CRICKET EFFECTS IN INDIA

Dominion, Volume 20, Issue 54, 27 November 1926, Page 24

CRICKET EFFECTS IN INDIA

A COMPARISON

Cricket in India, compared with that in England, is in its infancy. Yet it is improving fast; and it is only a matter of time when India will be able to send teams to play representative matches in England. At present, no doubt, the English are superior to the Indians in all departments of the game, but in varying degrees. From the spectacular point of view, English batting is very uninteresting. The one idea of the English batsman seems to be to score, no matter in what style and how. Batsman of the type of Victor Trumper are phantoms of the past. I have seen great batsmen, such ns Hobbs, Macartney, Bardsley, and Sutcliffe, bat; I have seen them pile up huge scores. But I have never been stirred by one of them so much as I have been when I saw Naidu or Vithal or Jai or “Doli” play an innings, observes a writer in the “Times.” These batsmen, though they cannot be compared to Hobbs, Sutcliffe, or Woolley in point of efficiency, are very interesting in themselves. Their style of plav, their method of scoring, are so different. It is a treat to see graceful Vithal knock up 70 or 60 runs, or to see the hard-hitting Naidu driving the ball to all points of the boundary. Yet, though this mav be verv interesting from the spectacular point of view, from the point of view of present-day cricket it is a great defect. To-dav. the “stickv” tvpe of batsman carries everything before him. No matter what mav be said against him, he has come to stav for good. The most attractive thing about cricket is its glorious uncertainty t and the only wav of eliminating or at least diminish. in<z this is bv verv careful ptav and patience. This is the one great thing the Indian batsman lias vet to learn from tlm Fnolishman. who risks, nothing, and is verv watchful and patient. Climate and Play. The Indian batsman, on the other hand, is verv enterprising. He forgets that cricket is a game of patience,, and that accounts for the comparatively poor scores made in first-class cricket in India. But this is not the onlv reason for the comparatively poor scores. The climate has got a lot to do with it. It tires a batsman out much sooner. Again, cricket pitches, in India are not so true as thev are in England. They are a great handicap to the batsman, especially during the monsoon season, when most of the matches are played. As regards bowling, I think that the English are infinitely the Indians’ superiors. Indian bowlers have not the same command over the ball as have the English. The reason is that the best in them is not brought out. They have not got to bowl against the "stickv” tvpe of batsman. Further, the Indian wicket helps them, and the In- ’ dian batsmen lack patience. Thus the I bowler finds that lie dismisses the side , prettv cheaply, I No doubt on n hard December wid-et the ground helps very little. This immediately brings into prominence brain work, tact, and fast bowling. This does not mean that the. Indian

bowlers lack anything, which tlic English bowlers possess, but on account of the comparatively poor defence of the opposition the best is not brought out of the bowlers. As soon as defence improves, bowling is bound to improve also. Good length, deceptive delivery, varying flight, discriminate placing of the fieldsmen, all will come into prominence.

No doubt all these qualities are possessed in some measure by bowlers like Botawalla, Warden, Joshi, Jamsu, and Kalapesi, who are excellent in themselves, but as yet they cannot be compared to Tate or Rhodes or Kilner or Macaulay, whose command over the ball would surprise any first-class Indian bowler. Yet, in spite of this mastery, more often than not the batsman gets the better of the bowler.

It is not. therefore, surprising to find people talk about doing something to help the bowlers. In my opinion, increase of length or width of the stumns will be only detrimental to the bowling. Necessity is the mother of invention: and, therefore, if the same state of things continues, it is mv opinion that in the near future we will see a ■ better tvpe and class of bowling. Fielding. As regards fielding, India possesses fielders who would draw applause from any crowd in the world. But it is not the few who count; it is fhe many. In gathering the ball .nd returning it the Indian fieldsman is decidedly poor when compared with the English. In this department of the game India has to learn a lot. It is not an infrequent sight to see the Indian fieldsman stopping the ball with his feet instead of with his hands. In firstclass cricket fielding is all-important. This fact the Indian player seems to forget.

Except_ in big towns, such as Bombay, Indian cricket is not played on such a large scale as is the game in England, and that accounts for the comparatively small number of really good players Yet the game is becoming more and more popular every dav and has already reached a standard which is not to be ignored.

One thing strikes me as most peculiar, and that is the standard of cricket in England in the. ordinary clubs, colleges, and universities, excepting, of course, Oxford and Cambridge. Without prejudice, I think that the average standard of such clubs, colleges and universities in India is undoubtedly superior. Teams of London colleges and teams of some Oxford and Cambridge colleges are poor as compared with the Indian; so also is the standard of the ordinary clubs. Tn India, for an average player, there are greater facilities for playing cricket than there are in England. First of all, placing cricket or, in fact, anv other game in India, is so cheap. Also, cricket grounds are right in the heart of the cities, easily accessible to nil. Thus, the average India” plaver finds it ease to practice. Tn England verv often the average plaver plavs matches without practice. -There are so many difficulties in his wav. The cricket grounds are so far off.