ENGLAND’S TEST WIN

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17957, 8 December 1932, Page 7

ENGLAND’S TEST WIN

AUSTRALIAN OPINIONS ■ j j VISITORS’ SUPERIORITY j I ONLY 10 BALLS YESTERDAY (Kh'C. Tel. Copyright—United Press Assn.) SYDNEY, Doc. 7. England won tho first tost match to-day by 10 wickets, only 10 balls being required to conclude the game this morning. Overnight Australia, with 164 required to save an innings defeat, had scored exactly that total for the loss of nine wickets. Nine bails sufficed to finish the Australian innings. Allen bowled a maiden to Nagel, and Voce’s third delivery shattered O’Reilly’s stumps. The innings had lasted 214 minutes. Sutcliffe scored a single off McCabe’s first ball, and England had won the first test.

'The impression gained is that England is definitely superior in both bowling and batting, with Australia ahead in fielding.

The total attendance was 155,125 and the takings amounted to £14,854. Mr. “Plum” Warner, joint manager of the English team, commenting on the match said: “We are naturally pleased and delighted at having won. We shall certainly not suffer from over-confidence, for the history of cricket has shown that the side that wins the first test is not necessarily the winner of the rubber. We know the grit and courage of the Australians too well to take them too cheaply in future tests.”

LARWOOD A ‘' KILLER.»»

Jardine, in commenting', on the match, said: “We have won the first round of what looks like an interesting series. lam very proud of my team. I cannot hut appreciate the way tire Australians fight to the bitter end. “

Woodfull, the Australian captain, heartily congratulated the Englishmen on their , well-deserved and decisive win.

The Sun, in its comment, on the test, says: “The Australian batting collapse was not entirely unexpected after what had happened in earlier matches. Larwood ‘best rode our narrow world like a colossus.-’ He was a killer; he simply scared old reliables away from the wickets. But McCabe, fdlcd with the confidence of youth, was untroubled by the defeatist policy and showed that it. was possible to bang both Larwood and Voce to the railing.* and saved his side from utter ignominy. ’ ’ Australia’s failure is the main topic of conversation in Melbourne. Newspaper critics, without exception, suggest changes by dropping veterans and the substitution of Ironmonger, Oxeriham, O’Brien, Darling, and Nitschke, and also by the adoption by the bowlers of the leg theory tactics. Clem Hill urges caution in the selection of the team. He contends that there is no need to get the wind up, and thinks the same team on a wicket less favorable to Larwood and Voce would turn the tables.