmen trying to hook short fliers at this stage. They would do better to duck and let them go as Worthington got out this way off the first ball of the Brisbane test. Fagg was out to a very good catch. The previous ball had flown near to his head and he was still thinking about that one when he hung his bat out to a well pitched up ball outside the off stump. Barnett must have been pleased to see McCormick go off, because he made some wild attempts to cut short risers in his last over. It was not a good start to lose a wicket at 27.

AUSTRALIA’S FIELDING PRAISED “Australia were on their toes, their fielding being excellent. Then Hammond helped Barnett in a steady stand and though they gave us a few quick heartbeats, they put us on top again. When McCormick was bowling, I thought the wicket was very fast, but when Ward went on, he seemed to belie me. He came off quite slowly and the batsmen, instead of square-cutting, elected to hook him to long on. O’Reilly bowled six overs for two runs, but it was practically all leg theory and the batsmen would have nothing to do with it. We always seem to lose a quick wicket just after lunch or tea. Now Barnett left. A leg spinner from Ward came through faster than he expected. This was another of Barnett’s useful innings for England. He is nearly, but not yet quite a great player. “NOSES RIGHT IN FRONT” “At Barnett’s dismissal, our position was far better than in any big match this tour. In Australia, I think matches are generally won by making a big score on the first day. Hammond and Leyland proceeded to put our noses right in front. Hammond reached his century before tea, when O’Reilly went on to try to effect a separation. Prior to that he bowled 96 balls of which only 8 were scored off. For a long time Hammond had me beaten. While making his first 60 he seemed to be more or less struggling. Perhaps it is because I judge him by his own high standard.”

To-day was one of those occasions when Hammond failed to give me complete confidence. However after 60 he went along with his old fluency and got the last 40 very quickly. He gave no actual chance but once jumped out and edged Ward just past slip while another time he nearly played too late to one of Chipperfield’s googlies, edging it wide of his leg stump. The crowd rose to him magnificently. Leyland was proceeding solidly as

he has been lately. Ward attacked him on and outside the leg stump and it was not easy for him to go all out for a shot without taking big risks. This Maurice wisely refrained from doing. It is a test match, not an exhibition game, and neither side cares much how runs are obtained as long as they are on board. The English colony went to tea in a cheerful frame of mind with 209 on the board and only two men out. What a change from our two previous performances here against New South Wales and the Australian XI when we were struggling to avoid defeat all the time.

Between lunch and tea the Australians’ fielding was strangely poor, but I except Bradman and Chipperfield, whose work was always good. After tea they improved, helping their bowlers to keep the runs down. McCormick started the day in great form buj; his speed fell off noticeably and it seemed a mistake to play him. We failed after tea to push home the advantage as we should have done. At that point we were in a strong position but our batsmen started too soon to play for six o’clock. After tea we had added only 38 in 70 minutes when Leyland was out leg before under the new rule in McCabe’s second over. England had a splendid day and we should have enjoyed it after tea had we scored above the average rate instead of below it. Still, the players may feel satisfied, insomuch as Hammond is still there and likely to-day to add to his already big score. He stuck it very well. His stamina and concentration are amazing.

Australia was handicapped by the inability of McCormick to come back after his opening spell. Ward wanted watching always. He did not come off the pitch quickly but his length was immaculate, as can be said of O’Reilly. It is interesting that including the Brisbane test he has bowled 5 overs since he last secured a wicket with 24 maidens. It is remarkable that a man can bowl so well and so fruitlessly.

BOTH TEAMS UNDER FIRE AUSTRALIA MUST IMPROVE SYDNEY, 18th December. C. G. Macartney comments that Allen was fortunate to win the toss and secure the first innings on a wicket that showed signs of wearing more quickly than customarily. The Englishmen’s rate of run-getting was satisfactory for a time, but in view [ of the tiredness of the bowlers at the end of the day, more runs should have 1 been obtained. Leyland was hopelessly out of touch and gave no sign of the man who compiled a century at Brisbane. His batting was disappointing. Barnett provided entertainment, but his display was marred by blemishes. He was not so certain as usual. Fagg failed to make a fullbladed stroke at the ball which brought his downfall. After Barnett’s departure, the batting gradually became passive and the atmosphere of a test match was entirely absent. Hammond however played a magnificent innings, executing delightful powerful strokes, although his timing, chiefly against O’Reilly, was occasionally faulty. I have to admit that I have seen him to greater advantage. Being still unconquered, he may yet exhibit that enterprise for which he'is _so notable. AUSTRALIAN ATTACK LACKS DIRECTION \ The Australian bowling was generally not accurate enough to be termed steady. In fact it has not received the punishment it deserved, but worst of all was the absence of a policy of direction. There was also an absence of control in the work both of McCormick and Sievers. A new ball was wasted ana the batsmen were consequently permitted to select the “scorable” ball at will. McCormick’s pace was good at the start, but gradually diminished its speed as the day progressed. Sievers transgressed badly in this direction. It is time he was made to appreciate the value of a new ball.

Ward, although he sent down some impressive overs, was a long way below his best. O’Reilly was the most impressive of the bowlers in attack, but even he has not presented the danger anticipated. He was quite unable to break through Hammond’s splendid defence. The out-cricket by the Australians left much to be desired. There was a lack of inspiration and test match spirit. The fielding fell away as the day wore on. There were several wild, stupid shots at the wicket and the Englishmen were thus allowed to obtain a grip on the game. Oldfield was given an enormous amount of unnecessary work.

England now occupy a strong position, and a great improvement must be shown to-morrow in the out-cricket and a more systematic attack in the bowling if the Australians do not wish to chase a big score. TOWN V. COUNTRY MATCH 'Uy Telegraph— Pp»bs Association) WELLINGTON, This Day. Scores in the cricket match, Town versus Country, being played at Wellington, are as follows: — Town, in the first innings, lost seven wickets, for 166 runs (Dustin, c Christensen, b McDougall, 2; Tindill, not out 66, Ell, run out 0; McLeod, lbw b Moloney 33; Ward, lbw b Moloney 47; Lamason, not out, 9; extras 9).

O. M. R. W. McCormick ... 14 0 66 1 Sievers ... 13 3 26 0 Ward ... 22 6 73 1 O’Reilly ... 20 9 46 0 Chipperfield ... 9 0 39 0 McCabe ... 4 1 15 1