CRICKET

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21531, 31 December 1931, Page 4

CRICKET

. ' ; ;■- By Slip. THE PLUNKET SHIELD Nothing could'have; done more to check the backward tendency that has been noticeable in Otago representative cricket than the match between Otago and Canterbury which was concluded, on Tuesday.Had’Otago won it would have been a truly wonderful performance, but loss by three wickets was an outcome which cannot be- regarded otherwise than as satisfactory. Otago’s, first inning’s score of 16L was a disappointing effort, though it was a great improvement on last season’s performances, and Blunt and Knight were the only batsmen who did themselves justice. ■ When Canterbury knocked up 472 it seemed that the, most Otago could expect to do was to avoid an inning’s defeat. Then came a recovery, which is without parallel in New Zealand cricket, and which demonstrated that our batsmen still retain the fighting spirit. Blunt’s remarkable score of 338 has already been the subject of so much praise that it is not necessary to ' dwell at length upon it. , Though Dempster may be New Zealand’s outstanding batsman at the present time, New Zealand has produced no greater cricketer than Blunt. He holds almost every individual record for New Zealand cricket and now he becomes associated with a new record for a last wicket partnership in shield games. The total, which he; and Hawksiyorth added for the last,, wicket was 184, which has been beaten only five times in first class matches throughout the world, and which is d considerable improvement on the previous record total of 138 made by James ancL Brice for Wellington against Otago in,:the 1926-27" season. For a couple >f seasons in Dunedin Blunt had,hot shown anything like his beet form, and it was only towards the end of the tour of Eng--lancl that he began to display his true batting ability", - though be secured a hue aggregate* for the trip. He started the present season below form, but those who saw him batting in the trial game before tiie .'Otago team’s departure and against Albion, when he made 64, noticed that he-tivas beginning to develop again shots which. Tic had- not produced for a very long "time. Against Canterbury .in his memorable innings he evidently brought info,.play all ol his most effective and stylish shots. Those who saw his knock are! therefore, to be envied. The value of the aggressive batting of Badcock, who scored 105, cannot be overestimated; The manner in which he scored off good and. ,evpp-dangerous-' balls must have done a great deal to take the sting out of the attack. Foe sheer courage and determination, however, it would be difficult to call to memory a performance more praiseworthy than that of Hawkesworth, who played a really great fighting innings. Commenting on the play on Monday, the Christchurch Press said: — “In scoring his 315, not out, Blunt played the innings of a brilliant cricket career. Going in at_ 10 minutes to 12 with the score showing one for 49, he kept his end up for the remainder of the day and'saw 506 runs added, his own share being 315. To say that, he played masterly cricket is but weak praise; it is doubtful if a finer display of all-round batting has been seen in Christchurch before. It was supposed that his play had deteriorated since he left Christchurch, and certainly he has shown nothing like it in Dunedin. He played many fine innings when he lived in Christchurch, and was generally recognised as the best batsman Christchurch has produced. But Monday’s performance easily eclipsed his previous best, and he produced scoring strokes that surprised even his greatest admirers. He lifted two or three into the deep field when it was safe to do so, but otherwise his runs were made by cutting, cover drives, and leg strokes. He repeatedly scored with late cuts off balls that many good batsmen would leave alone. His driving all round the off side was magnificent, and his on side play was almost uncanny, his leg strokes —and he rarely missed a ball on the leg side —being such as one would expect to see from nobody else. He gave an easy catch at 127, and was caught off a a no-ball, but apart from these the poor or weak strokes that he made could be counted on the fingers. It was an innings that, for all-round excellence, it would be hard to beat. “ Badcock’s century _ was quite overshadowed by Blunt’s big score, but, coming at the start of the innings, it paved the way for the big score that followed. More enterprising or more entertaining batting is not often seen in a first-class match! ; Right from the , 'fetart he went for t£e bowling. He scored from practically everything that should be scored off—and even more. He frequently made runs from balls that many good batsmen would have simply played. He took risks, but the balls he lifted were generally to chosen parts of the field. Except on rare occasions, his scoring strokes were well executed, well timed, and had a lot of power behind them. Not the least meritorious part of his innings was his fine running between wickets. So unerring was his judgment in this respect that his partner was imbued with the same spirit, and over and over again what looked like cheeky singles were run with the greatest ease. Anything finer has rarely, if ever, been seen at Lancaster Park. It should have been an education to the slow movers on the. Canterbury side. “Though several batsmen made more runs than Hawkesworth, the Otago ’keeper played an innings that was of inestimable value to his side. Going in when Blunt was within striking distance of his second century, his role was to keep his end up. He did it nervously at first, but when the goal was attained he settled down to the, soundest of defence, and, though several balls beat him that were very near his; stumps,, he was still there at 6 o’clock. ; i; ■ ' Though ‘ it . must be- remembered that the support -which, the Gtago bowlers received from the field was not nearly as strong as it might have been, no fewer than six Canterbury men giving chances in their first innings, the Otago bowling did not come up to expectations, and the absence of .a fast bowler must have been a great handicap. Admittedly Canterbury is a strong and even batting side, but the bowling was such during Canterbury’s first strike that the Sun made the following comment: —“ The Otago attack was not well organised—unless its purpose was to keep the Canterbury score under 500 runs. Its general scheme seemed to be that there should be plenty of bowling well off the wicket, with the object of enticing batsmen into slashing at it and giving catches; that Badcock and J. A. Dunning (captain of the team) should he the new-bal! bowlers; that Dunning himself should do 50 per cent, more bowling than anyone else; and that, except in the new-bali period, the changes should be merely relief-giving, not tactical. ; The batsmen were impervious to Badcock’s logtrap swingers with the new ball, and the trap did not last more .than an oyer or two. Badcock' was steady,-and after the gloss was off the ball he turned the ball back a little, but batsmen needed to be only reasonably careful against his bowling. Dunning’s width was not likely to got wickets unless batsmen wore over-Hnngiiinp-about 1 1 1 oir ability to keep the ball down when they went across to it. R. C. Blunt had to bowl almost as much as Badcock did. The permanent effect of an injury to a finger prevents him from spinning the ball as he did once, but. length and changes of pace enabled him to get two ,leg-before wickets. K. \V. Coupland offered no-difficulty; the batsmen concerned helped him to get his three wickets. D. A. 11. Moloney, slow bowler, spun the ball considerably from either side, but that was not.much use without control of length. D, Smith, who piits a lot of arm and body action into a short run to the wicket for a fast-medium bowler, also wanted length, as well as direction; his.main hope seemed to be that batsmen would lean out to balls flying well outside the off-stump. C. J. Elmes, a Blow-medium left-hander, with an occa- . sional faster ball, bowled steadily, but with no apparent * devil ’; yet more judicious use might have been made of him.” I think, nevertheless, that the Otago bowlers are capable of much better- performances than those for which they were responsible against Canterbury, and the Auckland 'batsmen would be very much mistaken in assuming that they have a weak attack to face. There are several young players in the Otago side who are likely to come fo light in Auckland, and 'with ': such an experience as the Christchurch game, behind them they should play their part in making the second game of the tour another very interesting tussle.

BACKING UP “ Dear ‘ Slip,’—l read with interest the letter published in last Thursday’s Daily Times under the above heading. lam with ‘ Whip Off the Bails ’ in disagreeing with the opinion of Mr J. M. Fraser — of which you express approval—that in the ease of a batsman going out of his ground before the bowler delivered t)ie ball he should be warned of the bowler’s intention to stump him if he persisted. I take it that every cricketer is fully acquainted with the laws of the game, and if he commits a breach of them he should pay the penalty. So why the necessity for the bowler to warn him? The bowler should have no compunction in whipping off the bails, in which case the score book should record 4 run out,’ and not 4 stumped.’ Backing-up may be done in quite a legitimate manner, and it would be better for the game if it was indulged in more. With a proper understanding between the batsmen and smart backing-up many singles could be safely scored which are not now attempted. It would also have the effect of a muchdesired sharpening up of the fieldsmen and brightening up the game generally.— I am, etc., J. M. Wilson.” ALL-ROUNDERS WANTED I have never advocated the dropping of successful and experienced players for youth alone. Merit and ability to me are the qualifications, rather than age (wrote Arthur Mailey recently in the Sydney Sun). At the same time that does not prevent supporting the selection of young players when the opportunity occurs. I refuse to take a pessimistic view of Australian cricket. Just at present_ we are, I must admit, a,little shaky, mainly because Kippax, Jackson, and Fairfax have suddenly dropped out. Fairfax, in my opinion, was never a great cricketer, but be filled a gap better than anybody else in Australia could do at the time. He was quite a good bowler with the new ball, and a capable, solid batsman, with certain limitations. His place has to be filled, and whether it will be filled by a cricketer of his, or Kellcway’s or Ryder’s type, will be decided by the Australian selectors. Personally, I don’t think it will. Oxenham and M'Cabe were tried as opening bowlers, aud neither has come yp to expectations. This is a pity in M 4 Cabe’e case because ho is such a fine batsman and fieldsman. As far as I can see now. Hunt is destined to be Australia’s,opening bowler to assist Wall, or whichever fast bowler is chosen. Hunt is not n great opening bowler, but he'has a dual role to fill, for after a couple of overs he can carry on as a spin bowler. In addition to Hunt we have Hird (N.S.W.) and Waite (S.A.), both of whom are waiting on the mat for the international door to open. Strange to say, both these young fellows have come successfully through similar ordeals. Both' were originally chosen as slow bowlers for their State. Each was,-rightly pr wrongly, not given sufficient opportunities of showing his worth at the bowling crease, and was forced by circumstances to 1 bat himself into the team. Now both can be considered as certainties for their States for some seasons to come. That being eo, they will have the bowling opportunities so necessary for their particular type of bowling. It is reasonable to assume that Hird and Waite are potential test match players. Of course, there are others, such as Fingleton (N.S.W,), Lonergan (S.A.), and O’Brien (V.), but these are batsmen only, and this article deals mainly with what might be considered as Australia’s greatest weakness —the lack of all-rounders in the true sense of the word —all-rounders of the M. A. Noble, Jack Gregory, Charles Macartney type, who had the ability to get five or six wickets, then put their pads on and score a century or two. NOTES The third teat match between Australia and South Africa will begin at Melbourne to-day. A match between New South Wales and Queensland at Sydney will be commenced to-morrow. \ Prior to the engagement of Alan Fairfax, the Australian cricketer, by the Accrington Lancashire League Club, an English writer said: Nobody ever hurried to a cricket ground because of the news that Alan Fairfax was batting—the grimmest of grim defenders, this monosyllabic cricketer of 24. Cricket is Fairfax’s passion. Chances of winning distinction lie in his bowling, which has surprising nip from the pitch. Real devil in it on his best days. The time may come when Ke will o'pen both the bowling and batting for Australia. There was a peculiar incident in the Senior Grade cricket match at Eden Park (Auckland) between Ponsonby and University. , One of the University batsmen snicked a ball which rose up slightly, and a confident appeal -came from the Ponspnby fieldsmen. The wicketkeeper failed to take the ball cleanly, however, and it bounced back and ran up the batsman’s back. The wicketkeeper, intent on making amends, trod right through the wickets and secured the ball before it hit the ground, to make a fair catch. The umpire was evidently unsighted, however, and, when appealed to, answered in the negative. There was an unprecedented incident at the Sydney Cricket Ground recently, when the playing of the band was stopped at the request of, Cameron, the South African captain. As soon as the band struck up its first tune Cameron spoke to Umpire Hele, who called an attendant on to the ground. The band finished its selection, but did not play again while the game was in progress. The bandsmen wore green and gold blazers—the colours of both teams.: