Cricket 1912

J u ly 20, 1912. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. The Triangular Tests. F if t h M a tc h : A u s t r a l ia v . S ou th A fr ic a , a t L o r d ’ s . I m pressio n s D a y b y D a y . B y H am ish S t u a r t . “ The great heart of creation heats for ever like a b oy ’s.” I wish the same could be predicated of the great heart of the Empire towards Imperial cricket. Only some 7,000 persons saw the opening day’s play in the first— and perhaps the last—match between Australia and South Africa ever played at the headquarters of the game, yet I.ord’s is in London, and London is the capital of the Empire. One would have thought that there were more than 7,000 persons in London, whether residents or members of its floating population, always large at this season of the year, w itb the desire to see and the power to gratify their desire to see such a match. Truth compels the admis­ sion, however, that Monday’s play, though interesting by reason of the novelty of the match and the many dramatic happenings and changes in its fortunes, was not of very high class, and did not merit a big crowd when regarded in its purely technical aspects. I doubt, however, whether it is wise, even if it be absolutely correct from the critical point of view, to judge test cricket by its technical merits and demerits. The moral factor plays such a big part in test cricket that one is forced to take a philosophical view of the play and to be very humane towards the very human liability to err, the self-consciousness which is so apt to paralyse power and to make mediocrities of great players in test matches. One saw this at Lord’s on Monday. The South African batting, while the first five wickets fell for 74 runs, was as bad batting as one ever saw at Lord’s on a plumb wicket. Nobody seemed able to do anything right or anything worthy of their real powers or their long training and experience in first-class cricket. I put the matter this way because I firmly believe that dictum of Von Moltke that nothing trains for war save war. The men of experience, the seasoned warriors trained in* the stem school of cricket war, all failed, and failed in a way that was unworthy of themselves ; and it was leftj to a youngster—Fortune, it is true, took him in her arms for ins bravery and made him the button of her caji for the day— to redeem the damaged prestige of South African cricket. Faulkner began the debacle by playing a defensive backward stroke which no coach would have suffered to pass unblamed. White was in too big a hurry, and Llew­ ellyn, after two off drives for four, was guilty of as big a technical sin as Faulkner. Nourse did, not make a single intentional stroke or even a correct stroke, and had two innings for his 11, for he ought to have been easily caught at mid-on if Whitty had remembered that the high jump and catching a cricket ball are separate events. Tancred, it is true, made some runs, and also one or two good strokes ; but he seemed to have as many lives as a cat. He could edge the bowling with impunity, and could have the ball in the air with safety, while he always made each of the bowlers tried during his stay (Whitty, Minnett, Hazlitt, and Matthews) looked very difficult, whereas they were all bowling rather ordinary stuff, with now and then a good ball. Taylor alone showed no pusillanimous diffidence. He declined from the first to give an adventitious excellence to the bowling, and treated it on its merits, and not as the sort of stuff the test batsman’s dreams are made of, to the detriment of his play when put to the proof in the actual field. Strieker took heart of grace from his example; and the two, favoured by the sort of luck which the brave ever deserve, but cannot always command, hit the bowling about and added 97 in 70 minutes. Both had “ lives ” and neither invariably kept the ball down even when it did not go to hand ; but they played natural and plucky cricket, and cannot be overpraised for the way in which they faced a critical situation and saved their side from an ignominiously small total against some moderate bowling on such a pitch. Strieker hit nine 4’s in his 48, and his driving and cutting were excellent. He was lucky ; but, as I have said, he deserved his luck for his pluck, and in any case cannot be held responsible for the inaccurate catching and the bad judgment of high hits shown by the fielding side. Mitchell batted like the earlier men ; but Pegler hit in the same resolute fashion as at Leeds last week, while Ward at last got a run in a test match. Taylor was last out. He made his 93 out of 207 in two hours fifty minutes, and hit twelve 4’s. He saved his side from ignominious failure. He is a puzzling batsman, but may attain real greatness with more experience. A t present he is a curious player by reason of his mixed methods. I do not know, but I fancy, that in his original and natural character as a batsman, he was a sheer hitter who did not mind whether he had the ball in the air so long as he hit it hard and often. Now he is a singular admixture of restrained defence, correct cricket in the matter of scoring strokes, and yet a hard and high hitter with all his restraint and correctness ! The new man and the old Adam each peeps out in turn when he is batting. That is why, I think, that with experience ho will eradicate faults, curb into safe utility his natural hitting powers, and become a great batsman. Ho has the right tempera­ ment and is as plucky and as cool as our own youngest test player, J. W. Hearne. His driving on Monday was specially good. The Australian catching was very inaccu­ rate. But for this and the poor judgment shown in trying to get under high hits the South Africans would have been out for a very small score. The Australian bowling was, as I have said, neither deadly nor difficult, yet it would have sufficed but for the errors in the field. The Austra­ lians made a poor start, Jennings and Macartney both being out with only 14 scored. But Bardsley and Kelleway then added 72 in 80 minutes without being parted. They played quite the right game for their side, though Kelleway, by reason of his unattractive style, tried the patience of the crowd- The shadow of defeat lay over the South Africans all day on Tuesday. There was little in the position at the resumption of play to warrant an optimistic view of the South African prospects. The Australians with 8 wickets in hand were 177 behind, yet Kelleway and Bardsley had played the bowling with such ease overnight that as soon as they got going one felt that a very big partnership was assured. Both men scored much faster than on Monday, and Kelleway, though not so attractive, got runs almost as quickly as Bardsley. In an hour they had put on 88, Bardsley making 51 and Kelleway 36 of the number. In the next hour they added 86 (Bardsley 42 and Kelleway 34), Kelleway being then out leg before to Faulkner’s last ball. In all the w icket put on 242 (a third wicket record for tests) in 3 hours 40 minutes, Bardsley making 126 to Kelleway’s 97, while on Tuesday they added 174 in two hours, Bardsley making 93 while Kelleway was making 70. As the pair put on 202 for the third wicket at Manchester and each scored a century, the South Africans are not likely to forget Bardsley and Kelleway. Kelleway (whose test average in the present series is 92 and whose scores are 121, 61 and 102) was batting for 3 hours 40 minutes. He hit seven 4’s and ten 3’s, the threes being chiefly “ hooks.” I did not see him give a chance, though he is said to havo been missed at the wicket on Monday. He is a great test player by reason of his utility and dependability. Bardsley, who gave an easy chance to White at third man off Faulkner when 131 remained until he had made 164—his largest score in test matches and his fifth test century. He was out leg before to Llewellyn’s slowest ball. He made his 164 out of 302, hit one 6 (an on-drivo into the score-box stand off Llewellyn), one 5 (4 from an overthrow), and fifteen 4’s, and his only chance was the one already referred to. His off-driving and timing on the leg side were specially fine, while he showed great skill in placing. The rest of the Australian batting calls for little comment. In its collective aspect it was no better than that of South Africa, though Minnett made some good drives and cuts, and Mayne one or two good on-drives and pulls. Pegler, for the third time this tour, finished off an innings at Lord’s with a good bit of bowling. On going on at 350 at the Pavilion end, he took 4 of the last 5 wickets for 16 runs. Before going on for the last time he could not keep a length. Nourse, on the other hand, was accurate all through, as his analysis shows, and now and then he bowled a rare good ball. It will be noted