CRICKET.

Waikato Times, Volume 113, Issue 18927, 22 April 1933, Page 18 (Supplement)

CRICKET.

REPRESENTATIVE MATCHES A POOR BEABON. THE HAWKE’S BAY MATCH. (By "Long Stop.’’) After two seasons In which the South Auckland team performed with outstanding success, the past year has been one of disappointment. Apart altogether from the defeats that have been suffered, the bald fact stands out that in the good years not a single new player was discovered or developed to maintain the strength of the side. All the guns were carried from start to finish by the same players, and as soon as any considerable number of new-comers were included, their weakness was apparent. The future for representative teams does not look bright, and unless drastic alterations are made in the organisation of coaching, practice and selection, South Auckland will have to depend on the same players as they did five years ago. Batting Failure. The degree to which local batting went back is amply shown by the figures of the players, one score in the nineties, one in the eighties and only three in the fifties in the course of five games. Lissette alone showed consistent scores with only one single figure in six appearances and an aggregate of 228, giving an average of 45.6. This was all the more remarkable because he made only 161 in 14 club innings, but shows that he can rise to the occasion. Skeet was available for only two rep. matches, in both of which he gave fine exhibitions, scoring 84 not out. Going sent h'is aggregate up with a great 83 in the last knock,, nearly doubling his aggregate in the previous eight.. Senior and Badeley, in the course oi three games, averaged just in the twenties, Which was not a good performance for either, but none of the others did themselves credit. Winger had a particularly bad time with the bat, and Cassidy was never reliable, while Aitken reached double figures only three times in 9 innings. Yet the few colts tried never produced figures as good as these, poor as they are. The Old Bowlers. Not only the batting depended on the old hands mSinly, but the only bow’lers who could take wickets were the same quartet, Going, Badeley, Winger-and Barnett. Winger took a few more wickets than the others as he played more times, but their averages very close, about 14 per wicket, though Going was rather more expensive. Aitken and Lissette were ineffective, their four wickets costing about 30 apiece, Smith oing a little better with 7 at 22 each. It is hard to judge the fielding standard as the ground at Seddon Park Js all against good work in this line, but here again the colts are far behind. Badeley and Aitken stood out as really good, probably as good as there are in New Zealand, Skeet was very fair in places, but the others tailed rapidly from poor to very bad. Wilson and Comer, on their solitary appearance in rep. matches, did quite well, having the advantage of a splendid ground. Visit to Napier. The team that went to play Hawke’s Bay at Easter was by no means the one the selectors would have wished to get away, but they turned out to be much weaker than was expeoted. On paper It looked like quite a strong batting side, right down to the end, the main weakness being in the bowling. At the same time it Is hard to see how the bowling could have been strengthened materially. Badeley has been quite out of form with the ball in club matches and it is very questionable whether he would have been dangerous in that match; Barnett, In all likelihood, would have been useful, even if it was only to provide variety and he would have had the advantage of very long boundaries. MacDonald would have been invaluable if he had ben in form, but he was not sufficiently recovered to make the trip. Apart from these, there were any amount of bowlers in the team as good as those who could not go, so

that the team was not really far below the best bowling strength. South Auckland made practically all their runs, in the first innings, during two partnerships; Senior and Cassidy put on 58 opening, then both went in successive overs from Lambert. The bowler was turning from the off with a packed close leg field, and Cassidy was snapped up here by Tom Reaney, while O’Brien took a red-hot one hand catch from Senior. Then Lissette and Aitken took the score to 130, the captain driving particularly strongly until he turned H. Reaney into Lambert’s hands at short leg. Lissette was sound on everything except the off-balls at which he made stroke after stroke without connecting. With that sizzling square cut of his he must have scored heavily had he been able to time them right. Winger made i and Comer 3 and the rest —5 of them —had bad luck. Second Innings Scores. The second innings was in some respects even worse, though the total was slightly higher, for this time only three got into double figures. However, there was one redeeming feature that saved the match from being an utter fiasco and delighted spectators and players alike, and that was Going's strike. Starting with a six first ball (he had been bowled firs! ball in the first innings), every ball came alike and was cracked good ami hard until there were five men on the boundary. When it is realised that he was hitting Lambert right into a .strong wind and landed three sixes over a 75 yard boundary it will be recognised how hard he laid on the wood. His 83 contained 4 sixes, and 9 fours, and he was caught just inside the line, the fieldsman actually falling after taking the ball and rolling ■over. Lissette played another sound knock, going l.b.w. unfortunately to a ball he just snicked. Clark played a good knock when runs were wanted to save an innings defeat. Keat did not have a chance to show what he could do, going in last both times and carrying hi sbat. The dozen balls he received he played confidently enough and he might have been sent in higher up the second time at least. Hawke’s Bay Bowlers. The bowling was not nearly as good as the poor scores would indicate, Lambert causing everybody trouble with off breaks and Evans, with similar balls, taking most wickets. The two Reaners were not nearly as good as last year, though they are still relied on as the main attack. Hawke’s Bay started poorly, Stephenson being caught second ball, and Kavanagh going in Winger’s third over with only 10 runs on; then Turvey had his wickets hit by Going without the bail being dislodged and he and O’Brien put on nearly 100. Lambert was very aggressive and reached the half century with 10 boundary hits before being brilliantly caught by Wilson in the long field. At the close of the day 9 wickets were down for 220 and things were not too hopeless. On Monday morning, however, the bowlers could not nothing with Brown and Fitzwater, the latter not being regarded as a bat at all, and nearly 100 more were added. Going was never on the spot and could get no life out of the wicket. Winger and Lissette could not strike a consistent length and averaged about 5 an oyer; the former got very little turn on the ball. Aitken kept the batsmen quiet at times, but seldom beat them. Clark had no chance with the new ball and when he came on could not get a swing, the only feature of his bowling. Comer was not given a chance, nor was Cassidy, who was the nearest approach to a slow bowler and certainly the only one who could turn the ball at all. The fieldsmen all enjoyed the chance of being able to go down to hard hits without fear of stopping the ball on the head and •other parts of the body and acquitted themselves well. Aitken changed the bowlers he used judiciously and until the last wicket had every cause to be satisfied with their efforts;

BODY LINE BOWLING. DENOUNCED IN NEW SOUTH WALES

Many of the leaders in the control ■of New South Wales cricket, while holding strong views antagonistio to the body-line bowling, preferred not to deal with it '0111013115' until the English team had finished their tour and left Australia, says a writer In the Sydney Referee. This was evident

when the matter was discussed by the New South'’Wales Association, and unanimous action taken. The action practically means that unless the M.C.G. deals with body-line bowling shortly, no Australian team will visit England in 1934. Public opinion Is solidly behind the officials. On the proposition of Mr R. C. M. Boyce, it was unanimously decided to discountenance body-line bowling in every branch -of cricket in New South Wales—to place it on the black list of things that must not be done. The discussion of the ’ proposal brought out various views of the body-line ■tactics, all in agreement on the principle that the new thing was a deadly menace to cricket. The Resolution. “That this association considers that body-line bowling Is against tire ■best interests ol’ the game, and urges all affiliated and recognised asocia■tions and clubs to discourage it.” “To see one Test match was enough to convince me that body-line threatens the game of cricket. To have seen ■every test, as I did, filled me with anxiety for the future. For a bowler to set his field accordingly and bowl deliberately at the man is against the very first ethics of the game.” “We must remove this insidious canker from the game, and, if we do not, I sincerely hope that Australia will not send a team to England next year. “Last season I saw some of our most prominent batsmen almost battered out of the game. To have seen the bruised bodies I saw was to be filled with pity.”—Mr E. A. Dwyer (Mosman). Australian selector.

“I cannot understand Hie mentality of the English captain. It was the ■worst example ever of putting _ the winning .of a game before the game itself.”'—Mr R. J. A. Massie (Sydney University). « “When English officials come to realise what It really was I am sure they will bar It. and that they will also consider it was distinctly unsportsmanlike. The brightest spot In the season was the refusal of Woodfull to retaliate with body-line bowling. This action had shewn great moral strength and love for crloket. He could have turned it on had he so desired.” —Mr R. C. M. Boyce (Gordon and Sydney University), State ■selector. “One of the tests I saw had all the element of a dog-fight. It was devised for putting one of our stars out of action.” —Mr E. W. Adams (St. George). “It is an cankerous growth. This month the board will probably decide that unless something is done in England we will not send a team over next season. It is time we publicly denounced it.” —Mr R. A. Oxiade, former chairman of the Board of Control.