Rain Interferes With Two Matches

Southland Times, Issue 21361, 6 April 1931, Page 4

Rain Interferes With Two Matches

While in South Wales we were the guests of the National Eisteddfod at Llanelly, and were profoundly impressed by the mag nificence of the spectacle. The singing of 800 children, clad in white was a musical treat that we all enjoyed.

Only three hours’ play was possible at Birmingham on the first day of the Warwickshire match, and there was no play at all on the second and third days. This was a keen disappointment to us, for we wanted all the match practice we could get before the final test, which was now only ten days off. Our last match in preparation for the big struggle at the Oval was against Northampton. The weather was not very pleasant, there being intermittent showers; and on an easy wicket they made 249, their last man being out just before 6.30. Bakewell a young player with a nice variety of strokes, and Timms batted so well that at one time we looked like chasing a much larger score. Incidentally, the running between the wickets of the Northants batsmen was the poorest I had seen in England. Generally speaking, it is not a fault commonly found here, but I am sure Northampton lost fully 50 runs this day which could easily have been obtained. ■ Rain came over the week-end and on the Monday morning we found ourselves in what everyone admitted was a really sticky

wicket. It was bad, but, even so, was not nearly so bad as the Melbourne wicket, when Hobbs and Sutcliffe put up their wonderful performance. Owing to some fine bowling by Jupp, ably backed up by Thomas and the others, we were all out for 93, the last nine wickets falling for 43. The Northampton captain made us follow on, but by now the wicket was better and more suited to the batsmen. Woodfull played a very slow but invaluable innings—in fact he really saved us from defeat. Then later Victor Richardson came along with a brilliant century, his best innings of the tour, in my opinion. Our captain, amid much comment, elected to bat right through until the dose of the match. Ihe criticism to which we were subjected was totally uncalled for. We did not bat a second time from choice—we were forced to. It was our last chance of match practice before the decisive test; our bowlers heeded rest and our batsmen needed practice.

Had we closed, thereby depriving one of our later batsmen of the match practice he required, and lost the vital test through this player being out of form, would anyone have pointed out the reason why this man was out of form I say our captain’s attitude was perfectly justified, particularly as we had no chance of beating Northampton.