CRICKET,

Gisborne Times, Volume VI, Issue 293, 18 December 1901, Page 3

CRICKET,

RUBBING XT INTO TIIE AUSTRALIANS. By—Telegraph— Press Association—Copyright Sydney, Dec. 17. Interviewed after the match, Barling said ho considered the English team had been underrated both in England and Australia. Maelaren had brought out the right kind of bowlers for the hard Australian wickets, and very strong batting power. Several good authorities have expressed the opinion that the Australian team was badly chosen, and that their captaincy was not good. The victory was well deserved. The Sydney Morning Herald says tho Englishmen won by outplaying their opponents at every point of the game. Tho result shows that the English sido was much stronger than it was thought by some English papers. Their play throughout was of the highest class. The victory must bo mainly regarded as the result of Maclaren’s judgment, but, allowing his skill as a batsman and captain, all the resources at the command of the team he lod to victory would havo boon discounted if the team chosen to represent Australia had been worthy of its proud position. If tho match teaches anything, it toachos that men should bo chosen on their immediate form, not on tho form they exhibited some time back. Bowlers whoso arms havo lost their cunning and batsmen who are plainly out of form should not bo chosen to the exclusion of younger players of decided promise. The Daily Telegraph says that, after allowing that tho better sido won, all that can be said is that tho proverbial uncertainty of the game has once more vindicated itself ; but, given all that, it is plain that alterations will havo to bo made in the Australian eleven in the next test match. The team had recommendations as consisting of seasoned and experienced players, but it betrayed its woakness as tho game proceeded. Perhaps the most pronounced weakness was the sameness of the bowling

COMMENTS OF VICTORIAN

PAPERS.

Bi telegraph—Press Association—Copyright Melbourne, Dee. 17. *■ The Age, commenting on the tost match, says that it was undoniably a groat win, achieved by sheer merit. The visitors showed superiority in every department of the game. It is, says the Age, useloss talking about a batting failure. Tho credit must be given unstintedly to the export bowling and fielding by which such a failure of the Australians was brought about.

The Argus suggests that a cable message be sent to Lord Hawke, assuring him that there need be no anxiety over the absence of Rhodes and Hirst. No real plea, adds the Argus, can bo produced in mitigation of the Australian defeat. If Australia hopes to beat the redoubtable visitors a new eleven should bo picked immediately to enable them to train together.

FIGHTING IT OVER AGAIN

(■Notes by “ RifOr. ”)

When writing in my “h.le.s” 'ast week that i expected’ to see the Englishmen show up well ic the lest matches, mv most sangerne expectations never .soared to the height of an innings ant 12-1 runs’ defeat of Australia. There is not a cricket in the Old Country, or throughout Uu length and breadth of the colonies who will not be heartily pleased that 'Jacla’-en's men have performed so gi.au lly in the initial big r .atch of the tour Just imagine how the sporting scribes on t> ose English jen n.-Js who published rich a quantity rubbish, about the strength of tbr English team when it left Homo must iiavo squirmed in their chairs wn- the result of the first test match reached them. If ever a team was ihrared with faint prais ? ' it was she one that has ;ust defeats i All Ausfcc -.Pa on Us own ground b_, the overv.be ruing margin of an innings and 121 runs. .Said the English sporting writers : “Hie team is strong in batting, but tbe bowling is weak—watery weak.” Did ever Geo Lohmait, Tom Richardson, Jack Hearne, or Bobby Reel bowl better than did Barnes, Braund, and Blythe in the great match just recently finished. Another heaven-born English cricket authority said of tbe English captain : “ Archie Maclaren is only the shadow of the Maclaren who scored -121 for Lancashire ir. a county match some years ago." What must the substance have been like if it be only the shadow who has scored 145 and 7-3 against New South Wales, and followed this up with 116 in the test under notice. Then poor Lilley, the greatest wicketkeeper England over had, came in for his share, and a sporting writer said : “ The team has no really first-class wicketkeeper with it.” If ever a man had cause to be pleased with himself after a cricket match that man is A. Lilley, the English wicket-keeper. In England’s only innings, he played splendidly in putting up the fine score of 81. In Australia's first innings he stumped Noble, and in the second innings ho caught Trumper, Noble, and Truinblo, and stumped Laver. Shades of Blackburn ; no really first-clas3 wicket-keeper, indeed ! It is hard to account for Australia’s display in this match. Perhaps the chief cause of their failure to do anything with the bat was the long and trying work they had to do in the field while the Englishmen were piling up their fine score of 464. But this certainly does not explain away their utter inability to play the English bowling in either innings on what was admitted to be a good wicket. The real explanation of the matter is that Maclaren has brought specialists with him in the bowling department. No man knows the strength of the batsmen in Australia better than the English captain. .Ho has turned that knowledge to account in selecting his bowlers for tbe tour, and the result of the first test match more than proves the soundness of his judgment. The fact that the bowlers who made schoolboys of the Australian batsmen who have been on the summit of the cricket world for so long are aii leg break bowlers makes ono pause and think. It has been held for years past that it was a bowler’s duty to keep the ball on the off side of the wicket. Leg-break bowlers were rare, and they were looked upon as expensive. The result has been that a generation of batsmen has arisen who have devoted all their attention to the oil sido of the wicket. .Their leg-play is weak, simply because they have such rare opportunities of developing it. Maclaren, with his sound judgment, has evidently been struck with this conviction, and has rung on the leg-break bowlers, and the success of the experiment has just reached us by cable. A considerable change will, I think, be seen in the Australian team when it takes the field for the second test match which commences on New Year’s Day, at Melbourne. One great advantage the Englishmen bad over the Australians was that their eleven wss composed almost wholly of young players in the prime of youthful strength and vigor, who were well able to stand tho strain of long and trying work in the field, under a burning sun. Australia will have to let a few of her brilliant young players dis place some of tho old veterans, if she wishes to retain the ashes of cricket in The Land of the Golden Fleece.” As Prince Ranjitsinhji would say, the test match just closed was not Australia s “ best canter.” There are still four matches to go, and a sporting enthusiast laid level money in town last evening that England would not win another test match of the present tour, Whether they do or not, they have shown by tbeir brilliant victory in the first test match that they compare favorably with the best team that has ever left England, and their tour will be followed with great interest by players in all parts of the world.