TACTICS IN TEST CRICKET

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19360, 8 December 1932, Page 5

TACTICS IN TEST CRICKET

CRAMPING THE BATSMEN. LEG STUMP ATTACK REVIEWED With the opening of the England v. Australia cricket Test games trepidation has been shown in Australia about the “menace of the leg theory. ’ In this connection the leg theory of the fast bowlers is somewhat different from the leg theory of the mediumpaced and slow bowlers, though the object is somewhat similar—to cramp the batsman’s style. The Englishmen have reverted to the fast bowler’s leg theory which was regular attacking policy in Test matches in the decade 1891 to 1901. Then Australia had “stickers" like Alec Bannerman, Giffen, G. Trott, Darling, Bruce, Iredale. and Clem Hill, while on England's side were W. G. Grace. Ranjitsinhji, Stoddart, Shrewsbury, W. Gunn, MacLaren, Hayward, Jackson and Fry. It was quite usual to see Lockwood, Kortright, Mold and Richardson resort A o leg theory to bottle up the brilliant Australian batsmen, and for Jones and Eady to reply in kind as best they could against an even more brilliant English batting array. Cramping the Batsmen. Pelt ’em down fast on the leg peg, varying from a good length to shortish with the field placed accordingly. The real good ones on this spot are hard to keep out of the wicket, the occasional rising one at a good length are harder still to play and keep out of the fieldsmen's reach, and the shortish ones that “jump" are uncomfortable either .o play or to dodge. An accurate siege of the kind is either devastating to the batsmen, or keeps them so unsettled and cramped that the score is small when the inevitable “unplayable ’ ball comes along; of course, inaccuracy on the bowler’s part brings a feast of runs. Australia’s Triumph. This leg theory of 40 years ago was displaced by the off theory until 1921, when the Australians, J. Gregory and McDonald, revived it in their English tour, and annihilated England. Commenting on England’s failure at that time, Mr Sydney H. Pardon wrote in “Wisden's’’:—“lt was the fast bowling more than anything else that brought about our undoing. Never before have English batsmen been so demoralised by great pace. The Test matches at Nottingham and Lord s were both practically lost in the first half-hour, Gregory in one and McDonald in the other neutralising all the advantages we had gained by winning the toss. I am sure that some of our batsmen knowing they would have to face Gregory, were out before they went in. Since Knox bowled his / tstest in 1906 I have never seen batsmen so obviously intimidated Gregory was apt, when he pitched at all short, to get up dangerously high, but old cricketers were inclined to be sarcastic when they saw batsmen frightened by long hops. They perhaps remembered Mr R. D. Walker's dictum years ago that the batsmen who could not take care of himself ought not to play cricket.”

A. A. Mailey's Opinion. Writing recently on Test prospects A. A. Mailey. of the 1921 Australian team, declared:— “This is the form of attack that Australia’s batsmen have to face, and if we had a bowler whose pace was equal to that of Larwood we would be compelled to adopt similar tactics. Some people say that Wall, the South Australian fast bowler, is too much of a gentleman to bowl at the batsman. In my opinion it is not a case of manners. I have said a dozen times that a fast bowler has been compelled (owing to the tactics of batsmen) to bowl on the wicket, and they have a perfect right to do so. Although the leg stump theory rattled the Australian batsmen in Melbourne neither Woodfull nor Bradman lost their wickets to it. “However, should the English fast bowlers adopt the leg field in the first Test match, we must not object on the grounds of sportsmanship. It is a legitimate theory, and I have sufficient faith in Australian batsmen that they will combat this menace in their own particular way. “In the first place, the Sydney wicket is almost as unsympathetic to a fast bowler as the one at Adelaide, consequently the Australian batsmen in the first Test will have less to fear than Woolfull and Bradman had at Melbourne. In addition, although the list of following batsmen is not long, it comprises the cream of Australian batting. If Australia puts up a respectable score in Sydney it will engender faith in the following matches, even though the Brisbane wicket shows a little of the devil occasionally. By the time the third Test is played, the problem of combating the English express attack should be solved. It is a serious problem for the Australian selectors, each of whom, I hope, will not be stampeded or even influenced by the results of one match.”