SPECULATION ON TEAM TO REPRESENT NEW ZEALAND IN FIRST CRICKET TEST

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27094, 31 May 1949, Page 5

SPECULATION ON TEAM TO REPRESENT NEW ZEALAND IN FIRST CRICKET TEST

From A. W. Mitchell, NZPA Special Correspondent.

Rec. 10 p.m

LONDON, May 30.

Unless injuries, an abrupt reversal of form, the wicket, or other imponderables exert their separate or collective influence it would' seem a reasonable guess—and no more—that the New -Zealand team to play England in the first test at Leeds, beginning on June 11, may be: Hadlee, Wallace, Burtt, Cave, 'Cowie, Cresswell, Donnelly, Mooney, Rabone, Scott, and Sutcliffe, with perhaps Burke as twelfth man. It is rash, perhaps, to make such a forecast with three more matches to be decided before the team reaches Leeds; but on the form shown on the wickets experienced to the present time this selection may not prove far wrong. £

I say “ wickets ” with emphasis for in all matches they have varied in pace, behaviour, and to a large extent, particularly at the Oval and Oxford, have governed the run of nlay and performances. * The - most interesting fact that emerges from a study of the New Zealand batting so far is that it has been the three who were here in 1937 who have performed the best—Wallace, within tantalising sight of his 1000 runs before the end of May, Hadlee, and Donnelly. Generally speaking, they have batted consistently on different types of wickets—slower here, faster there —whereas other batsmen playing in England for the first time have done best on the type of wicket that suited them personally. The Exception

the Dominion has sent to this country. Dropped catches have been rare, ground work has been neat and tidy, though some returns to the wicket showed signs of energy rather than judgment. Generally the standard is high, and Hadlee, Wallace. Donnelly, Sutcliffe, Rabone and Smith in particular have been outstanding. Having been rash enough to suggest a New Zealand team, let me be foolhardy and forecast the result! Unless we have wickets such as those encountered at the Oval and Oxford—and that exception is important—l cannot see the New Zealand batsmen being dismissed twice in three days. On vicious wickes, however, anything can, and does, happen: and there the luck of the toss will decide the result. I expect drawn games in probably three out of the four tests. And now let the heavens fall!'

The exception that proves the rule of this generalisation—and it is no more than generalisation—is the seventh-wicket partnership of Rabone and Mooney at Lord’s, where, when older players were sent back cheaply, they batted with great distinction and probably saved the game for New Zealand.

Another interesting aspect of the New Zealand batting has been the somewhat erratic performances of Sutcliffe, Scott, Reid and Smith. They are the core of the “ new ” batting side and .their records reflect both their inexperience of sharply varying wickets and also their inherent desire to lay about them. The difference between these four and Hadlee, Wallace and Donnelly is that while the older players have more knowledge and experience, they also combine the virtues of the English professional whose job is cricket and who eschews all risks to his career, and those of Saturday afternoon whose delight is to .make runs.

Thus we have seen Wallace bat without scoring for 20 minutes to half an hour when he has 50 or more to his credit, biding his time waiting for the loose ball, and then hitting as many as five 4's and a 3 in 10 minutes. Hadlee and Donnelly, too, have the patience and knowledge to play this type of “ two-innings-in-one.” Now. Sutcliffe, Scott, Reid and Smith have not yet acquired this knack of combination. Their nature, particularly that of Smith,, is to hit. and hit again, and devil take the sluggard. With the exception of being beaten by two good balls, one at Leicester, tne other at Cambridge, Sutcliffe may be said to have got himself out in his other innings by his happy, carefree hitting, and his slight mistiming of a

ball that has come off the pitch that ‘fraction slower than he has anticipated Much the same thing applies to Scott, Reid and Smith, whose sefTcriticism that they are not “ seeing ” the ball is perhaps largely due to their inexperience in assessing the pace of differing wickets, coupled with their firm intention to hit. Thus, they and Sutcliffe suffer to a certain extent from the defects of their own virtuesReid's Dismissal

After his innings at Cambridge, where he scored 188 not out (his highest in first-class cricket), we felt that Reid would settle down. The Fenners wicket, however,, was slow and easy, and in the next game, at Lord/s, the wicket was slightly faster., Reid, who found that to play back was the answer at Cambridge, played back at Lord’s when he should have played forward on this different type of wicket. And out he went, first ball.

Much the same thing happened to Smith at Cambridge. The Worcester wicket had suited him, and with luck he might have made a century. That fickle jade—more fickle in cricket it seems ' than in many games—was against him. At Fenners he played for a repetition of the Worcester wicket; but the ball “ came through ” slower and when he hit, his bat was just that fraction further forward at the point of impact than he intended. So he was caught. Thus with no disrespect to Reid and Smith I feel that since neither is an opening bat the selectors will use them in a test later in the summer when the wickets may be faster and their experience and self-confidence greater. The Batsmen So we have for batting: Hadlee, Wallace, Donnelly, Sutcliffe and Scott. As wicket-keeper, Mooney is the automatic choice for he has already proved he is the equal of any keeper the team has yet seen in England, and he has shown his ability as a bat. As for the bowlers, Cowie, if his leg muscle permits, is the obvious first selection. Experienced, accurate, and aggressive he is more valuable than Hayes though perhaps a shade slower. Hayes is bowling well but he is inclined to be erratic in length and direction and he is not yet, one feels, completely self-confident. There is the promise that by the time the tour is half way though he will become more dangerous and therefore useful to his side. If Cowie is not fit Hayes will undoubtedly play at Leeds. Burtt, Cave and Cresswell seem to me to leave no room for Burke unless Leeds produces the type of wicket to suit him. Though he bowled well, Burke has been rather out of luck and has not really found a wicket he likes. His time will come, however, and in the meantime the consistent good length and success of the other three —particularly of Burtt, who made a reputation for himself against some of the best English batting in the MCC at Lords —will put them into the team.

Traditional All-rounder

So we come to Rabone, one of the most interesting players in the side. Rabone has batted well, bowled successfully and fielded, particularly in the slips, with distinction.* He has, in fact, proved himself the traditional all-rounder. The selectors will probably have to make up their minds whether they shall use Rabone, Reid or Smith; and on form up to the present time and the background already mentioned, it is difficult not. to see them preferring Rabone. A word about fielding: Competent judges who have seen three previous New Zealand teams in England declare that this is the best fielding side