THE AUSTRALIAN MATCH.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2148, 13 January 1881, Page 3

THE AUSTRALIAN MATCH.

TO THB EDITOR 07 THB PRESS. Sib, —I am given to understand the Orioket Association have finally decided that only fifteen men shall do battle for Canterbury in the coming Australian match. With your kind permission, I beg to offer a few remarks upon this decision. In the first place, it will be universally admitted that the form of the members of the present cricket team of Canterbury is not to be compared with that of those who represented us against the last Australian team. We certainly have Oorfe, Ashby, Ollivier, Secretan, and perhaps one or two other good men, but I suppose every one will admit the last team could defeat the whole of the men picked to practise for the coming match put together with great ease. The last team of Canterbury men defeated the Australians certainly, but was there a single man in the whole province of Canterbury who would have backed the same team to do it again had another match been arranged. Nobody was found to admit the victory was a fluke, but could six men have been got to back Canterbury in a return match. When the last Australian team came here they had not been to England, and having only played a few matches in Australia, bad not shaken properly into their respective places in the field. It must be borne in mind the coming team has been playing together for over twelve months, and with the exception of the time they have been travelling, have played a match almost every day, consequently are in magnificent form. I consider the Australian team when it reaches Christchurch will be, at the lowest estimate, twice as good as the last one was. Have the Association not considered these facts, or have they (being themselves mostly cricketers) shut their eyes to them. We saw by telegram with what ease the Australians defeated the fifteen Victorians last month. Do the Association for one moment consider we have fifteen as good men hero as played for Victoria. Surely they cannot do so, as a glance at the sorry exhibition made by the Canterbury team in Melbourne will instantly dispel this idea. On looking over an old file I notice that the Melbourne Cricket Club, with anything but a good team, defeated the Canterbury men by 169 runs. Against South Melbourne Canterbury was defeated by one innings and 93 runs. By the Bohemians Canterbury was defeated by eight wickets and by all the other good clubs except the East Melbourne, which by one of the many chances of cricket they defeated, but all tbe members of the team will now admit that no one could possibly have been more astonished and surprised than they were themselves. The reason for giving these few details of the tour is to compare cricket here with Melbourne cricket, in which comparison we show up very badly. As I observed before, cricket then was superior to what it is now, clearly showing the absurdity of comparing Canterbury with Melbourne, yet the Association are doing so, and have the nerve to play only fifteen men. However, when the match;'comes off, and Canterbury gels ' easily defeated, and when, what now could be made a really good game is made a sorry show for our side, let us then hope the Association will see their own folly, and commence to look at the cricketers in the same

light in future as the outside public does. Perhaps the tried men will go to the wickets with their usual pluck, but I fancy I see the colts shaking in their oboes after several good men are out and it is their turn to face Hpofforth and Boyle. I really think, Mr Editor, in the interest of cricket, the outside cricketing public should interfere, and insist on twenty-two men playing, when doubtless much more interest will be taken in the match, better receipts shown, and all lovers of cricket will enjoy a really good game, in the place of the one we are threatened with at present. Apologising for trespassing upon your space to such an extent, Yours, &c., An Admibbe of Obickbt.