Cricket 1912

254 CETCKET : A WEEKLY EECOED OF THE GAME. J une 22, 1912. The Triangular Tests. (S o m e R e f l e c t io n s a n d A n t ic ip a t io n s ) B y H a m is h S t u a r t . W riting as I do, partly of necessity but chiefly from preference, before the En glish side for the third of the series of Triangular Tests has been announced, I m ay hope to escape the charge of criticising the handiwork of the selectors for the mere sake of being critical, and should also evade any possible accusation of prejudice either of the positive or negative variety. In the first place, then, I hold that the present strength of England lies in the comparative weakness of our opponents, when judged either by their general form or their test form to date. The South A fricans are in no single respect the equals of the South A frican side of 1907, and the Australians, though a better side than m any expected them to prove, cannot be compared with the A ustralian sides of 1902 and 1905, or even 1909. It is un­ necessary to go further back than 1902 and 1905, for the sides of these two seasons, but particularly the 1902 team, were as good sides as the very best elevens A ustralia has ever commanded. If, therefore, England had to meet an A ustralian side that were the equals of the 1902 and certain other A ustralian sides in all departments of play, one would not be justified in entertaining any great confidence in the ability of England to emerge victorious from , or to win the rubber in, a series of tests, provided always the English team was no stronger and gave no more convincing proof of all-round strength than in the recent match with South A frica at Lord’s. As to the South A fricans of 1907, I doubt whether the English eleven would have beaten them at Lord’s last week, and I feel convinced that if England had won at all, it would have been by a small margin and after a strenuous struggle for supremacy. I repeat that our strength really lies in the comparative weakness of our opponents, and that not one of the three “ m ighty opposites ” has so far shown as a side that they are up to their own highest standard of all round excellence. Of the three England m ay have approached most closely to that standard ; assuredly South Africa has fallen much the farthest from it. There is something as ironical as it is pitifully true in the fact that in the very season in which the strongest sides were most to be desired, the three great cricketing communities should have been represented by comparatively weak teams. The En glish side may, it is true, be strengthened, and it can be strengthened—the two things are not the same, for the “ m ay ” and the “ can ” depend upon the discretion of the selectors—but the other two sides are beyond improvement, unless it comes from within and is due to the develop­ ment of inherent powers not yet revealed or fully realised in action. It is a pity—alm ost a tragedy—that one should have to write thus in connection with the greatest series of matches ever arranged— the highest development of imperial cricket yet attained ; yet the truth is great and must prevail. If one could only be sufficiently optimistic to attribute this view of the triangular tests to personal pessimism, one m ight deceive others and also oneself into accepting the opposites as the very m ightiest of all the mighty opposites that have ever met and made history in the Imperial arena. T hat each of the great cricketing communities of the world should have one of the greatest sides, perhaps the very greatest side, in their history was assuredly the hope, for it could hardly be the expecta­ tion, of those who promoted, and finally f estered into accomplished fact, the present series of tests. B ut the truth is greit, and there is no escaping the fact that not one of the three sides can fairly be described as a great side, judged, that is, by the severe historic “ test ” standard. England, as I have said, approaches most closely to the standard, because England has a working side, if only the proper men be chosen, almost as good as any she ever possessed, though not perhaps composed of eleven players of the same assured greatness, individually considered, as the very best sides of the past. That side is the M .C.C. side that defeated the Rest. That side cannot, however, be chosen en bloc, but this does not alter the fact that the England side that beat South A frica fell so short of the test standard as a side that the task of strengthening it is comparatively simple. F ry has an indefeasible right to a place ex officio, and would perhaps have a still better right on other grounds ; Spooner’s right is war-won. A sim ilar remark applies to Woolley, Rhodes, Barnes and Foster, while Hobbs is a player of too great possibilities and is' far to fine a field (if he fails to score many runs, he always starts with a surplus of runs saved) to be left out. B ut the other four places are quite open, though they might safely be reduced to three, for Sm ith can be permitted to retain the position of wicket-keeper with safety and possibly with profit, in view of his understanding with Foster and his possibilities as a bat. Taking the open places as three, this would mean the substitution of other men for Warner, Jessop and Brearley. F it and well, W arner would be entitled to his place for his batting, but there is unhappily some doubt as to his being really fit and well This being so, Warner must be included amongst the doubtful three. There are in m y view six candidates for the positions. These are Hitch and Field (Warwickshire) for Brearley’s place, Hayes for Warner’s place and Douglas and J . W. Hearne for Jessop’s place, while Dean has also claim s to con­ sideration. H itch has never bowled better than in this season, while Hayes is batting better and is a better all-round player than when he played for England in 1909. Still we need not go into details as to each candidate and his special abilities. A ll I will say is that the inclusion of Hayes, H itch and Hearne for Warner, Brearley and Jessop would greatly increase the effective bowling strength, would materially improve the fielding, and would certainly not we iken the batting. There are, of course, sentimental, as well as m aterial, reasons why Douglas should come into the sid e; but much depends upon the conditions, though it is extremely difficult to take these for granted during three days in this uncertain summer. A match may begin on a slow, soft wicket and may finish on a fast pitch and vice versd. The best side in England is in m y view the M .C.C. side, and even though the playing of this side would have meant the exclusion of F ry and Spooner, the sacrifice would have been safely made to secure that strength which comes of unity of action and the sympathy of old association, which was not in evidence in the England side at Lord’s. Fry had, in fact, great difficulty in allocating positions ; and the fielding, though good individual^-, never approached in collective excellence or in intelligent anticipa­ tion that of the M.C.C. side against the Rest Postscriptum .—Now that one has seen the side, it is impossible to decide upon what principle of selection, if any, the selectors have proceeded. Taking Dean as a member of the side, and accepting the official intim ation as final that the eleventh place lies between Jessop and J . W . Hearne—a very curious alternative unless Jessop is to play if wicket be slow, Hearne if it be fast and weather outlook is settled—the selectors are deliberately sending England into the field at Lord’s without a fast bowler, while their idea of strengthening the bowling is to introduce Dean, who is sim ilar in style to Foster if he bowls his fast stuff on a fast wicket, and is much the same as Woolley and Rhodes, if he bowls his slow stuff on a slow wicket. I believe he bowls an ex­ ceptionally good ball. It is difficult to see how Dean can trouble a batsman who has become well set against Foster. But we need not pursue this subject. The England side are not a well-balanced team ; nor are they the strongest side available. We are again gambling on Foster and Barnes, while the side suggests that the selectors hold the foe cheap. Let us hope that we will learn nothing of the enemy from the enemy. Fas ab hoste may pave the way to future victories, but that is no reason why we should court immediate defeat by making the enemy our possible instructor in cases of adversity. iVlen of the Moment in London Club Cricket. T w o S t r o n g C lu b s — T h e I b is C a p ta in — M a y e s in F o rm — A M a n w o r t h W a t c h in g — M u r p h y t h e A l l - r o u n d e r — H o a r e a n d F lin n — A G o o g l y B o w l e r — B e m a r k a b le B a t t i n g — B e a l t h e D e f e n d e r . B y “ S u r e C a t c h . ” I h e a r fro m q u ite a la rg e n u m b e r o f frie n d s t h a t th e y a re o fte n u n a b le t o o b ta in C r ic k e t . M y frie n d s h a v e tw o w a y s o f m e e tin g th is d iffic u lty . O ne is to o rd er -C r ic k e t to b e d e liv e re d w ith y o u r m o rn in g p a p e r on S a t u r d a y b y y o u r n e w sa g e n t. T h e o th e r is to g e t in to to u c h w it h th e M a n a g e r a t 3 3 , M oor L a n e , E .C ., a n d a rra n g e w ith h im fo r a d ire c t s u p p ly . H o n . S e c s, o f th e c ln b s b y th is la s t n am e d m e th o d c a n e a s ily a rra n g e to s u p p ly th e ir m em b e rs w ith C r ic k e t , fo r th e M a n a g e r w ill sen d e v e r y w e e k to a n y c lu b H o n . S e c. h a lf-a -d o z e n cop ies o f C r i c k e t fo r 10 p e n n y s ta m p s. I sh o u ld m u c h lik e to see c lu b c a p ta in s o r H o n . S e c s, a rra n g in g fo r a d ire c t s u p p ly o f C r ic k e t , so t h a t th e ir p la y e rs c a n p u rc h a se fro m th e m th e ir w e e k ly c o p y e v e r y S a t u r d a y afte rn o o n . I f a n y p la y e r o r re a d e r sh o u ld in fu tu re h a v e a d iffic u lty in g e ttin g C r ic k e t fro m h is n e w sa g e n t I s h a ll b e m u ch o b lig e d if h e w ill a t o n ce c o m m u n ic a te w ith th e M an ag er a t 3 3 , M oor± Lan e, E .C .