Lists (None yet)

Login to create lists

Tagged (None yet)

Add Tags

Comments (None yet)

Add New Comment

No corrections yet



What Test Match laities

Revealed ;



^he fifth Test match W8B won by England, and the result was! mainly due to better fighting qualities shown by the visitors, and a .more complete knowledge of the finer points of the game. Big oppor- tunities presented themselves to the Australians, but while they had a grip on the game at certain :mea, they allowed it gradually to ullp from their grasp. The indomitable patience of the visitors was n ? thorn in. the side of Australia throughout the series, and in practically

every match this patience in batting was able to wear down ..ur accurate attack, which had to capitulate in the end. In only One Test . match did our bowling succeed in achieving a victory over the defensive

batting, in the second Test at Melbourne, but in the other four matches super-defensive batting was the dominating factor.

Another department in which the Englishmen were superior was speed bowling, and our batsmen never con- quered that pace attack. Larwood was, of course, the menace to Austra- lia, but Allen and Voce played their parts satisfactorily at periods. in the fifth Test, when the fast bowling appeared to be rendered more or leos helpless. Verity, with his left-hand slow medium deliveries, came along nt the identical moment and conquer :d our batsmen with impeccable accuracy and well concealed change of pace. In only one branch of the game was Aus- tralia superior, in my opinion, and that was wicketkeeping. W. A. Old- field has no peer in the world to-day, and his exhibition of keeping in the final Test was nothing short of magni- ficent. His batting, too, in that game, was nothing like his real form, and when this is combined "vith'his special- ist job, it only goes to show what his absence, through the injury he re- ceived in* the third Test at Adelaide, meant to the home side in the fourth, and that part he missed in the third Test at Adelaide.


The victories achieved by the Eng- lish team were thoroughly deserved, as they were the better side,, and their combination and team work were superior to ours. Douglas Jardine as a captain showed sublety, and never wavered , in his determination j to take those "Ashes" back to Eng


land. It would be useless to deny that he was unpopular with a certain section of the crowd, but despite this fact, of which very probably he wus aware, he ignored everything but his concentration on thc important games. He planned ibis- course of action and not once did he deviate from it. The

leg-theory fast bowling,':'wUh^f. the closely packed "on-side field bf cours j, played a large .part iii ' demoralising our batsmen, and they never overcame the danger - of. the'theory. There were isolated occasions when it ap-¡ peared that the opposition pace might . have to.revert to'orthodoxy, but it was not completely mastered. -, '( Jardine also showed discrimination in his selection of the men to perform a cer- tain task, and not once did they- let him down. . Verity rose from a bats- man of mediocrity to one of reliability; Larwood came to the rescue with the bat in Sydney, and thoroughly deserv- ed a century for his great effort.


Verity also timed his splendid bbwW lng performance beautifully.. when I Larwood had to leave the field owing to foot injury. In a lesser degree, Mitchell rendered good service in Bris- bane, in the only Test in which he appeared, by_ securing valuable wickets at a critical period, and by his snappy fielding. He should have been included in i'..e fifth Test. Allen proved himself to be a surpris- ingly good all-round cricketer on the tour, and ho helped largely towards England's success in the Tests. Troll ably his' fielding was ' the most pre- eminent part- OL' bis work in all de- partments, and especially his. clever and speedy work at tin. short posi- tions. Voce was a disappointment, and in my opinion ls not a. good bowler^ . However, he acted as a good foll for Larwood in one or two Tests, hut his "bumpers" werj over- done, and, for the most part, .harm



I cannot yet understand why Bowes was included In a Test match - lu preference to Maurice Tate, and I cannot help thinking that Tate waa badly treated. In many ways tho Sussex man proved his value during the tour, but on account ot lack ot match practice lt was hardly to be expected th..: he would be chosen In the later matches. - It would have been a great kindness to have given Tate a' pleasure trip altogether for services rendered in .lie past rather than allow a great cricketer to gc out in such an ignoble way. Anothei player in P. II. Brown could have been used without detriment to. thc side, and I venture to say that thU Surrey amateur will one day be a linc


Paynter played a big part in th< "rubber", match In Brisbane when he

M. TATE '.

an action bespeaks courage,;anU bis was a gallant effort In that match lt came heroically to tho rescue.- Such only on account of tho trying weather.

Sutcliffe .was not tbe "tateman he was cni the last tour. He In .proverbially à slow,' dreary player, but on this tour'.his. luck played an Important part In lila run getting.

, Hammond was tho outstanding player and all-rounder in the team. In ail departments he shone, but his batting could have been brighter on matty occasions! He was undoubtedly playing to a set policy, and his aggres- sion was seen too seldom. When it came, ... however, ; it ; contained brllllnn'cy that can only be seen from the gifted player. As a slip fields- man Hammond utands elone to-day; and wlren the"' epidemic of missed catches was abroad in the fifth ' Test

he was .one ot the few exception!- on the English jläJ.

Verity had few.'chance J to exploit hts left-hand accuracy and spin on rain-affected wickets, ace none at all In Test ' matches. His Impeccable length and cl varly conceited change of . pace splendidly supported the other types -when necessary.


The Nawab of Pataudi vfas another of tho disappointments, His over-; defensive batting wàs uninteresting, and although he reglbiered a century In his first CTest match, and . so equalled the record of 'his' other two countrymen-RanJItslnhjl and ' Duloep sinLJi-in this respect his work did

not. contain tire stroke play that was expected fro maim. , not by any. means In the same class as the

other two .Indian players. ..(l. v,

1 Leyland was a useful player, but to my mind he never got the best out ot himself as a batsman. Leyland is naturally an enterprising batsman,

but his freedom was seldom allowed free play, and his defensive batting made him appear awkward. There is nothing so unsatisfactory as to wit- ness a forceful batsman. endeavoring to defend, for his . ¿creed .restraint gives him the ao^earance ot a very inforlor batsman,'.

Wyatt ' improved vastly during the tour. Early io the programme he was rather a doubtful starter in the Test eleven, but gradually he placed himself on the list ot certainties. In England.Wy*tt was a flour, defensive player, but in Australia this season he has developed into a most aggressive player.;, " As an outfield Wyatt ? was

positively dashing, and surprised not a few. by,bis remarkable activity.

Jardiné' was. a . comparative failure with. the bat,'but. his fielding was grand.;, He. would give tile appear of being sluggish in the field, hut : he made some .magnificent catches in the. gully "position,, and, when required, his-activity was not below-any . ot the.-more speedy and snappy movers. . His . great- value to tho side lu the .field- was seldom seen, as he was most ' undemonstrative.

. 'Ames kept wickets - for England- !n every. Test,, ano*"for tho most .part; did' finely; -.. He ¡was, however,.chosen principally because of his : batting, and In that department, ho ' was a failure. I still maintain that Duck

worth ls tho bettor 'keopor, .but as the tour progressed the Lancashire lad was losing that match practice so necessary to maintain form, and

Ames hud to be retained. Ames was a failure with the bat, because, In my opinion, he did not play naturally. His only success was In the third


Test, /«riel.teveaittét score was due , to several jieceB of good fortune. Duckworth"", shpufd' have ; boen' ' given

the wlckç'tkeeplng position In the j

fifth Test match.

lt must bo remembered, however, that Chapman's team won the rubber in 1928-29'by the same margin as did Jardine's tlils time, and yet Australia regained the "Ashes" two years later with a comparatively young side. History may yet reheat itself in 1934, provided Australia can marshal her forces with judgment, and some oort of combination can h . effected.