TEST MATCH CONTROVERSY.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19403, 11 August 1926, Page 11

TEST MATCH CONTROVERSY.

ENGLAND'S FINAL TEAM. CHANGE IN THE CAPTAINCY. ARGUMENT IN THE PRESS. By Telegraph—Press Association —Copyright. (Received 0.5 p.m.) A. and N.Z.-Sun. LONDON. Aug. 9. Controversy continues regarding the exclusion of A. W. Can- from the team which is to represent England in the final test cricket match on Saturday at the Oval. P. A. Perrin, one of the selectors, asserts that Carr was dropped purely because he is not in his best form. England wanted to win and in order to do that it was necessary to play the best mou. P. F. Warner, Hobbs and Rhodes declined to comment on the matter. Carr told an interviewer to-day that he was not alone responsible for putting the Australians in first in the test match at Leeds. Yet he was being made the scapegoat. The Daily Mail comments; "It is difficult to understand why Carr considers he has a grievance. Ho offered to resign and his offer was accepted. Now he is annoyed because he was allowed to resign. Why did he suggest that he should stand down if he was keen to play? His omission appears to have weakened England, which is in danger of too many cooks spoiling the broth.'' Inclusion of Khodes Approved. The Australian cricketer, Charles Ivelleway, writing in the DaUy Express, says England's new team is strong in batting but weak in bowling and fielding. It is to be led by a young captain, yet it may win its spurs. Too many experiments crowded into one match might easily be the forerunner of disaster. Kelleway says ho believes Rhodes is still England's best slow lefthand bowler, but, he asks, can ho last out a long match? The Express commends the docision of the selectors as at once conrageous and adventurous. England, it says, is going to make a bold, and it hopes a successlal, lid for victory. Tho Morning Post says the selectors •have taken their courage in their hands. England now has a side of 11 first-class batsmen, and its attack is pretty formidable with Tate, Larwood, Geary, Rhodes, Stevens and Woolloy. Practically all the papers approve the inclusion of Rhodes. The South African cricketer, G. A. Faulkner, writing in tho Gazette, says Chapman will be a nominal captain of England because it is obvious that Rhodes will be the real one. He says ho was not prepared for the Chapman-Rhodes camouflage. He had imagined the selectors would have had sufficient - courage to elect Rhodes outright, without resorting to this roundabout method of saying "no professional shall be captain of England." If this was not the intention of the selectors Faulkner asks why they did not do the right thing and appoint by far tho best amateur captain in England, namely, Fender. The writer says the team selected is a highly experimental one, but he thinks the members will acquit themselves well. Mystery Should be Cleared Up. In an article under the heading "Test Captain Mystery," the Daily Chronicle critic says the position in regard to Carr should ho cleared up in fairness to Carr, Chapman and the public. "Can it be that Carr lost caste among tho lords of cricket because he placed Hobbs in command at Manchester?" asks the writer. "Everybody remembers Lord Hawke's dictum, and Carr's action is considered to be unforgivable among wealthy gentlemen." The Daily Express says the public desires to know the truth about Carr's resignation. There is a want of candour somewhere. Assuming that the change was desirable the public wishes to know why Chapman was chosen over the heads of Rhodes and Hobbs. If, as Perrin explains, the selectors only thought was that of England's success, then why put the team into inexperienced hands ?