WHY WAS WICKET CHANGED IN TEST?

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17905, 22 July 1926, Page 9

WHY WAS WICKET CHANGED IN TEST?

STRANGE COURSE WAS ADOPTED AT LEEDS. Of the many strange incidents in connection with the third test, the strangest was the changing of the wicket before play began. If the Englishmen had happened to lose the third test match thev would surely have been hoist by their own petard (says an Australian critic) We have been told by the cables that, following mature deliberation af. ter eleven o'clock on Saturdav, those in control of the English side "resolved to discard the wicket which Levland had prepared with patient labour and had another piece of turf marked out and rolled for the match. The reasons for thi6 decision would be worth knowing. Levland said previouslv that the pitch he had got ready was as “hard as cement. Why the Change? Why should Carr, Hobbs and Sutcliffe have discarded such a piece of ground in favour of a stretch of turf which had been exposed to the full rigor of the storm? There is no suggestion that they consulted the Australians. It is scarcely conceivable that our leaders xvere not aware of the change, although the cables say that they gave merely a casual glance at the pitch on their way to the practice nets. One wonders whether they glanced at the originallyprepared wicket, or at the “new” strip, seeing that it was within half an hour

of the time for starting the game that the change was made. It is clear that English managers thought that the wicket on which the game would be started would help the bowlers; that sun would make it difficult for a while, and that, if the sun continued, the turf would roll out better for the side that had second knock. Tactics. Perish any thought that they kept inside information to themselves l apparently M. A Xoblc and other Australian correspondents, at any rate, did not know of the change bn Saturday afternoon, or they must surely have referred to it) : and that they banked on Bardsley, if he won the toss, following custom, and taking first knock on what he believed was the damp “ce-ment-like” wicket, which would improve rapidly ; whereas Carr., if favoured by the spin of the coin, would put his opponents in on a pitch that he thoroughly expected to be against the early batsmen. We know now what he did, and how Macartney, the dazzling, and Woodfull, the solid, toppled over his plans. It may be, of course, that, after all the comment which has been passed upon safety-first batting, the Englishmen had decided to try forcing tactics in one innings at least, believing that they had the most venomous bowler of the match in Tate, who would be expected to make full use of a wearing wicket on the last day of the match. One prefers to think that this is the reason that actuated the change.