Cricket 1911

606 EUGBY FOOTBALL AND CEICKET. D ecem ber 30 ,1911 . Like Victoria, South Australia has very few young players with any chance of being chosen for the Tests. The only one with anything approaching international form appears to be Mayne, a right-handed batsman of the solid order and a good fieldsman. Queensland have in their team just now two or three cricketers who, with more opportunities of first-class play, would (I have no doubt) be knocking at the door of the Australian Eleven. Olaude Jennings, who assisted South Australia a few years ago and is now located in the far North, is a batsman of exceptional merit and quite fit to take his place in any side chosen for Australia. He is a sparkling batsman with a sound defence, and quite recently proved conclusively that he is in form by making a brilliant 123 against New South Wales’s best team. When it is mentioned that Cotter, Macartney, Folkard, Emery and Minnett were the bowlers against whom he obtained his runs it will be realised that his performance was full of merit. S. J. Fennelly is another batsman almost up to the standard of international form. In the match already mentioned he also distinguished himself, making 71 in the first innings and 78 in the second. He has a beautiful style, is right-handed and infuses plenty of vigour into his well- timed off-drives and most neatly-executed cuts. Last year I thought that .T. W. McLaren, Queensland’s fast bowler, might possibly (when possessed of a little more experience) be able to take Cotter’s place in the Australian team. He is built much on the same lines as the player named and looks as strong as a pocket Hercules, but I fear he has not the same stamina as the Sydney man, for he certainly tires somewhat after the first dozen overs. At the same time, with the experience of an English tour and in your milder climate, I fancy he would well be worth his place in the team, as he is a fair batsman, and a good field. To my way of thinking he is certainly the next best fast bowler to^Cotter in Australia. ‘ In Tasmania there seems loTbe no one likely to come along worthy of a'place in a representative Australian side, although the cricketers in the ‘ ‘ tight little island ” generally put up a good game against your representatives. As for Western Australia, they play so small a part on the stage of first-class cricket that it can scarcely be expected of them to be represented in the Triangular Test* ot 1012. Cricket in Australia. B y P. R. LE COUTEUR. HE first Test Match has come and gone—a hard fought battle. The numbers of runs scored on the different days indicate the nature of the conflict, stern and dogged—317, 272, 295, 254, 198, with 28 on the remaining morning. And on a good Australian wicket anything under 350 a day must be regarded as slow! But we must remember that each team had excellent bowling, and that the game was a Test Match. Curiously enough while nearly everyone on each side carried off some honour, three men are absent from the list from whom more than ordinary deeds were expected, Barnes, Cotter and Whitty. One mentions them thus by no means with the intention of finding fault or of saying that they should have done better, but merely because their failure is quite as striking as their success would have been. Perhaps it is not fair to expect so much from them, for after all they are bowlers, and a bowler must always be allowed more latitude for ill-success than a batsman, particularly in Australia. As a rule the trials the bowler must contend with are more numerous, and have a more subtle influence, than those which the batsman must face. Although Barnes met with little reward it is evident from the analyses that he must have been bowling with great accuracy, for he delivered 35 overs for 107 runs in the first innings, and 30 overs for 72 runs in the second. Which figures suggest a question which has been on the lips of cricketers for a little time. Does he bowl too well; is he too exact ? Some enthusiasts during last season were inclined to think thaA this was the case. Aud if this is true of his bowling in England it will be more true in Australia, where the wickets do not give the usual fairly high- bouncing ball of England, nor its occasional irregular deviation. Against class batsmen on good wickets there is such a thing as false economy in bowlmg. One might perhaps have expected a little more from Cotter in the closing stages of the game. The Sydney wicket as a rule is the most crumbling of the Australian wickets, and on tbe fifth day must have been showing some patches from which a bowler with Cotter’s strength could make the ball fly. Perhaps with Hordern bowling so well he did not experience that half-conscious feeling of necessity which imparts the extra devil that is so dangerous. However this may be, it would seem that the selectors will now have to consider the claims of McLaren, the energetic Queenslander. Whitty with his 1 for 101 was disappoint­ ing, but it must not he forgotten that chances were missed from his bowling. Although so many different players did well,, the match was Hordern’s with his 12 for 175 in 69 overs. It is not often that a googly bowler sends down so many overs for so few runs. He not only obtained wickets, but continually had the batsmen in difficulties. It is said of him that while his action is most cleverly deceptive he breaks little in Australia. As a matter of fact against first-class batsmen a googly bowler does not need much break. The most damaging ball is the one which merely “ bends ” in the unexpected way, and does it very quickly. The effort of the body, arm and wrist results then rather in the production of the top spin, which gives the awkward dropping flight and the whip from the pitch. In the reports there was noticeable mention of the work done by the leg-fieldsmen close in—the crux of the googly field— and of attempt at caught and bowled. This would suggest that the batsmen were particularly troubled by the swooping flight and by the whip, though of course the disturbing effect of a disguised break cannot be eliminated. We cannot say what might have happened if Hordern had not struck form. Hypothetical reasoning of this kind is absolutely uncricketing. Quite possibly some other bowler might have risen to the occasion. But there is something rather significant about the rest of the bowling in this match, apparently giving some confirma­ tion to what was said in an earlier article. It was said there that swerve bowling had not been fully exploited in Australia, and that this fact, rather than climatic conditions making the ball impossible there, was the cause of the scarcity of bowlers of this kind, though perhaps a greater swerve is possible in England than in Australia. In this match the swerving bowlers on the English side were notably more successful than the swerving bowler on the Australian side. And possibly this was no accident. Swerving is understood better in England than in Australia : the bowlers have reduced it to a finer art; and the batsmen have had more practice in playing it. There seems to be reason to believe that Douglas swerved rather consider­ ably in his first over, for we read that Bardsley almost played on, and immediately afterwards completely lost a ball. The report itself says nothing of the swerving, but those who know the ways of both men may read between the lines. At the beginning of the second innings Douglas sent down 8 overs for 12 runs. Other points of particular interest in the game were in the Australian first innings Trumper’s century and Minnett’s fine 90, in both innings Hill’s good form, and in the Euglish first innings the displays of Foster and Hobbs, in the second of Gunn, and in both of Hearne. Gunn’s innings with an injured hand during the fifth day, with Cotter bowling on a worn wicket, cannot be too highly praised. There is an extraordinary fact. If the cabled analyses are correct, not a single wide or no-ball was bowled during the whole match. It suggests an interesting question. Are the swerve and the googly resulting in more bowling at the wicket ? Although the “ extras ” are not inconsiderable in three out of the four innings, it by no means follows that the wicket-keeping was not good. W ith these new developments of bowling many more balls must hit the pads aud go away to leg. Even if the sundries were all byes, bad “ keeping ” is by no means denoted, for all the English and Australian bowlers, with one or two exceptions, are notoriously difficult to take. BOOKS RECEIVED. Tasmanian Cricket Association .—Report of Season 1910-11. THE AMERICAN CRICKETER. F ou n d ed 1877. Published by H. H. Cornish on beh alf of The Associated Cricket Clubs of Philadelphia. An Illustrated Journal of Cricket, Association Football, Tennis, Golf, and Kindred Pastimes. No. 608, Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, Pa., U.S.A. p r i c e - 15/- per annum , post paid anyw here. Specimen copies mailed on request.