CRICKET

Taranaki Daily News, 23 September 1926, Page 4

CRICKET

AUSTRALIANS IN ENGLAND. VIEWS OF CRITICS. (From Our Own Correspondent.) London, Aug. 12. When the Australian cricketers were odS their way to this country, Jack Hobbs appealed to critics at home to be tolerant, and to give the English player a chance. “Wait until the Tests are over before you throw your half bricks, and then you can blaze away as hard as you like,” he said. But it is the British way to belittle our own efforts, and, since the Tests started, there has been little but criticism just as though it were the fault of Carr and his men that the four matches played to date have all been drawn. The fact that they have had the best of the cricket has made no difference. The records do not permit this statement to be challenged. England’s score per wicket is as high as sixty; Australia’s is forty. The reply of the critics is to the effect: “Oh, yes, the batting has been all right, but look at the bowling! Tate’s nine Wickets have cost 37 rufls each, and Kilner’s seven nearly forty.” A good answer would seem to be: “Gregory has sent down 72 overs, had 2119 runs hit off him, and he has not got a single man out.” Of the Australian bowlers, Grimmett has the best record. His eight wickets have cost 29 runs each. The truth, of course, is that the Tests have proved both England and Australia to be remarkably weak in bow-ling. XVe had hoped much from Tate, but he has been a mere shadow of the man he was in Australia. He is the type of bowler who requires a fast and lively pitch to be at his best, and it has been his misfortune to have to try and spin the ball on turf deadened by rain. Perhaps the conditions will be more to his liking a week hence in the final game of the Rubber. Meanwhile, it has been said that he should be dropped. And a year ago he was proclaimed the greatest bowler in the world! PLAY TO A FINISH. The final Test at the Oval on which the Ashes will depend is, of course, to be played to a finish. The time factor, which we have always thought so important, is to be abolished; It is not a prospect that one can look forward to with much zest, because of the possibility that batsmen will “put the shutter up,” as the professional says, and play for safety, and that bowlers .may be sending the ball down off the wicket, trying to tempt their adversaries out of their caution. The Oval will not hold the thousands who will want to be present at the match, but, if the wicket is favourable they will have to -show almost as much patience as the batsmen. I am suspicious that the Australians have played for a final match to be staged under these conditions, because they are familiar with them, and those conditions will be all in their favour. It is certainly significant that they have taken no risk to win any of the earlier games, not even the one at Leeds, when they compelled England to follow on after Carr’s blunder in putting them in. Can Hobbs and Sutcliffe and the other English batsmen play the Australians at their own game? It has to be proved, and that there is some doubt is indicated by the demand that the team should be changed. On no account must there be any “tail,” it is said. >So Strudwiek is to go, according to the critics, and IM. D. Lyon, the Somerset wicketkeeper, is to be chosen because he is also a capable batsman. A. P. F. Chapman, and either Hendren or Woolley have also to be left out, and Rhodes, despite his forty-nine years, is to be included. Rhodes is still a wonderful player, being once more well on the way to score a thousand runs and take a hundred wickets, but he will not return to international cricket if he can avoid it. But why should the match be regarded differently from any other? To do so would simply be to play into the hands of the Australians. Even if there is no clock to time their efforts, that is no reason vriiy Carr’s men should play pawky cricket. They can hope to succeed only by playing naturally. . Any other methods will be doomed to failure.

TEST TAKINGS. £15,01)0 FOR AUSTRALIA. The cabled news that Australia’s s’nhre of the gates for the five Test matches will be approximately £15,000- must be pleasing news to the Board of Cricket Control. In 1921 the gross receipts from the five Tests amounted to £30,069 15/3 (less amusement tax); Australia receiving £10,175 3/1. From the whole of the English tour Australia’s share of the gates amounted to £33,341 19/4. This was further supplemented by the South African tour. The Australians returned home from the 1921 trip abroad with profits amounting to £35,644 8/4. The expenses were £17,922 5/9, leaving a credit balance of £17,722 2/7. Dealing with the poor state of the grounds, and the lack of accommodation for spectators, Mr. Sydney Smith, junr., manager of the 1921 team and the present team, hinted that lack of finance probably hampered the county clubs, as much of their gate money was taken up in paying travelling expenses and the salaries of professional cricketers. Mr. Smith was emphatic in stating that he had nothing against professionals, and numbered many as his personal friends. WHAT PLAYERS RECEIVE. This raises a rather delicate question, says the Sydney Daily Telegraph, Where does amateurism end and professionalism begin? The 1921 team was guaranteed £4OO each man, with first-class travelling and hotel expenses. In addition each player received a bonus of £3OO from the English tour, and £66 odd from the South African section of the trip. When communicated with recently Mr. W. C. Bull, secretary of the Australian Board of Control, said that he considered the agreement between the players and the Board of Control to be confidential, and would not give any information.

CRICKETERS AND FOOTBALLERS. A further interesting comparison may be made between the Australian cricketers as amateurs and Australian footballers as professionals. The last Australian Rugby League football team to visit England was treated handsomely. Members of the Rugby League team received £4 5/- per week during their trip abroad, with travelling expenses paid, and a bonus of £lBO upon their return. Although the receipts from the present Australian cricket tour in England will be bigger than in 1921, the expenses will also be much heavier. It is most improbable that members of this team will receive a bonus. Many of the members of the New South Wales Cricket Association are opposed to the payment of a bonus in any circumstances. After the last tour the manager of the Australian team received £6OO, and the players ££4oo each—£3oo bonus from the English tour, and £lOO bonus from the South African tour. THE AUSTRALIAN TOURISTS. AVERAGES .TOR TOTH. Owing to the complete details not being available of the Carlisle and Forres cneda.v niatelies, the figures cannot be included in the following averages. The table appended includes the Australians’ first-class averages with the addition of the following eleven-aside matches, Miner Counties, Durham, Civil Service, and the three earlier fixtures in Scotland:—• BATTING.

RESULTS 4T A GLANCE. Match. Result. Minor Counties 4• ■ • Drawn. Leicestershire . .1... Drawn. Essex . Drawn. Surrey Drawn. Hampshire Won by 10 wickets M.C.C Drawn. Cambridge University Drawn. Oxford University .. Won by an innings and 13 rpns South of England .. Drawn. Middlesex Drawn. North of England .. Drawn Yorkshire Drawn. Durham Won -by an Innings and 81 runs First Test Drawn. Yorkshire Drawn. Lancashire Won by an Innings and 77 runs Derbyshire Drawn. Second Test Drawn. Northamptonshire .. Won by an innings and 147 nine Nottinghamshire »< Won' by an innings and 138 runs Worcestershire .... Won by 178 runs Third Test Drawn. Lancashire Drawn. West of Scotland Jf Won by an Innings and 59 runs East of Scotland ... Won by 86 runs and four wickets •Scotland Drawn. Fourth Test Drawn. Surrey Drawn. Glamorgan Won by 224 runs Warwickshire Drawn. . Gloucestershire .... Won by nine wkts. Public School's .XV Drawn. Fifth Test Lost by 259 runs Somerset Won by 56 runs Kent Drawn. Sussex Drawn. An England Eleven Drawn.

Summary:—Matches played 36, won 12. lost 1, drawn 23. filril Service Assn. Drawn C. I. Thornton’s XI Drawn North of England ~ Drawn. \V. G. Palmer’s XI .» Won by 16 runs-ami six wickets , North of Scotland .. XVon by 289 runs Tasmania Won by an innings and 175 runs Tasmania Won by an innings and 184 runs West of Australia ~ Won by an Innings and 45 runs Summary:—Matches played 44, won 17, lost 1, drawn 26.

Inn. N.O. H.S. Runs. \ V H-. M. Woodfull. ... 37 5 201 1828 57.12 C. G. Macartney 36 4 160 1716 53.62 H. Bardsley ... ... 36 4 193* 1600 59 00 W. H. Ponsford .. 31 5 111 1076 41.38 T. J. E. Andrews .. 41 5 164 1460 40.55 H. L. Hendry ,, ... 10 2 81 320 40.00 J. Hyder ... 40 8 109 1188 37.12 J. M. Gregory ... 32 6 130* 935 35.96 A. ,1. Richardson .. 34 9 100 766 30.64 H. L. Collins .. ... 30 1 99 888 30.62 J.L. Ellis ...... ... 17 5 43 338 28.16 J. M. Taylor .. ... 42 3 201 1084 27.79 W. A. S. Oldfiek .. 25 6 62* 442 23.26 S. C. Everett .. 1 9 9. 100* 219 21.90 C. V. Grimmett ..24 3 41 318 15.14 A. A. Mailey ... ... 24 6 ♦Not Out. BOWLING. 6.72 Wickets. Runs. Average. H. L. Collins . 14 9 O 15.92 C. G. Macartney .. 56 911 16.26 C. V. Grimmett .. JH> 2029 17.49 A. J. Richardson .. G5 1139 17.52 J. M. Taylor .... .. 1 18 18.00 A. A. Malley .. .. 141 am 18.70 \V. H. Ponsford . ’2 42 21.00 S. C. Everett , .. 27 705 26.11 T. J. E. Andrews .r 11 339 30.81 J. M. Gregory .. . 38 1197 31.50 J. Ryder 27 913 33.81 H. L. Hendry .. .. 1 117 117.00 The following ble Includes the elevenaside matches with the addition of the figures of the Public School FifteenBATTING. In. N.O. U.S. Runs. AV. W. M. Woodhill .. 38 5 '201 1912 57.93 C. G. Macartney .. <36 4 160 1716 53.62 W. Bardsley .. 36 4 193* 1600 50.00 W. H. Ponsford . ... 32 5 144 1173 43.44 T. J. E. Andrews .. 41 5 164 1460 40.55 J. Rdyer ... 41 8 109 1193 36.15 <T. M. Gregory ... ... 32 6 130* 935 35.96 H. L. Hendry ,.. ... 11 2 81 322 35.77 H L. Collins ... ..31 1 99 896 29.86 A. J. Richardson .. 35 9 100 770 29.61 J. M. Taylor ... ... 43 3 201 1093 27.32 J. L. Ellis ... 18 5 43 342 26.30 W. A. S. Oldfield .. 26 7 62* 464 24.42 S. C. Everett ... ... 13 2 100* 233 21.18 C. V. Grimmett . .. 25 3 41 329 14.95 A. 'A. Mailey .. . . 24 G ♦Not Out. BOWLNG. 21’ 121 6.72

H. L. Coilins C. G. Macartney ... Wickets. Runs. Average. 16 . 56 244 911 15.25 16.26 C. V. Grimmett . *. 120 2065 17.20 A. J. Richardson . 66 1155 17.50 A. A. Mailey 141 2637 18.70 J. ’ L. Ellis 1 21 21.00 S. C. Everett ..... 31 739 23.83 J. Ryder 31 922 29.74 T. J. E. Andrews . 11 339 30.81 38 1197 31.50 W. II. Ponsford ... 70 35.00 .T. M. Taylor ..... 48 48.00 IT. L. Hendry 1 138 138.00 The following table includes the figures of the English tour with the exception of the two last one-day Hatches and the Australians' tour in Tasmania and Western Australia *— BATTING. In. N.O. M.S. Runs. A v - W. M. Woodfull .. 41 5 201 2124 59.00 C. G. Macartney ,. 38 5 163* 1945 58.93 \V. Bards! ey ...... 37 4 193* 1724 52.24 W. H. Ponsford .... 35 5 144 1354 45.13 T. J. E. Andrews .. 44 5 164 1515 38.84 J. Ryder 43 8 109 1244 35.54 J. M. Gregory .... 34 6 130’ 943 33.67 H. L. Hendry 12 2 81 3-30 33.00 J. M. Taylor ...... 45 3 201 1308 31.14 A. J. Richardson .. 38 9 100 847 ■29.20 H. L. Collins 34 1 99 940 28.48 J. L. Ellis 21 7 43 394 28.14 S. C. Everett .... 1 -> 2 100* 325 25.00 W. A. S. Oldfield .. 26 7 62* 464 24.42 C. V. Grimmett .... 25 3 41 329 14.95 A. A. Mailey 26 6 21 128 6.40 ♦Not Out. BOWLING. Wickets Runs. Average. C. G. Macartney ... 60 958 15.96 A. J. Richardson .... 7 / 1296 16.83 H. L. Collins ..... 16 271 16.93 C. V. Grimmett .... 1232153 17.50 4 A. Mailey 157 2857 18.19 j L Ellis 1 21 21.00 S. C. Everett ...... 39 84221.58 J. Ryder 36 961 26.69 T. J. E‘. Andrews . 15 417 27.80 J. M. Gregory ..... 43 1345 31.27 W. H. Ponsford .... 70 35.00 J. M. Taylor 1 48 48.00 IL L. Hendry 2 166 83.00