CRICKET

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20191, 31 August 1927, Page 9

CRICKET

NEW ZEALANDERS AT RICHMOND * WIN ON FIRST INNINGS. GOOD BOWLING AVERAGES. (Pres* Association —By Copyright.) LONDON, August 29. In place of the match originally arranged against Mr Gates’s eleven at Old Buckenhara a one-day match was substituted at Richmond, which gave the New Zealanders another opportunity of meeting club cricketers. The pitch gave considerable help to the bowlers, and Richmond were dismissed for a small total, despite the inclusion of the Middlesex amateurs, H. L. Dales and C. D. Gray, and O’Gorman (a well-known comedian, who was promoted this year to the Surrey first eleven, in which he performed well both with the bat and the ball). M'Girr and Merritt had another good harvest, six' wickets falling for 74, and the whole side being out for 100. New Zealand went, in with plenty of time to get the runs—Dempster and Mills, the first pair, in fact, hitting them off before being separated. At the tea adjournment one wicket was down for 105, but after that the batsmen simply hit out and got out rather rapidly. They did not declare, but went on batting till stump® were drawn at 7 o’clock, when the total had reached 221 for eight wickets, New Zealand winning on the first innings. O’Gorman did some good bowling for the club. New Zealand played a substitute in the person of Calder. Details: RICHMOND First Innings. Dales, b M'Girr \ 3 Fraser, st James, b Merritt Summers, c Blunt, b M'Girr 0 Jones, c Blunt, b Merritt 18 Gray, Ibw, b M'Girr ... . 1 O’Gorman, st James, b Merritt ... 0 Clark, <c Allcott, b Dacre 27 Norman, not out 18 Heald, c Cunningham, b M'Girr ... 1 King, c and b Cunningham 0 Blundell, b Merritt 14 Extras - 12 Total (■ Bowling Analysis.—M'Girr, four for 23; Allcott, none for 14; Merritt, four for 38; Dacre, one for 5 p Cunningham, one for 3. NEW ZEALAND. First Innings. Dempster, c Clark, b O’Gorman ... 66 Mills, b Summers 48 Merritt, et Clark, b O’Gorman 16 Dacre, Ibw, b O’Gorman 17 James, c Blundell, b O’Gorman , 6 Cunningham, Ibw, b Blundell 5 Calder, b O’Gorman •••- 14 Blunt, b Blundell 5 Oliver, not out ... < 15 Allcott, not out T 7 Extras 18 Total for eight wickets 221 Bonding Analysis.—King, none for 28; Heald, none for 32; O’Gorman, five for 72; Blundell, two for 30; Fraser, none for 23; Summers, one for 17; Gray, none for I.—A. and N.Z. Cable, GAME WITH NEW SOUTH WAI/ES. ARRANGED FOR OCTOBER 28. SYDNEY, August 30. (Received August 30, at 7 p.m.) The Cricket Board of Control has acceded to the proposal that the New Zealand cricket team now touring England should play a four days’ match against New South Wales at Sydney, commencing on October 28.

NEW ZEALANDERS’ TOUR. THE TEST MATCH QUESTION. / Written for the Otago Daily Times. By Colonel Philip Trevor, C.B.E. It was a pretty easy victory that the New Zealanders gained at Wisbach—a matter of eight wickets—against the East of England. Many are the attempts that have been made to make cricket flourish in the east of- England, or, rather, I should say, to revive it there. A very long time ago—nearly 100 years —Norfolk ranked supremely high in the cricket world, and it is indeed on record that on one occasion a “ Grand Match ” arranged between Norfolk and England was won by the county and not by the country. Then came what are still known as the “hungry forties,” which hit the agricultural counties in the cast of our land harder than any other counties. Agricultural wages in that disastrous era were about 9s a week, and the grim struggle for existence put the playing of games out of the question. Poaching took the place of games, and it was the most adventurous of all pastimes. A man could be, and was, indeed, hanged for poaching. When, by slow degrees, the poverty of the Eastern Counties was to some extent relieved, the ball game spirit was not revived. The fact remains that as a game cricket flourishes less in Norfolk and in Suffolk “than it does in other counties. For all that, the side which the New Zealanders defeated at Wisbach had some pretty good players in it, notably C. H. Titchmarsh, W. E. Hazleton, “ Nipoer ” Holloway, and the Cambridge Blue, L. G. Irvine. *lt is said that Titchmarsh,, now distinctly a veteran, has in all matches made more runs than any batsman who has ever lived with the exception of W. G. Grace. It is difficult to check abatement of that kind, but I should think in this case the statement is true. The . match demands only a passing notice. But what happened in it emphasises the contention I have already made—namely, that these tourists are much too good for any second-class side. As I write the New Zealanders are taking a well-earned' mid-tour rest. It is an opportune moment, therefore, for mo to discuss a matter whiah is to become one of substantial importance—namely, the claims New Zealand hag to be honoured by the inclusion in their programme of test matches at their next visit. Next season the West Indians will be in this country, and it has been arranged that they are to play test matches—for the first time. Now, I have seen all the overseas teams which have come to this country perform —the Australians, the South Africans, the New Zealanders, the Parsecs, also the Philadelphians—and I say advisedly that only Australia has sent hero a side better in batting than the present New Zealand side. Never in this country has South Africa put into the field a real strong batting side, though it must be allowed that South African batsmen are 50 per cent, more effective on matting than they are on turf wickets. That is why they have won test matches played in their own land and have not won a single one played in this land. South Africa, indeed, has only produced two outstanding batsmen—namely, Aubrey Faulkner and H. W. Taylor, and the former, now resident in England, is earning as great a reputation as a teacher of the game as be holds as a player of it. After these men you can begin to make comparisons. And there have only been three great South African bowlers—the fast bowler, J. J. Kotze. and the googhe merchants, Aubrey Faulkner and Ernie Vogler. Gordon' White, apart from his batting, strengthened the 1907 team because his real good googlie (when he got it a length) was the best googlie that could be bowled. And Reggie Schwarz also strengthened that side, but in a peculiar ag almost non-understandable

way. Rqggie absolutely could not bowl a leg-breaking ball. He bowled the offbreaker with a leg break action, and, marvellous to relate, month after month our batsmen, when they got to the wicket, batted as if be could bowl one and continued to look out for the le£ breaker. Reggie was accorded the rank of googlie bowler, much to his own amusement. The side the West Indians sent on the Occasion of their last visit hero was easily the best the West Indies has ever produced. It was a capital fielding side, and it contained two very good bowlers and two (if not three) other men in it 'were good bowlers. But in it there was only one real class batsman—G Chaliouer, who was then in the late ’thirties. I rank Challoner between Faulkner and Taylor—fairly close to Faulkner and just above Taylor, (fall Challoner class one in that West Indian side, and if you want to be very accurate you must say : “ Class two, none.” Then you get to class three and dispute about the merits of other candiFor more than thirty years Australia has sent over here some rare good batting sides —sides 'that have been almost without tail. But neither South Africa nor the West Indies has ever had a side whiqh has been anything as strong in batting as that wlych New Zealand has sent here this summer. I am sure New Zealand has distinct claims on test match honours on the occasion of the next visit of a New Zealand team to this country. Nor cau it fairly be retorted: “New Zealand has no great bowler.” Some weeks ago I committed myself to the statement that at the moment there was no great bowler in the world. I note with natural satisfaction that so great an authority as Warwick Armstrong agrees with mo. Armstrong in his own person linked together two generations of Australians, and he knew at first hand two generations of English and South African cricketers. New Zealand is ftp! to be disqualified therefore on the ground of lack of bowling, while fielding, as I have pointed out, is a matter of practice and determination. Incidentally South Africa has never had a really great fielding side. And I make another claim on behalf of New Zealand batting—an important one, namely, the capacity of the side (the whole side practically) to-score fast. We shall never be converted in this country either to the doctrine or to the practice of the unlimited time match. And with our unsettled and changeable weather the capacity to score fast is the match-win-ning capacity. , . My advice then to New Zealand cricketers, jf I may offer it, is this: “Stick to your present batting policy. Go on improving your fielding and make your most promising bowlers concentrate on length. When you come here again, if you have length bowlers and improved fieldsmen, we shall be ‘ up against it in the test matches that I hoped to see played.” And if meanwhile you can unearth a real fast bowler and a couple who can make the good length ball do “ funny ” things, I see no reason why your people should not do here what the Australians have done so often. And if they do it is all for the good of the Empire. July 26. It was an even better victory than it might appear to be on paper which the Chiswick, where they defeated our Civil Service by an innings and 15 runs. The feature of the match was of course the unfinished partnership of J. E. Mills and C. P. W. Allcott, which began after seven wickets had fallen, and which produced no less than 190 runs. When these two batsmen came together the New Zealanders, in spite of a fine innings by R. C. Blunt were not in a good position, but thanks to them T. C. Lowry was actually able to declare the innings closed that evening, knowing when he did so that the defeat of his side was not even a remote probability. -I hesitate again to lay stress on the match-winning capacity of batting which is not merely reliable all the way down the list, but also of the forcing type. - New Zealand s 421 runs were got at the rate of about 80 an hour. That is a moderate pace for the New Zealanders, but it is in advance of our average in first-class county cricket. Next day the New Zealand bowling asserted itself. Despite another plucky innings by C. H. Bennett, Henderson and Blunt had the side out for 150 runs, the fast medium left-hander having an even better bowling analysis than the slow right-hander. It was a good victory, and won in the right way. I would here say a. few words in regard to the side which New Zealand defeated so handsomely on this occasion. In our Civil Service are a number of players who on their individual merit have a right to rank as first-class cricketers. But so far the Civil Service has not been organised for games like the Army and the Navy have been organised, and as the Air Force is being organised. But the movement to organise it has already been mad l ' and is making progress. I would like Jp be more explicit, but as yet I am not in a position to say anything more in detail. Negotiations are proceeding. T am, however, at liberty to state that the idea of a Service Tournament has been broached, and not without reason is it held in influential quarters that the Civil Service is entitled to rank for games purposes with the three military services. The matches iu which the Army take part rank as first class, and only a few days ago the Navy utterly routed the Army at Lords. It is thirteen years since the sailors beat the soldiers. Incidentally, that victory has done something to emphasise the ' ims of the Civil Service to recognition. The point of these remarks on the present occasion is this : I want' to draw attention to the fact that that the Civil Service are already a pretty good side, and, with the necessary official encouragement, they could in the near future justify the official distinction of first-class. To' the great disappointment of everyone the New Zealand match against the Army at Folkestone was ruined by ram. There was no play at all on the second day of it, and only a few minutes on the third and last. The bad weather on the Thursday and Friday was the more to be regretted seeing that the tourists were bv way of being up against, it. Very seldom do they win the toss, bat first, and get put out for less than 200 runs. And that was their fate at Folkestone. Now it is a.s n batting and not as a bowling side that the Army rank and have always ranked. In this matter I can speak with experience. During the last 40 years any number of us soldiers have been asked to play for our counties, and practically all of us for our batting. Indeed, I can count on the fingers of one hand the soldiers who have been played in these games tor their bowling. From 1892 to 1895 I was a member of the Aldershot Divisional Eleven, which was then at its strongest. Indeed we rarely lost a match. More than half that side were asked to play county cricket, chiefly for Hampshire. Inctdently all but two declined, but that is a detail. At that time E. R. Bradford, who, besides being our best bowler, was also our best batsman, occasionally plaved for Hampshire, though he did so under pressure. He was loth to desert his soldier side. Poor Bradford was killed in the Great War when in command of his battalion. He had the melancholy distinction of being one of the notorious list of bowlers black-listed officially bv the M.C.C. for throwing. Rarely have the 'M.C.C. in their judicial capacity made a ghastly and egregious error’ but thev made one on that occasion. By making a list of men who thev decreed were not to bowl (C. B. Fry was one of them) thev superseded the umpires and consequently broke the laws of cricket under which they existed to maintain. I was about to captain the Aldershot Eleven at the time in a match to be played in London, and I said to an influential M.f.C. committeeman : “ I intend to put Hvclvn Bradford on to bowl.” Ho said aghast: “You can’t do it.” I said: “Please don’t interrupt. I intend to out him on to how! . Lobs.” “ Great Scott,” was the reply. “We never thought of that. I left them to think it over. ..-recording to the M.C.C. edict, Fry, Bradford, and

Co. could not go on to bowl lobs. More than 30 years have passed since then, and it is just as rare now for a soldier to get a trial in tirst-class county cricket as a bowler as it was then. It came, therefore, as a great surprise to me wnen the soldier howlers got the New Zealanders out cheaply on the first day of the match at Folkestone. But it did not come as a surprise to me when the soldier batsmen subsequently lopped the New Zealand score for the loss of only three wickets. If only the weather had kept fine it would have been most interesting to test once again the recuperative batting powers of the New Zealanders. There is no need for me to make excuses for them. But Ido desire to draw attention to the disadvantage they have been at during the past few weeks on account of the continuous rain with which this country has been afflicted. You cannot dismiss the weather question as one concerning merely fast, slow, or sticky wickets. You cannot fairly ignore either the physical or the moral effect of When the West Indians were last here they opened their tour in the worst month of May the oldest of us in this land had ever known. The cold was intensemost of them wore two sweaters when in the field—and the wet and the grey skies depressed them intensely. Cb°. se Y h ? could only see cricket as a technical test of skill began to say: “ These people are no good.” Fortunately the fine weather came at long last, and subsequently these West Indians added week by, to their reputations. They left the country with those reputations established, and they have now been accorded the honour of test matches. History is recorded the other way on with the New Zealanders. They opened in fine weather and they instantly established a considerable —a very considerable—batting reputation. Because late they have made two or three only moderate scores on slow wickets I de dine to take that fact as evidence thw, they are lacking in the power to bat'veU on soft turf. My memory goes back too far and is too retentive to allow me to do that. This phenomena, if you like to call it so, is too well known to mo (and consequently it is not a phenomenon). I have noticed it in the casq of the Australians and the South Africans as well as in the case of the West Indians. The Southern Hemisphere has tho Northern Hemisphere beaten to a frazzle in weathet. . , . 1 leave it to the scientists to explain how it is that bad weather morally depresses those who are used to good weather. It is enough for me to note the fact that it does depress them, and that I know for a certainty that such depression is very practically translated where the Empire game of cricket is concerned.