CRICKET.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLI, Issue 12546, 13 April 1904, Page 7

CRICKET.

The Parnoll and Eden elevens are now leading for ilia Auckland Crick Association senior championship.

The following will represent the Eden first eleven against City seniors on Saturday next:— Elliot (captain), H. Douglas, A. E. Clark, N. B. Lush, N. T. Williams, H. Hobson. I. Mills, W. Mills, 8. Mills, A. E. Sandford, and W. B. Smith.

Touching on the financial loss sustained by the Marjleb&iui Cricket Club in connection with the Englishmen's recent Australian tour Mi. 11. E. Faster said ho scarcely thought the club would send out another team on the same terms as those accepted in connection with the visit of Warners side. EDEN CLUB JUNIOR AVERAGES. ' Tho averages of the Eden District Cricket Club's second elevens for the season's cup matches are as under: — "A" TEAM. Matches played, 8; won. 6: lost, 2. Runs scored for, 3679 for 11? wickets,- against, 1213 for 14j Wickets BATTING AVERAGES. ... 111- It una U.S. Avgo. • Dixon 4 32:3 45* 125 A. 11. Clark ... lo 227 07 25.2 0. byre 9 199 1,3 04 a A. 11. Freeman ... 14 203 52 14 8 W. Rowland ... 9 101 29 14 4 U. V; > Beal ° 12 12?, 20 13:5 H. lfotoon. 7 82 36 13.5 J. '- ujikerley (cap.) 9 301 30 12 6 , ' Vu tim I 63 J7# H. 3 1 ■ Mill? 3 35 18 1, 'IV D.Bali 4 « 26 10.7 J B. Kyd 12 85 25 5.5 }•. I.OS'S 3 25 g? §' If- n '^ y 12 65 21* 6.5 H. Donald 7 16 3 2.6 maU?lies aboVe IIaVC pl!lJetl in at least tbro ° Also flatted: C. Bottrill. *<"• Ball in. W. r i vn- 'iVi\ ' r ® 1, a ," Brown, V,'. Thorpe, K. L.-tver, B. Baiter, anil W. Kedshaw. BOWLING ANALYSIS. 11. Hobson ... 30.4 7' 67 pt' M '?o J. L. akt ' riey "' 44.3 9 300 10 5 5 A. 11. Free,van... 69.5 5 210 32 65 »■ J vv;t ... 333.2 39 274 40 6.8 The above have played In at least three matches, and taken more than 10 w» Vets Also bowled: 11. Donald, R. WaltJTi, K. 'o Beale, C. Lyre, W. Rowland, A. Clark V howe, ami W. Dixon. ' x ' 11 TEAM. Matches played, 8; won, 4; lost 4 p ntls MSkkiS: lor « wicket 3: a » ainst - 1507 BATTING AVERAGE!?. xv *■ r> , . lu. Huns. II,5). Avire. w' L. Kobmion ... 9 239 56 26.6 W. Thorpe ... 0 149 3 , } 18 . 6 ;V ] ™ vvn 11 200 KJ 18.1 0. Hokimson ... 12 325 3', U. 3 D. Jack ... ... 13 130 3? 9.2 W.Somervell ... 13 92 «3 0•> A. Walton (Oapt.)... 12 110 29 01 A. K. Sand lord ... 4 35 si £'7 U. W. De Bauffh * 11 K 53 8 3 0. Browu* ... ... ii 31 16 7 7 « Neild 11 40 13 4.0 I'. Gilmoro 9 38 7 2.2 *'fko above have played In at least three matches. Also batted: D. Mclnness, .T. Paly. G. Megerney, C. J. Bottrill, T. Smith, H. 'Bennett. K. llutton, and c. Waddingliaiii. . BOWLING ANALYSIS. „ „ , Buns. Whit. Avfa. C. P.obinaon 211 29 7.2 P. O'lniora ... ... 99 11 9.6 11. W. de Baugli ... 120 12 10.0 A. Brown 105 10 10.5 D. Jack 134 10 11,4 The above have played in at least three matches, and take* 18 wiekola or over. Also bowled: G. Mtsrernoy, W. Somervell, ,T. Daly, A. Walton.' A. 11. Sanclford, D. Melnness, C. Brown, and (I. .Neild.

ENGLAND'S AND AUSTRALIA'S WEAK POINTS. Though the M.C.C. English team was not preceded by songs of praise, the men have left, on their return to England after having accomplished that which England's chosen filled to achieve on English grounds in 1902, says "Not Out," of the Referee, in an interesting review of the doings of the opposing sides in the recent test matches, England v. Australia. It is all so happy, so unexpected, too, in many quarters—from the point of view of England. As lovers of the noble game of cricket, we Australians have not allowed ourselves to be cast down with sadness by " tho ashes" shipping across the seas to the home cf cricket. It is not good for this universal British gam® of ours that either England or Austalia shouldeven though it be by sheer merit—get an unloosening grip on the championship. After a certain length of reign, as tho champions, even the best of cricket teams are lik#ly to suffer from the surfeit of victory and some of its attendant ills.' Defeat is. it stimulus to tho nervy team of fighters. It " points out weaknesses iu a aide us only strenuous finishes in lost games can. And one is sure that Australia's defeat will be prolific of good fruit wherever first-class cricket is played, and in many places where it is not played. There is some litile philosophy in this point of view, and it has the additional merit of soothing our Australian- -feelingsif they need it.

It has been said that the M.C.C!. team has been the luckiest that ever visited Australia, That may or may not bo so. But, luck or no luck, it does not, in my opinion, lessen the merit of the victories gained against Australia. The weather is " all in tho game." If this had been one of the usual dry summers, England would probably have failed. But even that is problematical, and after all it is only an opinion. As the season was, and on the cricket shown, there was very littie between the two teams. Australia was the stronger in batting; England the stronger in bowling. In fielding they just about beat us—on the whole—in the slips; elsewhere.on the wholewe just about beat them. Both Ridsw missed catches, but it was the fortune of war that tho really expensive misses should mostly have been mad» by Australians. And, you know, we rather initio ourselves on our fielding. In ground fielding, wo are a bit better; in snaring the catches— and especially difficult onesas a team, they were superior.

In 1901-2. Macl.&ren's team met Australia at a time when some til" our best players were a trifle below form. But ?JaeTnr<m did not have much good luck. The M.C.C. team, in my opinion, snot Australia stronger than she was in 1901-K. No man, not excepting .1. Darling in 1/97-8. or C, Hill in either 1897-8 or 1901-2. ever played such cricket for Australia as Victor Trumper did ; and though it was a bqwler's season, no nian—either Englishman or Australian—ever scored so many rims in any series of tost matches as V.T. did in ilio latest series. M. A. Noble never batted against England as lie did ibis time. They had no one on the side onurd to eitlißi of these batsmen. R. A. Duff and Clem Hill have not ho**« surpassed by anv of the Englishmen, and in mv- opinion Duff has not boon equalled. _ Hill IW'U patchy—tor him—and against the English howl in a has not shown his usual form, nor anything' like hi* old mastery of the ball. At the start of the ssasnu be was 111 his true form; the qnjQtirn in Tasmania Btid/subseouent. lack of practice did not bvln to perpetuate that for'ii. Add >1. I'-. Oragow to the quartette, and you have AmlrsbVs halting as represented in the test nv<iteht>.s. No other fenteman showed anything like bin form in ho Kerifts. A tutted niis»wl the run-get-Hntr of Trtwabla and MoT eod in other year-, (in the test matches they made. 03 runs in 14 innings); missed tha run-getting 01* others, too.

Thire was a color-sal and rnnles? Australian tail, and it ia mere fairness to ascribe the runlessposfi of that tail to the equality and variety and unexpectedness of the English attack. You mav endeavour to make yourself believe that it was solely bad batting by "the tail," but super-axccllent 1 fowling that was never "tired" had something to do with it.

This brings us to the one great mat.cnwinning power possessed by the M.C.C. team mi comparison with Australia in the series, 1 hev had an almost perfect combination of bowling talent, and the more one saw of them in this season of moisture the more curtain one felt, on that subject. Rhodes showed young Australian left-handers how to squeeze every ounce out of a wicket helping tho ball He is one ol the greatest on a bowler's wicket ; by no means the " headless" or mechanical bowler on good wickets he has been made out to be. Possibly d he had struck a dry season, with real starched shirt-front Australian wickets, he would have become an ordinary rank-and-file bowler, and achieved little that was great. But even under conditions of that kind he would probably have never been pasted as Johnny Uiiggs has been. Arnold was a first-class performer, and a good, reliable howler, who did not lose his value on hard wickets. Brannd, to my mind, was as good as ever, just as accurate and more varied in pace— Australian batsmen knew more about l is methods this time. Unlike Rhodes and Arnold, hia work was done almost wholly on batsmen's wickets. Of Fielder we saw nothing in Sydney beyond the practice nets. Hirst bowled more than anyone, save Rhodes, was always slippery and flighty with the new ball, l»u' he did not get many wickets considering hit English reputation and "the amount of work he psi foraied. In some of the latoi mutohea it was felt here that ha made the batsman the target. At

all event?, two or three of the Australians were severely hit by halls bowled seemingly straight at them. Relf was not used much, and, when tried here two or throe times, ho had to face the music of Victor Trumper a bat manipulated by that artist well set. Ana that does not conduce to succsss. Ano bowlers mentioned above comprise two ,I®*** banders — fast ami one slow —font righthanders, one slow, one fast, arid two medium —arid all accurate bowlers. There was another, and he was not accurate. But that does not matter, for Bosanquet, as bowler, is 11 freak—that is, on his day out. l» you catch him off-colour lie is unspeakably, bad ; but he had several good days, and as nearlyall of them were reserved for the Sydney ground, we in Sydney are like'y to think mo highly of Bosanquet as bowler than our Southern " friends. In both New South Wales and in the four test matches he had tho colonial batsmen baffled. One had believed his command of length to be too weak for an England v. Australia bowlci, hut, judged by his work this season, Bosanquet ts a match-winner. If he can add to his unique powers as an off-break bowler with a- leg-break action that of accuracy, England will possess in him a powerful weapon against Australia in future years. But we can only hope that our batsmen have picked up a few wrinkles from their experiences against him this summer. The M.C.C. team line! no batsman of tho Maelo.ren standard; and was not really a great batting side. The men laid themselves out to play what is known as " Scotch" cricket, but one believes it helped them very little towards success, and would have been a source of weakness in a dry season of fast wickets.