THE AUSTRALIAN TEAM IN ENGLAND.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5422, 13 August 1878, Page 3

THE AUSTRALIAN TEAM IN ENGLAND.

The advent o£ an Australian team of cricketers in England, after an eleven of , the cobuies had won a match against an English team under Lillywhito, would naturally occasion some excitement, and this was not long in showing itself. The defeat at Nottingham

tended in no degree to lessen the interest in their piny, ■ seeing that it was engaged in so soon after their arrival, and in bad weather. If there was anything in it to depreciate their reputation, the influence was but temporary in its effect, as the Australian victory at Lord’s coming so soon after completely removed any doubts as to their strength. It was immediately subsequent to the defeat of the crack club, the Marylebone, and afterwards the Surrey team, the Press was incited to treat the visitors as, remarkable players. The Daily Telegraph of June 7 observes Australia has secured the third cricketing triumph of her representatives, and her second victory in London, beating the Surrey Club on its own Oval. Such was the result of the henceforth famous match played at ICennington on Monday and Tuesday between the Antipodean Eleven and the redoubtable Surrey team. Well may our sturdy young colonists feel proud of this last marked victory which they have achieved—a victory upon which their vanquished antagonists have been amongst the first and foremost to congratulate them, for rarely in the annals of cricket has the wellknown ground at Keuninglon witnessed a batter match, and never has a game been played with more spirit and greater emulation, yet characterised throughout by the most cor-, dial good feeling and brotherliness between the respective rival teams. In bowling and fielding the eleven from the Antipodes are declared magnificent, and they have also among them players who may fairly be called heroes of the bat. Spofforth, “ the demon bowler,” ns he has been styled, amply sustained his claim to this appellation by his fatal delivery on the first day, which not a little puzzled the Surrey batsmen, and conduced notably to the success of his side. Equally praiseworthy in the same team was the batting of Bannerman and Midwinter, who, resisting every temptation offered them, played without the least flurry or impetuosity. Mr. Murdoch’s style is described as fully equal to that of our very best players ; and the captain of the Australian team, Mr. Gregory, hitherto “ out of luck," showed himself nevertheless a “ first-class cricketer.” As to the welcome accorded to the Australians and the warmth of their reception, it proved that though the sea may separate Englishmen bodily it cannot divide them in sentiment. Apart from the intensity of the interest which all classes among us evince in our “national game,” the excellence of the play of the young colonists was such as to evoke in the highest degree the enthusiasm of a sympathetic and appreciative crowd of spectators. The fact that these fine young fellows are all of them Englishmen like ourselves, though natives of “ Greater Britain,” and born beyond the limits of our own “ little island,” ensured them the heartiest of welcomes. They have come from the other side of the world for the sole purpose of meeting in friendly rivalry their “ elder brothers ” of the mother country, and it must be acknowledged that they have shown themselves true “ chips of the old block.” To find similar instances of such thorough-going and entire devotion to physical cultivation as our Australian visitors have manifested we must go back to the palmiest and best days of Grecian cultivation, when from one end of the Hellenic peninsula to the other the inhabitants were attracted to the Olympic or Isthmian games, where Greek met Greek in the friendly but earnest contests of th e stadium 1 . The Telegraph’s special reporter writes Long before the Australian cricketers showed their neat uniform of dark blue and white at the Oval, their fame in this country had been established. Erom lip to lip, in cricketing circles, passed the dread name of Spofforth, the “ demon bowler,” who with the same tremendous stride and action could deliver a “ full pitch" as from a catapult, and a “tioe” so nicely delivered that it would pu.izle the judgment of a Grace or a Walker. Long before yesterday every one had heard of Spofforth, the mysterious Vanderdecken of the cricket-field, who, coming all the way from Australia, had floored the mighty “ W. G.,” had scattered his stumps into wild confusion, and had helped to win the first great victory for the Australian team. With Spofforth bowling, and the wicket in good condition, no one quite knew what might happen. Ho could “ bowl, and no mistake,” and that was the opinion of the Nestors of the cricket-field. At Lord’s, under the tennis-court wall, the “elders" of the mysterious confraternity of cricket had decided over their pipes and shandy-gaff that Spofforth was a “ demonbowler,” and no one in their senses would venture to dispute the decision of the oldest inhabitants of Lord’s. But Spofforth, though a bowler among bowlers, combining the terrible pace of “ Jackson” with the plodding and delicate head-work of old “Jimmy Dean,” was not everything. There] was Boyle, most certainly not to be despised ; there was a wicketkeeper that took off balls and leg balls with a click and a finish that made even the active Pooley open his eyes ; there was the gigantic Midwinter, ready to play as “ steady as a church,” and to sacrifice the temptation of a broad reach and a wide pair of shoulders for the sake of steadiness and his side ; there was the popular captain, Mr. Gregory, burning to upset the train of ill-luck, and to show, as he proved yesterday, that he is one of the best and boldest bats in the team ; there was Mr. Murdoch, who in point of style and form cannot be excelled by many University cricketers of our day ; and, lastly, there were the Bannermans, determined to score on the very earliest opportunity. This was the team that these thousands of cricket-lovers went out to see yesterday at the Oval, and it was a day of cricket long to be remembered. The weather was brilliant, the match all round was as good and even as it well might be, and the company was eager for a fair field and no favor. Those who intended to take the holiday meant to enjoy the cricket, and to enjoy it undisturbed. So far as the two matches in London are concerned, the Australians are clearly the best men, and by this time connoisseurs have come to the conclusion that whenever the youngsters play they will take a good deal of beating. In Spofforth they have a bowler who, “ on his day,” as cricket slang has it, would demoralise a first-class eleven. The change bowlers, mostly fast, are not confined to one or two ; and the all-round fielding, though not superior to what a first-class English eleven can show, is still very admirable, finished, and complete. For instance, the wicket-keeping of Blackham, though lacking that somewhat affected style encouraged by the great wicketkeepers of to-day, is as downright, as businesslike, and as practical as anything of the kind that has been seen since the days of Lookyer. Blackham’s wicket-keeping is not showy, but it is effective. The manner in which he takes off-balls and leg-balls with equal ease is a lesson in the art, and is so far practically useful that it economises a field. It is not the case, as has been supposed, that the Australians are particularly brilliant in the field when compared with good specimens of our University or public school cricket. For instance, though Murdoch fielded at point with wondrous activity, and caught so many, that, as Carpenter used to observe, it was “ just like shelling peas,” still, when criticism steps in, it is only fair to say that there was no fieldsman on the Australian side at once .so sate, so active, so f brilliant, and so finished as the Surrey captain, Mr. G. Strachan, who as .an all-round cricketer did his very utmost to pull the match out of the fire, working throughout with characteristic modesty and good taste. In batting, as in fielding, on tho Australian side, there is the same sound average merit, and a conspicuous absence of all inequality. There is “no tail” on tho eleven anywhere ; and, though a certain nervousness has hitherto occasionally paralysed the efforts of tho best batsmen, and even now makes them play slow and anxiously, when a match ought to be won by dash, still this match just concluded has given the public a very jfair idea of the general excellence of the eleven.

The Daily News has these remarks on the victory over the strong eleven of the M.0.C.: —There seemed to bo no accident in the matter. The Australian bowling and fielding, helped by the slow ground, were too good. The wicket-keeping was as good as the bowling, and one of the finest elevens in England wont out in both innings like the tail of a public school twenty-two. Nor wore tho Australians much more fortunate at first. Their two best bats, or almost their best, the Bannermans, made no sign. Tho fielding of Wild was as fine as that of Murdoch on the Australian side. ■ Alfred Shaw proved that his hand had recovered its cunning. Certainly it was a bowler's day, and people who think tho batting is mastering the bowling must admit that the reverse is the case when Spofforth, Shaw, Morloy, and Midwinter find a wicket to suit them, and excellent fielders to back their efforts. In tho first innings the Australians scored 41, leaving them only 12 to win in the second, which was done with 0 wickets to go down. Tho Australians have proved that

they are at least our equals in the field. In drier weather their capacity with the bat is to be tested. Whether in any return match they win or lose, it is pleasant to see that such fine representatives of the old English gam© are reared by the colonies. It is very noticeable that, as in .all good cricket, it is the bowling and fielding of the Australians, nob their batting, which have given them the victory. In the cricket field, as at the whist t.ible, it is often of more importance to prevent your enemy scoring than to score yourself. There seems to be no doubt that fop the present the novel style of the Antipodean bowlers has puzzled our batsmen ; and though there was certainly nothing to complain of in the bowling of Surrey, it was less effective than that of the invaders. Such an invasion is, of course, one of the best things that could happen to English cricket. There are few things more dismal to the lover of the game thau° the endless innings where two or three batsmen simply smite ineffective balls to all parts of the field at their good pleasure. The Australians have foi, a time put an end to this state of things. In time, no doubt, our batsmen will learn how to face them, and our bowlers how to pick their brains. But the lessen of their admirable fielding is the lesson which may be learnt with greatest and moat permanent advantage. As for any at bein" beaten, we need hardly say that nothing of the kind exists. Even if the victors were less akin to us than they are, there would be no such feeling.., We teach our games to all the world, and ■ are very glad now and then to take a lesson in return instead of giving one. Bub for Englishmen of Australia to beat Englishmen of England at cricket is no more annoying than for Yorkshirenien to beat men of Kent, or for the University of Oxford to beat the University of Cambridge. The Pall Mall Gazette of May 27 says Almost the best test of the general character of an eleven is its fielding. If eleven men field smartly and well together and understand one another’s peculiarities, it is astonishing what advantage they have over a aide which is less remarkable in this respect. And here the Australians certainly excelled, , Quick, active,.and ready, and as smart in the return as possible, they all seemed worthy rivals of Mr. Hornby, and than this there can be no higher praise. But they had certainly no long time in which to display their proficiency. Two more contemptible innings than those which were played by Marylebone it has never been our lot to witness. Some of the best batsmen in England seemed to have, conspired together to show the strangers how they could nob play. The Examine)' says:—Many reasons have been advanced to account for the unexpected termination of the match. It is assumed that the Australians were peculiarly favored by fortune in the wicket which had been selected, that the state of the ground suited them, and this regardless of the fact that we have often been told that they are seen at their best on a very lively ground. It is also suggested that there is something novel and peculiar in their bowling, which makes it utterly unlike anything our English batsmen have had as yet to encounter. There may be more or leas of truth in any or all of these reasons, but we suspect that the proverbial uncertainty of cricket , supplies sufficient excuse for the defeat of the Marylebone Club. Cricketing records contain many instances of similar unaccountable - collapses. A powerful eleven has been disposed of at something less than a run per man if we remember right, and a fairly good one succumbed on one occasion without scoring at all. We ourselves remember a good average eleven, with a professional bowler, being completely routed by a school eleven over which an easy victory had been anticipated, the boys scoring between four and five hundred runs to some five and twenty made by their visitors. There is no doubt, in fact, that the Australian team is a very strong one; and particularly in the bowling and fielding departments, bub we should prefer to aeo a few more of their performances by which to average their powers before admitting that they have stolen a march upon, the cricketers of this country, or, on the other hand, determining that their recent victory was altogether due to the chapter of accidents.