CRICKET.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLII, Issue 19, 12 May 1909, Page 11

CRICKET.

TKE AUSTRALIAN XI. IN ENGLAND. Programme of Matches. MAY. 6— v. Nottinghamshire, at Nottingham. 10—v. Northamptonshire, at Northampton. 13— v. Essex, at Leyton. 17 —v. Surrey, at the Oval. 20— v. M.C.C.. at Lord’s. 24 —v. Oxford University, at Oxford. 27— FIRST TEST MATCH, at Birmingham. 31 —v. Leicestershire, at Leicester. JUNE. 3— y. Cambridge University, at Cambridge. 7 — v. Hampshire, at Southampton. 10 —v. Somerset, at Bath. 14— SECOND TEST MATCH, at Lord’s. 17 —.Vacant (probably Scotland). 21— v. Yorkshire, at Bradford. 24—-v. Lancashire and Yorkshire, at Manchester. 28— v. Scotland (two days), at Edinburgh. JULY. 1— THIRD TEST MATCH, at Leeds. s—v. Warwickshire, at Birmingham. 8— v. Worcestershire, at Worcester. 12 — v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol. 15— v. Surrey, at the Oval. 19—v. Yorkshire, at Sheffield. 22 — v. Derbyshire, at Derby. 26—FOURTH TEST MATCH, at Manchester. 29 — v. Yorkshire and Lancashire, at Hull. AUGUST. 2— v. South Wales, at Cardiff. 5 — v. Lancashire, at Liverpool. 9— FIFTH TEST MATCH, at the Oval. 13— v. West of England (Devon, Cornwall, etc.), at Exeter. 16— v. Gloucestershire, at Cheltenham. 19—v. Kent, at Canterbury. 23— v. Middlesex, at Lord’s. 26—v. Sussex, at Brighton. 36—v. M.C.0., at Lord’s. SEPTEMBER. 2—v. Essex, at Leyton. 6— V. An England Eleven (Mr. Bamford’s), at Uttoxcter. 9—Scarborough Festival, at Scarborough JS —v. South of England, at Hastings. The First Win. ‘ The tour of the Australians commenced auspiciously with the defeat of Notts by an innings and six runs. Following are the scores:— NOTTINGHAM.—Ist Innings. A. O. Jones, not out 125 G. Gunn, b Armstrong 9 J. Hardstaff, b Armstrong 7 J. Gunn, b Cotter 37 W. Pay ton, b Cotter 12 J. Iremonger, c Carter, b Whitty .. 7 C. James, c Trumper, b Whitty ~ 0 E. Alletson, b O’Connor 1 T. Oates, c Carter, b Armstrong .„ 5 A. Hallam, b Armstrong 0 J. Wass, b Armstrong 31 Sundries 5 Total 239 Bowling Analysis: Cotter took two wickets for 73 runs; Armstrong, five for 55; Whitty, two for 42; Laver, none for 21; O’Connor, one for 38; Noble, none for 6.

AUSTRALIA.—First Innings. M. A. Noble, c Jones, b Wess 4 W. Bardsley, e Oates, b Wass, .... 63 H. Carter, lbw, b Hallam 61 8. E. Gregory, c James, b Wass ... „ 2 V. Trumper, b Hallam 94 V. Ransford, lbw, b Wass 4 W. W. Armstrong, not out 106 A. Cotter, o Alletson, b Hallam .... 22 F. Laver, b Hallam 17 J. O’Connor lbw, b Hallam 6 J. Whitty, b Hallam 0 Sundries 10 Total 389 Bowling Analysis: T. Wass, took four wickets for 107; A. Hallam, six for 114; J. Iremonger, none for 75; John Gunn, none for 42; J. Hardstaff, none for 11, NOTTINGHAM.—Second Innings. A. O. Jones, c Armstrong, b Whitty 30 Geo. Gunn, e sub., b Noble 22 J. Hardstaff, b Armstrong 25 J. Iremonger, e Whitty, b O’Connor 4 J. Gunn, o sub., b O’Connor 1 W. Payton, o Whitty, b Cotter .... 6 C. James, lbw, b Armstrong 6 E, Alletson, c Trumper, b Armstrong 31 T. Oates, b Cotter 13 A. Hallam, b Cotter 1 T. Wass, not out 0 Sundries , 5 Total 144 Bowling analysis: Cotter took three wickets for 51 runs; O’Connor, two for 35; Whitty, one for 33; Armstrong, three for z 7; Noble, one for 3. Captain of the English. Team, Mr. A. C. MacLaren (Lancashire) has accepted the captaincy of the English team for the test matches against the Australian eleven. Hon. F. 8. Jackson was asked, but was unable to accept. The Demoralisation of Bowlers. (By G. L. JESSOP (Of England and Gloucester Xl.’s). When writing on matters appertaining to cricket, one is rather too prone to treat one’s subject entirely from the standpoint of first-class cricket. It is a mistake from which too many of us suffer. At the very lowest computation the humbler followers of the game outnumber their more exalted brethren by the very large proportion of some three or four thousand to one. With such a large subject as the “Demoralisation of Bowlers,” it is impossible to ignore what for want of a better term wo will call second-class cricket. For it is in this class that bowling is more frequently demoralised. And for this reason. The county bowler is a man of mature experience, ready to cope with anything which may occur a little out of the ordinary. Although at times he may himself experience an occasion or two when his bowling may, to use a colloquialism, get tied in a knot—yet in nine cases out of ten he finds some nwans by which he can unravel it. With him it is merely temporary. Usually it is not so with local bowling. Exceptions there must be, of course, but the general happening is tbat once the bowling is collared, it re"siins so for the rest of the innings. In Rustic Cricket.. Tn the days prior to my inclusion in the first-class ranks, my experience was mostly confined to local and village cricket. Of good club cricket I eaw little. In this local and village cricket it needed very little to put the bowler out of his stride. The mere standing out of one’s crease in order to play fast bowling was quite sufficient to ensure a perfect gluttony of long hops. And the most certain way of bringing about complete demoralisation was for one to run out of one's crease to slow or medium pace bowling. Nor is this to be wondered at, for against a resolute, keeneyed, and quick-footed hitter the bowler’s task is never a sinecure in any class of cricket. A bowler requires a cool head to deal with such, and it is exceptional to find one of this speeies outside the ranks of first-class cricket. On occasions even in first-class cricket such methods have been found to pay, but those who do indulge themselves in this manner form a very small minority. Rustic cricket —real rustic cricket —where spikes are unknown, and the only equipment deemed really necessary is either a rod belt or cap—is responsible for all sorts of dodges in the direction of putting the bowler off. One batsman, who

should have known better, for he was a parson's son, made a constant practice of drawing back from his wicket as the bowler was on the point of delivery, pleading on each occasion his unreadiness. It used to, as he was careful to explain to me, demoralise the bucolic mind. To plead to him that it was not quite cricket was but to involve oneself in endless argument. If these few lines of mine—should they catch his eye—result in his sincere repentance of the error of his ways, they will not have been written in vain. There is also a reverse side of the medal, for the bowler himself is not altogether slow in an endeavour to steal a march on his inveterate foe. Whether it is altogether “according to Cocker” to suddenly change from slow underhand to fast overarm to an unsuspecting batsman, is a question which I will leave to the delinquents themselves to solve. But after all instances where either batsman or bowler resort to practices which, even if they do not exactly break the letter of the law, yet do evade the spirit of the game, are xetremely isolated. And the spirit of cricket breathes just as healthily on our village greens as it does in the proud enclosure of the headquarters at Lords. Long may this be so. Hypnotic Influence in Cricket. In the demoralising of bowling the personality of the batsman plays no little part. If one looks at the names of the first dozen batsmen at the end of each season, one recognises how very little separates the twelfth from the first in the list. But though in the matter of averages there may not be much to choose, yet a larger gap in actual cricket does exist. To the bowler there is something almost intimidating in the personalities of a Fry—a Ranji—a Hayward—or a Tyldesley. He cannot quite explain it, but there it is. Possibly he maybe too conscious that those selfsame ruthless ruffians have discovered thoroughly all the secrets of his personal art, leaving him like the '‘dummy hand” of a bridge player thoroughly exposed. He is not going to bowl any the better for this knowledge. He may bowi with the utmost confidence against some other batsman whose average merely differs from those others by an insignificant fraction. Certainly with a “Ranji” it almost amounts to hypnotic influence. Knowing full well the deadly dispatch of that batsman’s “on” .stroke, the bowler , is fully impressed with the importance of not bowling anything near the leg stump—and yet he finds that ball which he propelled with full intent to the “off” side has been attracted as by a magnet towards the guarded shins of that nonchalant figure. When he finds that he cannot accomplish his aim, he finds himself almost unconsciously doing the very thing he ought not to do. Is it possible for hypnotic influence to play any part in the future of cricket? Perhaps some scientist will relieve the minds of our bowling brethren on this subject. 1 know personally that I have often wished for a half volley, and have had my wish immediately granted, but that I put down fo intelligent anticipation. On another occasion I repeated my wish, and again 1 got it, and so did my leg stump. As this was my first ball in a Test match, my faith in hypnotic influence received a shock from which it has never fully recovered. It may not be so with others. Patience and Punishment. There is one meaning to the word demoralisation which signifies the “throwing into confusion,” and it is to this state which the bowler is brought by the association of two fierce hitters, each of whom is imbued with a firm conviction that the bowling can be hit. There comes a day to most hitters when nothing can go wrong, and it is then that the true demoralisation of the attack occurs. It matters little how good the bowling may be, for the better the length the faster do the runs come. Such days as these come few and far between, but when they do arrive it is not a matter for surprise if the bowler’s confidence is somewhat shaken. There can be no doubt that hitting is more likely to cause demoralisation than any other cause, but it must not be lost sight of that a steady, stolid defence likewise quells the spirit of the bowler. But bowlers bowl so much better when no runs come. It is then merely a matter of patience. Few bowlers stand punishment really well, and it is the man whose principal aim is the keeping down of runs who is the first to lose confidence when Louik-

fiarics eome quickly. And it is bowlers Of this kidney who come in for the most punishment; for their accuracy of length . being of a mechanical precision, lends itself more readily to the upsetting of the inechanisni. This mechanical Length bowling does, of course, meet with sucleess, but it is not the greatest factor In match winning. The bowler who is not afraid to be hit is the one upon whom greater reliance can bo placed. A batsjnan like P. Warner would very rarely . be caught napping against perfect length 'bowling on a plumb wicket. There are limits to every batsman’s game, and jrhereas the defence of a Warner might (demoralise an attack, if that batsman threw defence to the winds, and taking bk courage in his trusty arms were to eliterally bald-headed for the bowling, tactics would be far more likely to d to his omi demoralisation rather n that of the bowlers. The bowler, >wing how foreign such methods are his game, would be lifted up with the prospect of the enemy delivering himBelf into his hands, and consequently be he ever so fagged would feel entering |nto him new spirit. •‘And then with hope eternal in the human breast Would ho proceed to bowl his darndest best."

* Just in tire same way Trumper would Se less likely—indeed, not likely at all—to demoralise the attack if he chose for Stay particular match to wear the mantle of a Quaife or a Kinneir. Chacun a son Keu—each one to his own game. Apart from the prowess of any particular batstaan, our present-day’ wickets have a lot Tto answer for in the direction of loss "©f confidence of the bowlers. One hears Hittie of their demoralisation when wet • yvickets make their appearance, or when ’pitches begin to crumble. Then it is <>hat no matter when runs do come fast and furious the bowler is still on good •’Hermel with himself, for he knows that "tin an imperfect wicket the batsman must ? Booner or later make a mistake. And provided that mistake be taken advantage of, he has nothing further to fear. Missed Catches.

Missed catched quit* as much as the fierce onslaughts of vigorous batsmen are responsible for the discouragement of the bowler. Especially- those of the slow variety, who depend so much on good fielding. When one considers that the making of a chanceless century is of such an uncommon occurrence as to call for special remark, and when one also remembers the frequency with which “centuries” do occur, one is not left wondering long over the cause of the demoralisation of the bowlers. That theirs, however, is not a hopeless lot, we can glean from the knowledge of the splendid success with which the South African attack met on the occasion of their visit jn 1907. Then we saw bowling rise superior to the drawbacks of perfect wickets. If their example be largely followed, and an era of “ googly ” bowlers ehould set in—it will not be for us to lament as to the demoralisation of bowlers. Rather will it be of the demoralisation of batsmen.