Cricket 1912

444 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OE THE GAME. A tretrsT 24, 1912. weather and hence for the season and was much the largest at any of the tests. A D i s m a l S e c o n d Da y - Rain limited play on Tuesday to three periods, and in all it was in progress for about 108 minutes. The first period began at one o ’clock and lasted for under 20 minutes. During this period, the two outstanding English wickets foil for the addition of 12 runs—the innings, which lasted for 5 hours, closing for 245. The second period began at a quarter past two and ended at five minutes to three. During this period Australia scored 10 runs off Dean and Barnes for the loss of Gregory’s wickct. The third period, during which the wicket for tho first time in the match was too much of a mudheap to be really difficult, began at a quartor past five and lasted to the closo at six o ’clock. During this period the Australian score was advanced from 10 to 51 off Barnes, Dean, Foster and Woolley, while another wicket (Macartney) fell. At the close of play, therefore, Australia with 8 wickets in hand were 194 runs behind. It was a dreary and dismal day, but the 12,000 or 13,000 spectators (of whom 10,813 paid at tho gates) bore their disappointment at the long and trying delays with great equanimity and patience. In all probability this was due to the great number of cricketers in tho crowd. ■ Yery little comment will suffice. First as to the Australian bowling. It was on tho whole good and accurate, even if the bowlers did not get the most out of the pitch. Minnett (4 for 34) bowled with great skill, particularly in the matter of disguising his change of pace. He came very quickly off the pitch and was in a way the surprise of the match—at least up to this point. Whitty was steady, and, as usual, showed great stamina in getting through a lot of work. It is greatly to his credit that only 69 runs were hit off his 38.overs for 4 wickets. Macart­ ney was also very accurate. Only 22 runs were scored off his 19 overs, and at one time he bowled 12 overs for 6 singles and 2 wickets. The fielding was superb alike in accuracy, quickness and intelligent anticipation. Those who held that England’s innings showed that “ six days ” cricket tended to produce abnormally slow play were not justified by the facts. England took 5 hours to score 245 runs at the slow rate of under 50 an hour, but as England took nearly 4£ hours to score 203 at Manchester in a “ three day ” game, the argument from the Oval innings at once falls to the ground. As for the rest of the play it was chiefly remarkable for the further proof which Bardsley and Kelleway afforded as to their excellence as a “ test pair,” and as test players in their individual aspect. Both were as cool as if at the nets. In any case if they felt at all anxious or nervous, they very successfully concealed their emotions and conveyed the impression that they were consummately, nay almost “ cheekily ” cool. Kelleway’s defence was as sound as it was skilful, his back play being perfect. His defence was well tested by Barnes, who bowled at his best and was extremely difficult, especially during the first 40 minutes of the Australian innings. Gregory and Macartney were never at home, whereas Bardsley was and seemed able to ignore the state of the pitch and to defy the demoralising effect which the knowledge of its state seemed to have upon Gregory and Macartney. The wicket, it should bo added, was, however, easier when Bardsley went in than it had been before a heavy shower caused a delay of 80 minutes. A D r a m a t ic D a y o f D e l a y s . Although Wednesday was another day of weary delays through rain and weary waiting for the pitch to dry, the cricket was always intensely interesting during the 3 hours 20 minutes of actual play. In that time 12 wickets fell for 123 runs, Australia losing 8 for 60 and England 4 for 63. At the close of play (this occurred at 5.20 through bad light, followed by rain) England with 6wickets in hand were 197 runs on. It was a day of dramatic happenings. Kelle­ way and Bardsley by extremely good cricket took the score to 90 before the third wicket, fell and in all put on 71 in some 75 minutes for the third wicket. Then 6 wickets fell in 30 minutes for 14 runs, and after a delay through rain the innings closed for 111, the last 7 wickets putting on 21 runs. The sudden alteration was due to a double change in the bowling at 77, Barnes crossing over from the Pavilion end and bowling from the Vauxhall end—the end, that is, from which he bowled when he took 13 wickets for 57 runs against South Africa in the eighth test—while Woolley bowled from the Pavilion end. Both men bowled with great skill and once Kelleway was out, they met with no resis­ tance from batsmen who were helpless and were also some­ what demoralised. Too much praise cannot be given to Kelleway and Bardsley. Kelleway is probably the finest defensive player in the world, at least in tests, as his record in the present series of innings of 102, 61, 114, 3 not out, 37 and 43 clearly shows. His defensive back play is as effective as it is a model of accuracy. He is always in a position to play his defensive back stroke with safety, watches the ball right up to the bat, gets it in the middle thereof, and alwaya has his bat at the right angle. If caught young, the average coach would have spoiled Kelleway and have robbed his play of all its character and most of its effectiveness by making him get his right foot back and across to make forcing back strokes probably on the strange principle—orthodoxy apart—that aggression was the best defence. So it may be, if aman’s cricket nature lies that way. But Kelleway’s does n o t; therefore his natural game is his right game ; results show it and we may thank the fates that Kelleway as a youngster was not educated out of his peculiar greatness into decent and orthodox mediocrity by some pains-taking coach with the usual ideas of his type. Kelleway waits for the ball that he can safely score from, then he scores resolutely and skilfully. You do not want more in a six days’ test or in any man with his mission and methods and natural bent. Again I say, look at results. An average of 72 in the present tests should silence criticism and give even the man with “ coaching ” instincts pause. Bardsley was equally good, and both were the personification of coolness. Hobbs played another great second innings. His 32 was far better than any century on a plumb pitch. Hobbs reached his 2,000 runs in tests and thus joins the select circle of Hill, Trumper and Gregory. Hobbs’ timing on the leg side was simply perfect and he once more conjoined sound defence with the utmost resolution. Spooner’s double failure was deplorable. He has been out of luck in the tests with Australia and has scored only 3 runs in 4 innings. His mode of dismissal has, however, been un­ lucky in 3, if not all, of his 4 innings. Fry batted with laborious care and seems unable to find his real game. Up to Wednesday night he had taken 2 hours to make 21 runs in the match. One must confess that he did miss scoring chances at the Oval, but, as I have said in another part of these notes, the explanation is probably psychological. The attendance was again good. Men of the Moment in London Club Cricket. (By “ S u r e C a t c h . ” ) This week I am able to present a photo of W illie Tew, who is, I believe, the only London club batsman that has scored 5 successive centuries in the brief space of seven days’ cricket. It m ust be twenty years ago since I was first introduced to W illie Tew on the Eton Mission ground by Frank Bontofc, the old Forest Gate captain and present Manor Park Constitutional hitter and bowler. Since then the subject of this sketch and myself have had m any an enjoyable first wicket partnership. W ith the possible exception of P. F . Warner, W illie Tew has done more travelling abroad than any other cricketer in London, and only this summer he sent me a very interesting article from the land of tbe midnight sun, and in a letter last week he tells me he assisted at the Olympic games, and had to take up the cudgels m any times with his Swedish friends and try to explain away our defeats. He says we lost a great deal of prestige, but were looked upon as the truest sportsmen of the m any nations represented. A L e a d in g F ig d b e . Altogether in a wonderful career F . W . Tew has, I suppose, played more innings than any other bona fide club cricketer in London, and like myself, I believe, he at one period of his cricket