Cricket 1886

6 CBICKET: A WEEKLY EECOED OF' THE GAME. JAN. 28, 1886. A U S T R A L IA N C R IC K E T E R S IN A U S T R A L IA . From The Illustrated Sporting cO Dramatic News. J ust now, when all cricketers are talking about Australian cricket, a few paragraphs upon the subject of Australian cricket in Australia may be Apropos. My title refers to Australian cricket generally, but my remarks refer principally to the colony of Victoria, which I only left last year, for Vic­ toria is the stronghold of cricket in Australia. Nine of the thirteen Australians who came home to do battle for the colonies in 1884 were Victorians, and such men as Horan, inferior to Murdoch alone in batting, and Allan, the famous left-handed bowler of the first Austra­ lian eleven, were left behind, not to mention such young players as Bruce, on his day an almost unplayable bowler, and a batsman who has scored over 300 runs in a single innings, or McShane, a cricketer with a yeoman’s style, but who frequently does yeornan’s service. Walters, too, is a wonderful scorer, and Stokes and Lewis have achieved phe­ nomenal averages in club matches. Thus it will be seen that Victoria could send home an eleven almost as capable of maintaining its prestige as the Australian eleven itself. In Murdoch, Bannerman, and Spofforth it would lose a tower of strength, but the esprit de corps resulting from the men all coming from the same colony would go some way towards balancing this loss; and when Ivo Bligh’s team were in Australia, after the English eleven had twice defeated the Australian eleven, the Victorians succeeded in beating them in the single innings. This was, of course, merely the fortune of war, but the Victorian eleven must have been a very good one for even luck to help them to this extent. And if they could do this then, when they were a scratch eleven, as we know by expe­ rience in our matches against the Australians all teams picked only for a particular match must be, would they not much more be capable of acquitting themselves creditably when trained by playing for many weeks together —the same eleven—match after match? It does not require one to have been in Australia to see wliat a formidable team could be selected from the following Victorian cricketers:— McDonnell, Bonnor, Alexander, and Bruce of the Melbourne Club; Horan, Boyle, Scott, Midwinter, McShane, and, perhaps, Lewis of the East Melbourne Club ; Blackham, Palmer, Cooper, Allan, Slight, and Rosser of the South Melbourne; and Turner and, perhaps, Stokes, of the Richmond Club. Moule and Groube, who came home with a former Australian eleven, are also Victorians. Turner is a seasoned cricketer, who can take the wicket or bowl at a pinch, as well as bat and field well, and Rosser is a first-class batsman, well worth a place in any eleven were he quicker in the field. The first question which an Englishman would naturally ask, is “ What is the cause of the phenomenal success of the Australian elevens ? ” The climate has something to do with it, and the different hours of labour have something to do with it ; but first and fore­ most I should put the high ideal of Australian cricket. There are certainly four maxims of Austra­ lian cricket which all cricketers would do well to lay to heart:—(1) That no first-class bats- man'has any business to be bowled on a first- class wicket—bar accidents. (2) That no man can be called a first-class cricketer who is not a first-class field. (3) That an eleven ought to consist entirely of all-round men, so as not to have any pronounced “ tail ” in the batting. (4) That a team to play well together must practise together. Take the Australian eleven of 1884, and see how they illustrate these maxims. Murdoch, inferior to no batsman in the world since Grace has partly retired, can also take the wicket at a pinch, and can field bril­ liantly. Spofforth, so deadty on his day with the ball, makes some wonderful catches, and on a ground too true for his bowling hits up runs. Bannerman, the safest of batsmen, is the safest of “ mid-offs ” as well, and can be put on to bowl with moderate economy to rest the regular bowlers when leather hunting is the order of the day. These three hail from New South Wales, and are a tower of strength to the Australian eleven, but only have Massie, Evans, Garrett, Jones, and perhaps Moses, up to intercolonial form, behind them. The New South Wales eleven has a decided tail. Giffen stands away from all other South Australian Cricketers in merit, being probably as capital a specimen of an all-round cricketer as there is to be found. A batsman with a stubborn defence, and terrific hitting powers, no better field or safer catch could be wanted, while he is a first-class bowler. And now for the Victorians. I naturally take Blackham first, the prince of wicket­ keepers, and as resolute and successful a bats­ man as ever went in to stay a rot, or pull a match out of the fire. Boyle is not a first-class batsman, but is a ticklish customer to tackle when only a few runs are wanted to save a match, as he keeps his wits about him, and is not unlikely to finish it off with a few opportune slogs of judicious temerity. His batting is like his bowling—there isn’t much in it, but he is a capital judge of his power and yours. He sees what policy suits the situation, and carries it out; and this combined with his command of pitch and straightness, puts a bad batsman, or a good batsman crippled by a treacherous wicket, at his mercy. His courage and quickness in the field are marvellous, though I think his standing so close in (few the men would like to do it) is a mistake, ex­ cepting when the wicket is so good that one can afford to let afew runs go for the off chance of taking a crack batsman “ off the edge of his bat,” as the phrase is in cricket. For a man standing where Boyle does in the field cannot possibly help letting many balls go by him which an ordinary mid-on could cover, and this makes one less run-stopper in the field. Boyle, too, is the Ulysses of the team, the “ polumetis.” In Palmer they have that invaluable man, the bowler who comes off on a good wicket when all the other bowlers have left their devil behind them, and, like Blackham, he has an awkward way of stopping the breach when the batsmen of his side are falling all round him; he can field well enough. Bonnor is not only the giant hitter, but whether at short slip or at long field the ground he covers is equally phenomenal, and his re­ turn of the ball from the long-field, either to save the run or to save the wicket-keeper’s fingers when they are not running, is a marvel of judgment, accuracy, and powerful throwing. Scott can field, and he came to the front rank of the batsmen in the last tour; he has bowled with success sometimes. Midwinter can do yeoman’s service both with bat and ball. McDonnell is a dashing, brilliant field, just as he is the most dashing of batsmen, who always goes in to face any bowling, confident of making “ fours ” as thick as blackberries, and makes them with glorious “ cuts,” as well as big “ drives.” There is no batsman in Australia whom the Australian public would rather see bat, and deservedly; no one could show more dash and pluck. These eleven men were “ the Australian eleven ” of 1884. [Alex­ ander came as a manager, not unworthy to play at a pinch, and Cooper has really been a kind of emergency man.] Where did the tail come in here ? When did this eleven ever find itself in a fix, because the last three men to go in were a wicket-keeper, and a couple of bowlers not good for a run between them, like the last three men in the Oxford eleven of 1870 ? This would not be the case if the last three men were Blackham, Giffen, and Palmer. If we analyse this team, there is not one man in it who is not a first-class player in at least two departments of the game. If a man is put in a team for his bowling or batting only and does not come off, he is a mere idler. It is more sensible, perhaps, to put a man into an eleven for being a brilliant cover-point; he is not so likely to fail in his speciality. A first-class wicket-keeper, of course, one must have at any cost; but how much better to have a batsman like Blackham with the necessary qualifications behind the sticks, than some who are first-class with the gloves but might just as well continue behind them as in front of them when it comes to batting. The Australian ideal of cricket certainly helps them a long way on to victory. They deserve to be successful with their cricket. Careless batting is quite the exception. An Australian’s idea of batting is, in the first place, to keep his wicket up; though it be with poking of the deepest dye. I have before referred to his canon, “ that a first-class bats­ man has no business to be bowled on a first-class wicket” (except it be off his pad or the like); and, therefore, he does not consider that he has any claims to being a first-class batsman until he has a first-class defence. There is only one “ Massie ” in Aus­ tralia. Even the dashing McDonnell will not take liberties with a ball likely to bowl him. The ideal of first-class English amateur bats­ men—to make a run off every ball that is not stopped by a field—has not found disciples in Australia. Bannerman is an exaggerated type of a first-class Australian batsman. He merely carries the general theory to a logical con­ clusion. A fieldsman who expects to play in first- class matches in Australia can expect no more consideration from dropping a catch that comes to him, from however high or far, than abatsman forbeingbowled by astraightforward ball. He is supposed to be past that stage. At the present moment there is a first-class batsman out of the Australian eleven for his slowness in the field, a man who would be sent in to bat at the head of the team were they to play him as a substitute. And now as to bowling. The secret of Aus­ tralian bowling is practice. Whenever an Australian eleven disbands, and its members resolve into their respective clubs, they go down to practice in the ordinary way like any other first and second eleven members of their clubs. They bat their ten minutes, and then field and bowl till everyone else who started with them has had his ten minutes. I have often seen Horan and others practising at junior nets when a first eleven net has been too full or deserted. This, then, is the secret of Australian bowling—that in order to have one’s ten minutes’ innings at a practice net one must do one’s hour or so of ground bowler’s and scout’s work. At the Melbourne Club each net has a pro­ fessional to look after it and coach the batsmen gratis during practice hours. Out of practice hours one can hire their services in the ordi­ nary way for 3s. per hour. Now, hanging about a net only to “ fag ” the balls is poor fun; so everyone tries his hand at bowling, and the result is that every cricketer in Australia goes through his apprenticeship at bowling, with the usual result of the survival of the fittest. In England, only those who fancy that they have a turn for it try to bowl: in Australia, everybody tries, so bowling genius seldom remains undeveloped. Palmer and Giffen might never have developed their genius for bowling, and yet have so developed their bat­ ting as still to play in first-class matches. Think how this would have weakened the Australian eleven. Is this not a case of “ gnotlii seauton ” ? Now as to their climatic advantages. From an English' point of view Australia would be quite fit for cricket all the year round. Their June is the antipod of our June in season, and yet the Australian M.C.C. could often give a better pitch in June than the London one. In Melbourne it is customary to play cricket Next Issue February 25.