ENGLISH CRICKET REFORM

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11248, 28 June 1922, Page 8

ENGLISH CRICKET REFORM

LESSORS OF THE TESTS GOOD BOWLERS SCARCE. Everv cricketer worthy of the name is deeply indebted to the fine cricket the Australians showed us last summer, especially on hard wickets (writes the tion. K. H. Lyttelton in the “Westminster Gazette"). This applies to bowling and fielding in particular, and never can be forgotten the look of the English elevens as to shape and size as they walked out of the pavilion after seeing the Australians dart hither and thither after the ball. Controversy, however, has been stirred up, and a stnjv* ha* bam reached which is critical in the interest of the great game itself, and it is from this point of view alone tli&t this article has been written. The Australians seem to think that test matches are everything, the other matches being more in the nature of exhibitions, and provided they do not lose, and the gates are good, that is sufficient. This is their honest opinion, and from their point of view there is much to be said for it. Holding this in view as they do, they are consistent when they say that test matches should bo played to a finish, and it is ridicuj lous that they should travel thousands of miles to plav four drawn matches out of five as they did in 1899. We on this side, especially the county committees, do not agree that test matches should be played to a finish, as this dislocates the whole system of county cricket, and here is the difficulty, and the question is: How ought this to be settled? EYERY SIX YEARS. There is a good deal of money in English and Australian cricket, not only in the test matches, but in the more or less exhibition games against counties, most of which are impecunious, and these counties are for that reason glad to see Australians here as often as possible. The Australians are equally glad to come, and small blame to them —they love the game and they see something of the Old Country, to say nothing of the chance of getting about £7!fs clear of all expenses, as each Australian got last year. One solution of the difficulty - which is worth consideration is that five, or even seven, test matches should ail be played to a finish; but as this would undoubtedly upset all county cricket for that year, let Australian visits take place every six years, instead of every two or three, and when Australians are here let county cricket be suspended and not played according to the system of marks, champion county and so forth. Our programme could then be arranged on the principle of keeping an English eleven in being, playing matches against the combined Oxford and Cambridge elevens, perhaps with small odds, England against the North and South, North v. South, besides the time-honoured Gentlemen and Players contests. There could be seven test matches—one at Lord'6, the Oval, Manchester, Leeds, Nottingham, Birmingham, and Cardiff; and the counties as a solatium would get a substantial money payment out of the profits, as they do now, and no material damage would result from one year's suspension of rigid county cricket. There would also be countv cricket arranged, but of a rather different type, which would bring out rising talent all the better for not being so formal. TOO MUCH RUN-GETTING. The whole difficulty has arisen owing to the enormous run-getting, which makes three days of fine weather insufficient.' This is true not only in test matches, but in all matches, and this brings us to the other alternative, which is to alter the rules in favour of the bowler, and so curtail run-getting that drawn matches in three fine days should become well-nigh impossible. Many of us would like to see this solution, for not only would drawn matches, the curse of orlcket, be eliminated in fine weather, but we should be spared from the dirges about the lack of bowlers. The wickets are 60 easy now that bowlers have no chance, and fast bowlers especially are discouraged. Mr McDonald, as a fast bowler, is worthy of comparison with Richardson, Cotter, E. Jones and Lockwood. Nevertheless* it cost him nearly 25 runs for every wicket he got in test matches last season, on wickets well suited to his 6tyle, and against the worst batting side England has ever put into the field. In Australia there is no There we play five test matches and two matches with New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia, and there is plenty of time. The average number of days for each match is probably about font* and a half, and we cannot do this in England under the present system, when we have more than five hundred first-class matches to play in about seventeen weeks. Has not the time come for some change in favour of the bowler?