AN UNLUCKY GROUND

Taranaki Daily News, 13 September 1934, Page 12

AN UNLUCKY GROUND

LEEDS AS VENUE OF TEST. ACCIDENTS AND ILLNESSES. (From Our Own Correspondent.) London, July 19. Leeds, the venue of the fourth Test match, has been an unlucky ground for England. In six attempts we have not beaten Australia there, and on almost every occasion something has happened to leave an unhappy memory. First, in 1899, Johnny Briggs, Lancashire’s famous bowler, was seized by a fatal illness, and 10 years later Gilbert Jessop had to retire from the match owing to a severe strain. Then, in 1921, Jack Hobbs had to be rushed to a nursing home to undergo an operation for appendicitis, and did not bat in either innings. The wife of the late Mr. J. W. H. T. Douglas had the same complaint, and Lord Tennyson and Brown, the Hampshire players, were hurt. I recall still another incident of a later date at Leeds which fills-a page of cricket history. A. W. Carr was England’s captain, and after winning the toss he daringly put the Australians in to bat. It had rained, and it was thought that for an hour or so the pitch would play trickily. But Macartney compiled a century before lunch, his innings being remembered as one of the most brilliant in the whole series of Test matches, and Woodfull also made 100. Arthur Carr, by the way, is at present lying seriously ill after an alarming heart attack. It is feared that he may have to retire from the captaincy of the Notts eleven, and it is doubtful whether he will be able to play again. The Leeds ground is pleasantly situated in one of the suburbs of the city, one side of it being ringed by trees. It holds over 30,000 people, and the boundaries are wide. The pitch has not a very good reputation, being liable to crumble. I am told, however, that it will last out the four days as well as the one at Old Trafford. But the team who win the toss will, I think, hold an advantage, and it may be a winning one. Unless the bowlers receive some assistance, there is not much likelihood of a result being reached, although we can scarcely expect as many runs to be made as in the Manchester game. This set up a record. In fact, a total of 1307 for 20 wickets was more in keeping with the scoring at Sydney. It gives an average of 65 a batsman and—well, it is agreed that it would be better if the balance between bat and ball could be adjusted. FAILURE OF FAST BOWLERS. One cause of all the runs has been the comparative failure of the fast bowlers. Poor Wall, who "ias had to provide all the pace for the Australians, has had a most unhappy experience. In the three matches it is estimated that he has covered seven miles, and his reward has been five wickets for 379 runs. England’s fast bowlers have not fared much bettei- although Fames claimed 10 victims in the first match at Nottingham, and then could not get a wicket in ths

second. Bowes has taken four and Clark and Allen one each. It is not surprising that the cry “Bring Larwood back” is insistent. I thought there was a possibility of this, but the Notts man still declares that he will not play, and the selectors have not approached him again. If Larwood had been available, their -task would have been greatly lightened, and England’s prospects of retaining the Ashes improved. In regard to the final Test at the Oval, it should be realised that this will be played out only if the match at Leeds ends in a draw, otherwise it will be restricted to four days. The Australians wanted it to be played to a finish in any circumstances, but the M.C.C. are not willing to alter the arrangements. They point out not only that they would not be justified in interfering to such an extent with the county championship, but that timeless cricket would not ap-

peal to the English public. This is undoubtedly true. If a game cannot be finished in four fine days, there is something wrong either with the bowling or the pitch. In the present case the bowling is admittedly weak, the weakest that we have seen on the two sides in a Test series for many years.