SECOND TEST MATCH

Otago Daily Times, Issue 20586, 8 December 1928, Page 13

SECOND TEST MATCH

THE AUSTRALIAN TEAM,

THIRTEEN PLAYERS CHOSEN.

(United Press Association,; CBy Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) BRISBANE, December 7. , The test selectors have chosen the following players, from whom the side for the second test will be selected:— Andrews (New South Wales). Blackie (Victoria). Bradman (New South Wales). Grimmett (South Australia). Hendry (Victoria). • Ironmonger (Victoria). Kelleway (New South Wales). Hippax (New South Wales). Oldfield (New South Wales), Ponsford (Victoria). Ryder Victoria). Richardson (South Australia). Woodful (Victoria). The team includes four bowlers, no fast howler being included. The general impression is that the selectors have done their job badly.

CLEM HILL’S OPINION. SELECTORS HAVE DONE WELL. LONDON, December 6. (Received Dec. 7, at 8 p.m.) _ Critics point out that Australia’s oossible second test players show that the selectors. are not in a panic, and they somewhat dolefully record the fact that Australia : more than once has reversed an initial defeat with virtually the same team. One or two contrast the calmness with the English selectors’ oanic in 1921, when no fewer than 30 players ■ were drawn on. Clem Hill, in the Daily Telegraph, says: “ The selectors have done wef,l andthe 13 named are practically the best available. Nothling is apparently not thought class enough, but will eventually force his way into the team. The pre sence in the field of Andrews or Richardson—l hope both—w’ill mean a difference of 100 runs. 1 do not think there is a great deal o{_ difference betwen the two. sides, p'erhapa just a little -in favour of England. If the Australians win the toss and play tight for a few overs they are going to make big* scores.—Australian Press Association. CRY FOR NEW BLOOD. SYDNEY, December 7. i (Received Dec. 8, at 1.30 a.m.) Old-time cricketers, including Turner, Hopkins, Waddy, and Garrett, favour more new .blood in the Australian test teams, and’ cannot understand why, Nothling, Bottington, and A’bckctt were omitted. Others defend the selectors and argue that batsmen must be the first consideration,, and the selectors cannot afford to lengthen the tail.