COMMENT ON TEST CRICKET

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLIII, Issue 20668, 5 March 1937, Page 9

COMMENT ON TEST CRICKET

REFLECTIONS ON FORM OF PLAYERS KING’S CONGRATULATIONS TO BRADMAN United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright [By J. B. Hobbs. Copyright in all countries. Reproduction in whole or in part forbidden.] (Received March 4, 6.30 p.m.) MELBOURNE, March 4. England failed to regain the “Ashes” because frankly the side was not quite good enough. Bradman is more than one man in the Australian team. The “Ashes” were lost and won on the third day of the fourth test. If the English batsmen that Monday had pushed home the advantage the bowlers hau gained, England could still have allowed Bradman to get his 270 and pulled off the match. “Never Struck Form” The English batsmen have never struck form. There is no first-wicket pair to give the side a good start. Sutcliffe was sadly missed, and passengers were carried in every test. Another cause of the English defeat was the absence of a tip-top spin bowler. I cannot see England ever doing really well In Australia until they find one. The Australian wickets have become more responsible to that kind of bowling. Allen told me he thought the difference in the pace of the test wickets here since the last tour was the contrast between the fiery Lord's wicket and the test wicket at Manchester.

I have no complaint against our present bowlers. They dismissed Australia for far fewer runs than England anticipated. It was our batting that failed. We had to rely too much on about three. Hammond failed to hold his initial form. The bowlers found a way to-cramp his style by concentrating on his leg stump. Being essentially an offside player, he was compelled to play In a manner entirely foreign to his nature. On the other hand, Australia undoubtedly had the better stroke players. Issue Decided By Toss The toss decided the issue in every game. I wish something could be done to nullify its effect. I am afraid nothing can be done. Australia, however, had won the final test before the rain came, and all the rain did was to increase the margin of defeat. Yet in a way, Australia were lucky to get away with the “Ashes.” Their side was short of bowling until the last test, while the rain won them the third test when England were two up. O'Reilly Is a class bowler, although he sank in my estimation on this tour by exploiting the leg theory too much. Oldfield is still a master behind the wickets. Allen more than came up to expectations as a captain, but he was handicapped by social duties. The umpires gave complete satisfaction, but perhaps the happiest feature of the tests was the excellent behaviour of the crowds. Barracking was almost eliminated. “WEAKEST TEAM IN CENTURY” CRITICISM OF ENGLAND’S DISPLAY BRADMAN DECIDES ISSUE FOR AUSTRALIA United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph-Copyright (Received March 4, 6.30 p.m.) MELBOURNE, Mardh 4, C. G. Macartney, recalling that this is the first time that Australia have won the Ashes in Australia since 1925, says: “There was not a great deal between the two sides, but Australia can claim superiority. It was Bradman’s batting that turned the scales in favour of Australia. Bradman clearly showed that he is capable of suiting his batting to any situation, and he exploded the idea that the captaincy would interfere with his run-getting. "England possessed no Bradman to come to her rescue when in peril. Hammand was not sufficiently consistent to play the role. On the whole England possessed a steadier bowling strength than Australia, but they were seriously hampered by the poor quality of their slow bowlers. England won the first two tests owing to superior team work, but from then onwards the side gradually declined. Australia improved, emerging from the last test as a firstclass, well-balanced fighting team. “Allen made the most of the limited material. The team he was asked to lead was the weakest seen in Australia this century. Bradman is established as Australia’s captain for many years.” The “Sydney Morning Herald’s" cricket commentator, reviewing the tests, emphasises the steady improvements made by the Australians after the second test, and the manner in which some of the younger players proved capable of backing up the efforts of the more experienced men. "WORST SIDES FOR YEARS” CRITICAL VIEW OF TEST FORM United Press Association —By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received February 4, 6.30 p.m.) LONDON, March 3. Commenting on the Tests, Mr Arthur W. Carr, former captain of Notts and captain of England some years ago, says: “We were lucky to win two Tests. I should think in these two were the worst sides which ever represented England and Australia.” KING CONGRATULATES BRADMAN “PREDOMINANT SKILL” PRAISED United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received March 4, 9.25 p.m.) MELBOURNE, March 4. D. G. Bradman has received a special message of congratulation from the King on winning the Test “Ashes.” His Majesty pays a tribute to Bradman’s "predominant skill as a batsman.” The Board of Control acknowledged the message. Reply to Criticism Dr. Morton, a member of the Australian Board of Control, replying to

English comment with regard to the Englishmen’s heavy programme in Australia, said the so-called picnic matches in Australia were really a pleasant interlude. The programme here was not so arduous as that for the Australians in England, where they had to play practically two matches a week instead of one as in Australia.