BODY-LINE BOWLING

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 76, Issue 163, 13 July 1933, Page 6

BODY-LINE BOWLING

UNIVERSITY CRICKET I APPEARANCE AT LORDS I GENERAL CRITICISM I J telegraph—Press Association —Copyright) . j LONDON, July 11. i -■ The appearance of body-line bowling j >iin the University cricket match at t Lord’s is greeted with general criti- ■ jcism. The Sketch declares that it was " 11 much resented by the vrowd and xe- j ‘ I cricketers, and adds: “Wilcox, the l Cambridge University captain, is cri- | ; j titled to argue that what is good for . 1 j England is equally good for Cambridge, , a !but the soundness of the contention is J i doubtful. ’ ’ '! A. E. It. Gilligan. writing in the ( 1 Chronicle, admits that Wilcox fulfilled . f the task of dismissing Oxford Univer5 jsity cheaply, but- from a cricket stand- , > < point the batsman is handicapped. If . ,-such dull, dreary, deadly monotony ( - spreads, he says, the spectators will l vanish. ) The cricket writer of The Times dq- : elares that-the prolonged.leg-theory” . tactics,, with its array of short-leg . • fieldsmen, drove the spectators, expett- > ing glory and fun. nearly mad. ■ The fast bowler, Fames, bowling J • very short and inaccurately, caused 5 some bruises, aud took the last three ’ Oxford wickets. He hit two batsmen on the shoulders, a third on the arm. ‘ and a fourth in the stomach. Tindall ’ was “yorked” after he had been j struck by the previous ball, and Old- 1 . field was bowled off his chin. ’ Oxford University’s innings yielded 1 - 164 runs, Jahangir Khan taking four >' ■ wickets for 54 runs. As already indi- 1 cated. Fames took three wickets. There •’ ■ was no further play on account of rain. > COUNTY CRICKET L C COLLAPSE OF SURREY. i ’ FINE PERFORMANCES. \ — t LONDON, July IL v I A feature of the latest series of e 'county cricket championship matches j ■ was the sensational collapse uf Surrey 2 i against Gloucestershire for a total of [ 'only 44 runs. This is the lowest score I made by Surrey in thirty-live years. c The wicket was difficult after rain, and Li Hammond, setting a leg trap, made the ball come off the pitch at great pace. . Hammond took six for twenty-six. and , 1 was supported capably by Goddard, j who gained good figures in each innings. Gloucestershire scored heavily. 1 Sinfield going close to a double century. Hammond getting a century, and Dacre 1 also making a good score. In Surrey’s recovery, not great enough, however, to avoid a big defeat, Gregory played the leading part. Handsome wins were registered also by Derbyshire (over Worcestershire), ' by Yorkshire (over Northamptonshire), and by Lancashire (over Leicestershire), Sussex also winning outright against Somerset. Apart from those already mentioned, there were numerous outstanding individual performances with bat and ball. In the bowling department- Verity, James Lang- .. ridge, and Mitchell each recorded fine “doubles.” and with the bat Leyland, Kilner, Hopwood, and Bowley all made big three-figure scores. " The results were I Glamorgan v. Warwickshire, at Car- ~ ’ diff. —Glamorgan 228 (Mayer four for 41) and 234 for nine wickets (D. Davies 90; Paine five for 65. including the “hat tritek”); Warwickshire, 358 lor four wickets, declared (Kilner 143, 1 Wyatt 86). Warwickshire won on the | first innings. Derbyshire v. Worcestershire, at ! Chesterfield. —Derbyshire 513 for eight wickets, declared (Worthington 200 not • out); Worcestershire 83 (Mitchell five 1 for 20) and 196 (Mitchell six for 44). i I Derbyshire won by an innings and 234 ! runs. • I Gloucestershire v. Surrey, at Bristol. [ —Gloucestershire 464 for five wickets, t declared (Hammond 120. binfield 181 $ not out. Dacre 78); Surrey 44 (Ham- A mond six for 26; Goddard tour for 17) 1 and 318 (Gregory 164; Goddard five for 67). Gloucestershire won by an innings and 102 runs. w Yorkshire v. Northamptonshire, at 1 Leeds—Yorkshire 349 for seven wickets declared (Leyland 192); Northamptonshire 63 (Verity seven for 35) and 135 ? (Verity six for 67). Yorkshire won by .- an innings and 151 runs. y ‘ Lancashire v. Leicestershire, at Lei- n • ester. —Lancashire 455 for nine wickets j, declared (Hopwood 140); Leicestershire ■215 (Iddon four fur 27) and 155 (Ben- iS I nett four for 49). Lancashire'won by a lan inning.-, and 88 runs. \ Essex v. Kent, at Folkestone.—Essex a ,252 and 190 for eight wickets (Cutmore b 78 not out; Freeman five for 56); Kent E i 329 (\alentine (127). Kent won on the t ' first innings. s • .Somerset v. Sussex, at Taunton.— f I Somerset 149 (James Langridge six fur >' ” and 188 (James Langridge seven for 64); Sussex 313 for nine wickets, 1' 1 declared (Bowlev J 34) and 25 for five !l ; wickets. Sussex won bv five wickets. 1 I 7 ’ 1 . s / ANOTHER DRAW WEST INDIES v. NOTTS. > I LONDON. July 11. s 1 Jbe match between the West liulies I; and Nottinghamshire was drawn, the \ - scores being: West Indies 314 (Headley f: 66, Merry 51. Aehong 54) and 6 for no a wickets; Nottinghamshire 273 (Walker 1 70, A (Are 61; Martindale 66). The West liulies have comniciiced their return match with Lancashire, at Manchester, and in this C. S. Dempster, [the Wellington and New Zealand repreIsentative, is playing for the county