Cricket 1912

J un e 8, 1912: CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 209 binds together the players. The die is cast, however; and England will “ muddle through ” in the old way, forgetful of the lessons of 1909, when the first mistake was the appointment of a captain for all the tests, before anyone had the least idea of his form. The same mistake has again been made, and doubtless it will be followed by others, as in 1909, if one is to take the first test side as being, in the opinion of the selectors, the best side in England. To the men chosen for their batting no very serious exception can, as I have said, be taken ; but the bowling is in a very different position. There are only three bowlers—accredited bowlers—in the side, and only two of these have so far this season given proof of being up to England form. In other words, England is taking the field with only two bowlers, and reliance is being placed on these two coming off, and on Brearley recovering the form which he seems to have lost. On his form in the trial at Lord’s, Brearley had no pretensions to be regarded as an England bowler. It is not at all pleasant to be coldly eritical in dealing with a bowler for whom one has an intense admiration on account of his stamina, his skill and his courageous heart. For years Brearley has been the best fast bowler, day in and day out, in England, and no bowler, since Tom Richardson gave up the game, has shown the same lion-heart, the same continuing energy, the same ability to accomplish a big performance or to peg away hour after hour against batsmen well set and scoring fast. The spirit is willing as of old—but is the flesh as strong? I doubt it, but my doubts are tempered by a hope that Brearley will dispel them at Lord’s. On form and in the face of the facts, how­ ever, we seem to be “ gambling ” on Foster and Barnes proving sufficient in themselves; and the choice of Brearley makes our venture all the more speculative. Fortune has a way of avenging these appeals to her favour. Douglas, on his Australian per­ formances, should have been in the side. It was he who seconded Barnes and Foster, and he had almost as big a share in the Australian successes as the pair now regarded as indispensable and ample. On trial and indeed on generalform Hitch should have been the fast bowler, and if a bowler outside the M.C.C. team had to be chosen then Field of Warwickshire had greatly superior claims to Brearley on recent form. Hitch must not be judged on his form for Surrey alone. In his county side a man is often over-bowled, whereas in a representative match he can be nursed and more sparingly and judiciously utilised than in a county game. I repeat that the M.C.C. side should have had the honour of representing England. They had fairly won that right on the field of battle; while even on the lower ground of expediency they are our best side, if they are not our eleven best players. The side as chosen, may be good enough to beat South Africa, but we should do well not to despise the foe on account of the Manchester match. In cricket you have to take the incidental luck of the game and the luck of the weather into your calculations ; and the weaker of two sides may win, if all the luck goes their way. Then the performance of South Africa at Manchester, now that one has had time to ponder over all one saw there, seems “ altogether too bad to be true.” Pegler excepted—and Pegler accom­ plished a performance that must be ranked amongst the great performances in test cricket—the South African bowling was un­ worthy of the real powers of the side. For their poor fielding— Taylor and Beaumont excepted—I offer no excuse. As to their batting I cannot help thinking that Faulkner and White, if the latter had not been handicapped by his damaged hand, would have pulled the game round and saved the follow-on. That saved, the match would probably have been drawn. As for the hat-trick of Matthews at a time when 34 runs were required with 3 wickets in hand to effect that desired end—here, if ever, the incidental luck declared in favour of Australia and against South Africa. As to the second innings collapse, the history of cricket furnishes many examples of similar debacles due to the operation of the moral factor—whose force grows by what it feeds upon, and becomes greater from wicket to wicket—though it ever suits most of us to say for journalistic reasons that the latest example is the most extra­ ordinary, just as the last gale is ever the greatest weathered. Possibly it was a mistake to send Faulkner in first with so short a rest—merely the interval between the innings—after he had batted for 4^ hours. But Faulkner approved of the action, and thought his eye was so well in that he could stay. As it was, his early dis­ missal shook the morale of the whole side, making some seem reckless—Nourse, for example—and others obviously nervous, or at least neurotically over-anxious and careful. This last applies to Schwarz, that usually dashing batsman, and to Ward. Both played gently forward to half volleys, and so gave the inevitable catch, aud presented Matthews with his second hat-trick. The collapse was of moral origin ; the powers of the side were paralysed and the cricket was of the falsest possible kind. Are we immune from the baneful effect of the same deadly cause—our old enemy, “ the occasion ” ? Acute testitis conjoined with neurosis of a particular situation may make a strong side weak. It is just as well, therefore, that we should avoid boasting before we have put our armour on. The fate of others should teach us prudence in these matters, and the folly of leaving anything to chance in selecting our side. It is trite history, how­ ever, that in test cricket, as in matters of greater concern, we have tasted too often of the bitterness of experience before applying its lessons. Let me suggest one lesson of the past. We should have at least fifteen men at Lord’s, regardless of expense, and in the matter of bowlers we should be equipped for any kind of wicket. Big Matches of the Week. W a r w ic k s h ir e v . A u s t r a lia n s . —Kinneir, with some luck, played his first innings of any size this season, and he and Charles* worth, who has also been doing comparatively little, added 122 for the county’s second wicket. The board showed 200 with only four men o u t; but, though the Australians had not their full strength in bowling, the innings closed for 275. The stand of Jennings and Macartney—135 for the second wicket—was the chief feature of the colonial first innings, though some plucky hitting by Webster and McLaren—54 for the last wicket —must be mentioned, for it enabled their side to finish up practically level on the first innings. Bardsley again fell a victim to Foster, who bowled in his finest form. On a wicket drying after rain Warwickshire showed up badly in their second inniugs, Macartney taking four good wickets for 22. Left with onlv 116 to get for victory, the Australians lost three good wickets for 43 ; then rain stopped play. N o r th a m pt o n s h ir e v . S o u th A fr ic a n s . —Nourse made 137 in 3 hrs.,with only one chance, at 62, the wicket-keeper being the defaulter. Herbert Taylor, who is developing into one of the side’s most dependable men, helped him to add 65 for the second wicket in 45 minutes, and Snooke and the big man added 102 in 1| hrs. for the third. Later Beaumont, without slogging blindly, hit hard—75 in 105 minutes - 6, 6, and 4 off successive balls from John Denton, and caught in the deep off the next! Campbell and Pegler (the l«tter hitting a 6 and six 4’s) added 58 for the tenth wicket at the excellent rate of 2 per minute ; and the Afrikanders registered their biggest total to date. Northants did little in their first innings, though seven men made doubles, Wells’s 39* being the highest; but they played up much better in the follow-on. Haywood ran up 52 in an hour, by vigorous driving; William Denton batted very steadily and w ell; and Smith, Yials, and Seymour all lent help towards saving the game. E ssex v. M id d le s e x .— Perrin and McGahey once more ! But in separate innings this time. The first-named, with a difficult chance—perhaps scarcely a real chance—to Hendren at 60, m*de his 107 in a little over 3 hrs. Gillingham helped him to add 114 for the fourth wicket in 95 minutes. Reeves—rather under-rated at Leyton, I think—and Freeman put on 77 for the seventh in 40 minutes, the Cambridge-born man hitting eight 4’s in his 48. Middlesex had by no means as easy-paced a w-cket as Essex had enjoyed, rain having affected it. and they did wonderfully well to save the follow-on. Tarrant played as Tarrant does at critical times; Lord Harris’s nephew, an old Etonian, N. Haig, made top score, a dashing and plucky 72, at the rate of nearly a run a minute ; and Hendren, the Hearnes, and A. R. Litteljohn, captaining the side for the first time, all earned credit. Douglas was going for a win, evidently. So was Charles McGahey, who ran up 117 in 3 hrs. (a 6, and eight 4’s), while Freeman (who helped him to add 99), Gilling­ ham, and Russell all scored at a good pace. Declaring at 258 for 5, Douglas left Middlesex the nice little task of making nearly 400 to win in 4 hrs. But the visitors, if they could not win, were not going to be defeated. They never looked like it, indeed. After Tarrant and Litteljohn had left, young Hearne and Hendren added 133 for the third wicket in 110 minutes, and put the game in such a position that only a complete slump by the rest could have given the home side victory. Hendren, hitherto out of luck this season, batted capitally for just over 2 hours., and hit twelve 4’s. Y o r k s h ir e v . S o m e r s e t .— John Daniell won the toss, and put Yorkshire in ! He was justified, too, thoush not on results. But— don’t they call him the Prophet? And didn’t his prophetic ins'inct scent rain in the offing ? Against fine bowling by Greswell and Robson the White Rose cracks mostly failed on a slow wicket. Four were out for 53 ; but Wilson (who batted 2$ hrs. for his solid 72) and that most promising amateur, Tasker, added 68 for the fifth—nearly half the total. Friday was a blank. Saturday saw Somerset struggling. Only the skipper and Captain Tillard struggled to much effect, however, Haigh being altogether too much for the rest. An undistinguished second effort by the home side—Hirst’s 31 highest—was declared at 118 for 8, Robson and Greswell again sharing the wickets; then rain delayed the game, and it petered out in a draw. Yorkshire are not having much luck with the weather in their home games this year.