WHAT ENGLISH PRESS THINKS OF NEW ZEALAND CRICKET TEAM

Wanganui Chronicle, 4 May 1949, Page 5

WHAT ENGLISH PRESS THINKS OF NEW ZEALAND CRICKET TEAM

Comment On The Form Shown In Match With Yorkshire

LONDON, May 3 (Rec. 11.55 pm).—English cricket writers J have been generous in their appraisal of the New Zealand cricket team in its match against Yorkshire. : Of its batting on the first day the following were some of the comments: The “Sunday Times’’: “On an easy wicket New Zealand had some enjoyable batting practice against bowling which was often sadly lacking in , the cardinal virtues of length and d : - . rection. Their accredited batsmen all made runs easily and weil, and it is obvious that they will prove a severe test la our counties. They all treat a long h°p as a long hop, : n the same forthright way that the president of the Royal Academy calls a horse a horse.’’ “NAIVE. SOMETIMES BLASPHEMOUS.” The Manchester “Guardian”: “Like the happy club cricketer they are, the New Zealanders hold naive ana sometimes blasphemous views about cricket, and seem destined to persEi. in them. They are going to pul! or hook every long hop if possible out of sight, sweep full tos.es to the leg side with an energy which threaten the life and limbs of old men in the crowd, leap down the wicket to hal volleys, and drive length balls with reckless abandon anywhere in the air whenever captains fail to set deep fieldsmen for them.” “Sixes before lunch seem likely to become necessary for their appetites, and whether they win or lose matches, they are going to expose inaccurate bowling with boisterous cheerfulness whenever they meet it. ’ the paper adds. “Sutcliffe’s batting imdeed a thing of rare beauty. Quick judgment allows his feet to move with such smoothness of rhythm that the swiftness of them is hidden; his back flickers with *he lightness of a sword in each lift, flash and followthrough is a gesture of cnivalry and challenge.” Writing on the second day s nlay, E. W. Swanton, in the “Daily Telegraph,'’ said the New Zealanders well deserved the moral satisfaction ci mall advantage of a first innings i°ad, but, he continues, this lead was neutralised and much more by the loss of both opening batsmen in Aspin- ■ n’s first over. | “Sutcliffe hooked the first ball au- ■ • laciously for four, but to hook again • :nd be bowled at such a moment was iminal folly which will no doubt aunt him horribly. 1

“Where so much rests on the first five I thought Hadlee was unwise not to send in a tail-ender with, say, Scott. Incidentally, justice was poorly served by this fateful over of Aspinall’s- for, whereas when Yorkshire had to span a short spell on Saturday even'ng, it was 15 minutes before Hutton took the first ball. In Sutcliffe’s case it was approximately eight and a-half instead of the legal ten. KAYEiS MISSED Commenting on the bowling. “The Times ’ correspondent said it can be said at once that the New Zealanders looked to be a much better combination than some oi the over-modest suggestions made in their own country. “The Times” continues: “Unfortunately, the fastest ol the New Zealand bowlers, Hayes, was not playing. He would have been a valuable support to Cowie on a pitch which, if (tame- was certainly no help to the slower bowlers.” “Cowie did his work manfully and most unluckily. Burtt, in a long spellalso kept splendid length, but the most interesting was Cresswell. He has promising action, almost fullchested to the batsmen, but his in- , swingers require a deal of attention.' The “Manchester Guardian” says Hutton showed the limitations of the New Zealand bowing and the rest of the Yorkshire batsmen its qualities. “The limitations nad, in part, been anticipated. The attack lacked broad ’ variety. Cowie alone bowled with real . pace, and sometpies !if ted dangerously from a length and swung too late for comfort. Cave is only medium pace through the air and does not provide a marked contrast wilp Rabone, or even a violent one with Cresswell. Burtt is the only spin bowler whose flight has the authentic fullness which disguises length and entices a batsman to error. Such uniformity scarcely provided a batsman of Hutton's comprehensive technique with a problem. He had the equipment to ideal with every particular ball, and .no single bowler, nor a combination of their talents by Hadlee, could command sufficient variations to deceive him.” Tire correspondent describes New Zealand's solid assets of bowling as “accuracy of length and direction, which ar? not easily disturbed by the punishment which only quick-footed batsmen are likely to give it.” THE FIELDING. | Commenting on the fielding, Swanjton, in the “Daily Telegraph,” said: “Much of the individual fielding was ■.cry good. Several things have yet to J be developed, including the inner and outer ring. Now and then the fields-