Cricket 1884

NOV. 27.1884. CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 471 T H E C R IC K E T IN G CAM P A IG N . (F oorth A ustralian T eam ),. B x an O bserver . (From the Melbourne Argus, of Sept. 16). The Australian cricketing campaign of 1884 in England has oome to a close, and as far as pronounced results are concerned, things are pretty much as they were before the team started. Through an utterly ab­ surd arrangement the three representative matches which were to have decided the question of supremacy between the two great cricketing powers were each limited to three days, and the interesting point stands over for another couple of years. In England there is, it seems, an unwritten rule to the effect that all matches shall be finished within three days. It was probably framed in old times, when wickets were less perfect, and a three-figure score a rare event. It is an English institution, however, and Eng­ lish cricketers are conservative enough to stand by the traditions of the game, however awkward they may prove in these days of sensational innings. One of the test matches was won by England, the other two drawn in favour of Australia, and, in one of these contests, the batting of Murdoch and his men was so remarkable that it reflected more credit than an ordinary victory. Out­ side the representative matches, or frag­ ments of matches, the performances of the Australians have been in no degree startling. To be twice beaten by weak North of England elevens was not their true form. On one day they rose to the occasion, and against the finest eleven in all England three-figure scores followed each other with a regularity that must have been perfectly cloying to the on-lookers. On the next day they signalised the Can­ terbury week in Kent by giving the country men that rare sensation— a victory. To-day they almost annihilate the grand batsmen of Middlesex, and to morrow some second-rate cricketers in Sussex are revelling in a sweet revenge. Even the proverbial uncertainty of cricket can scarcely explain away all these strange contradictions. Possibly the ex­ planation lies in the theory of reaction, which teaches that after a supreme effort comes an equally pronounced inaction. It is difficult to calculate the value of a few extra men at such a juncture, and had they been available the results might have com- ? ared much more favourably with those of ormer years. Against the wishes of all in­ dependent judges of the game on this side of the world, the Australians practically de­ cided to play the same eleven right through the tour. They claimed a superior know­ ledge, based on the grounds of past experi­ ence, and their anticipations have not been borne out by results. If England thinks it well to bring 20 men together for one match before making a choice, surely 14 men fit to play in all weathers, and upon all wickets, are not too many for a whole tour. The fol­ lowing table, giving the results of matches played in England by different Australian elevens, will show the position that the last team occupies as compared with others. - Matches Played. Won. Lost. Drawn. 1878 .. 41 19 7 15 1880 .. 87 21 4 12 1832 .. 88 24 4 10 1884 .. 82 18 7 7 The performances of many of the indi­ vidual players have been as variable as those of the team. M’Donnell, Giffen, Blackham, and Palmer maintained the reputation they had gained, and the latter on several occa­ sions showed the batting power he occa­ sionally exhibits when it is least expected. Giffen improved as a bowler, and at first was a recognised factor in the attacking power of the Australians—a feature at times not over strong. Neither of the two crack Sydney batsmen were as consistent in their play as heretofore. Bannerman, who has so often taken the smart out of the best English bowling, and who, on the last tour, generally managed to get somewhere in the vicinity of 30, has only rarely reached his favourite figures. Murdoch was of little use during the early part of the tour, although some brilliant innings latterly, combined with an occasional “ not out,” will probably make his figures read just as well as ever when the averages for the tour are published. Still the figures do not represent nearly the same amount of usefulness to his side that the Australian captain’s record did in pre­ vious years. In the natural course of things it was only to be expected that when the same men are called upon tour after tour to hear the brunt of every engagement, there should eventually be a falling off in their form, and even a slight change for the worse in the play of two such batsmen must have had a distinct effect on the records of the team. Spofforth’s performance during the tour confirms the long-entertained conviction that he is certainly the most remarkable bowler that ever stepped into a cricket-field. All the variety and vitality that years ago gained for him the soubriquet of “ the demon bowler ” have been again displayed, and the question naturally occurs as to what the team would have done had they been obliged to make the tour without him. All young batsmen or bowlers of promise in the colonies seem to have been regarded by the leading Australian cricketers, not as prospective allies, but as rivals who might successfully dispute olaims with them for in­ clusion in future elevens. The universal pretence was that the style of the new men would be unsuitable to English wickets, and at first the opinion of the Australians, with their experience, was received with some respect. But the complaint was so per­ sistently reiterated, that cricketers grew sick of hearing it, and although the same reasons were urged against Scott’ii inolusion, he was admittedly forced upon the promoters of the team by public opinion. And the experi­ ment was a good one, not only for Murdoch’s eleven, but for all future Australian teams, as he has, onoe and for all, disposed of the nonsense about unsuitable styles. Some members of the team harped so steadily upon this one string that it would almost seem as though they believed implicitly in their own theory. If so, it only proves their judgment on ouch matters to be absolutely worthless. A few days before the team sailed, a mem­ ber of it, who has been much more success­ ful as a consistent batsman than as a prophet, expressed a positive opinion that Scott would be the decisive failure of the team. The contrary has proved correct, however, for no member of any past team ever made such a creditable debut. Not even Charlie Banner­ man in his finest form, as a member of the pioneer eleven, batted with more success in important matches than Scott has done during the present tour. His runs were always made when they were of the most value to his side and the reputation of Aus­ tralian cricket. The other new man of the team, W. H. Cooper, was taken as a novtl experiment, and through no fault of his own was entirely useless. At the start he was unfortunate enough to damage his finger in such a way that his howling power was en­ tirely lost, and practically the South Mel­ bourne captain comes back untried. Next to Cooper, Midwinter at one time promised to be the failure of the tour. His bowling was of no service to the team, although a great deal of reliance was placed upon it, and his batting reputation was only re­ deemed by a few scores towards the close of the campaign. Bonnor, the big hitter, has only a very moderate record. He showed his finest form in one match against the Players, but his brilliancy was much too spasmodic for a representative cricketer. Boyle, as a bowler, performed creditably, but this only goes to prove that other Aus­ tralian bowlers, who are quite as effective as the East Melbourne man on good wickets, and are just as well suited by soft turf, would at least have been equally successful. Amongst the English batsmen who have met the Australians, the two most consistent performers were Grace and Steel. The former specially prepared himself to meet the Australians, and with Murdoch out of form his claim to being the champion bats­ man of the day was not questioned by any­ one on the Australian side. Hi3 rival amongst English batsmen is A. G. Steel, who was a sore thorn in the side of the Aus­ tralians all through the tour. Against previous Colonial elevens the performances of the Lancashire amateur were rarely of a startling kind, but since then he has sojourned for a time in the camp of the enemy, and his success during the present season against the Australian bowling is only one more proof of the value of such experience. Most of the leading Australian batsmen owe their position to the same cause, and the obvious inference—which by the bye seems to be pretty generally over­ looked—is that the sooner a promising Aus­ tralian colt gets an English season the more rapidly will his talents develope. The present plan of choosing only matured cricketers reminds one very much of the foolish system some trainers pursue of work­ ing their horses so that the powers that should have won the race are wasted in use­ less records on the training track. A few years ago it would have been rank heresy to have ventured the opinion that an outsider should be chosen in preference to a veteran with English experience on his side, but the doctrine, like some others at one time equally sound, has shown many assailable points. The attitude of the English press towards the Australians has not been at all generous. The chief end and aim of the tour was, as it must for some years continue to be in a modified degree, money. Australia is a working community, and young men with their own future to mould cannot afford the time and expense of an English tour without some return. There may be something in the complaint, perhaps, that any attempted monopoly must give the flavour of a pro­ fessional concein ; but that feeling is con­ demned on either side of the ocean. We have not heard that the financial element has been unduly prominent during the tour, or that the Australians, in a single instance, conducted themselves otherwise than as gentlemen should. They have not measured their opponents’ bats in the centre of the ground and before all the spectators, as was done by the English captain at the opening match on Lord Sheffield’s ground. Neither have they played a Crossland in their team, in spite of the protests of their opponents, Next issue o f Cricket Dee. 25-