Courage in Cricket

Hokitika Guardian, 24 June 1921, Page 4

Courage in Cricket

GETTING OUT OF TROUBLE. c t NERVE-RACKING FINISHES. c i (“Point,” in Sydney “Sun”.) , P. F. Wanrer, the famous English '] cricketer, has given his answer to a question which has been asked and < variously replied to for nearly forty years: AVhy, at cricket, can Australia, with a population of 5,000,000, hold her own with the pick of England’s 45,000,000? The Englishman pafcT a, magnificent tribute to Australians when he said it was due to their extraordinary courage in tight corners. Remembering clearly the salient features in the most memorable of test matches, the same question has often been put, and a few years ago it prompted a conversation before the A.I.F. struck a blow in the war. An old English Lancer, who had risen high in the Australian military forces, j was asked bow he thought our soldiers would fare In Europe, and he replied' j “1 was with them in the Boer War, and I know that in attack there is ] nothing to equal them. If they will stand and take their medicine they will be the finest soldiers God ever made.’ “Don’t you think they "'ill—the type of men they have proved themselves in cricket?” he was asked further, and lie said: “I bclifeve they will; but I want to see it.” He had to wait only a few months to

read an officer’s dispatch from Gallipoli, using his very words to describe the Australians. .MORE THAN COURAGE.

As the war progressed the A.I.F. gave many illustrations of intrepid courage in attack; for instance, in their stupendous, almost hopeless, task around Pozieres, at Villesr-Breton-

nenux, at Mount St Quentin. And equally they demonstrated their inflexible will to stand and take their medi-

cine for nearly a week under gruelling

fire at Bullccourt, outside Amiens, when they stopped the German hordes

who had broken the English line, and at many atlier vital points.

As with our soldiers, so it has been

with our cricketers. In the course of

the ninety-nine test matches they have fought their way out of more tight corners than their opponents have. But it lias required more than mere courage to do this. Was it any wonder, with such a succession of outstanding players as C. T. B. Turner, H. Trumble, G. H. S. Trott, J. Darling, E. Jones, M. A. Noble, ('. Hill, V. Trumepr, R. A. Duff and A\ T . \V. Armstrong? England had

one brief run while T. Richardson, the

great fast bowler, was irresistible; but with all the batting skill of Ranjitsinhji, Maclaren and Jackson the Eng-

lishmen could offer no more Ilian tem-

porary checks to the sides which included Trumper. Hill, Noble, Darling, Duff and Gregory. [ wonder whether

any other eleven ever included a more formidable half-dozen batsmen? MEMORABLE ESCAPES,

But the time came when they were conquered hv one Englishman—S. F. Barnes—whom Clem Hill has described as the most difficult bowler lie has played against. Recent events found

England with one outstanding batsman—Hobbs —and a team of moderate all-rounders, whose disappointing p'erformances gave strength to the contention that such a combination will be beaten by an eleven which includes two or three towering champions like Armstrong, Gregory and Macartney. Murdoch, a champion batsman of the early days, with 153 not out, topped the 152 which AV. G. Grace had made. In the first test played in England at Konnington Oval, in 1880, Murdoch nearly dug the Australians out of the

ditch, but bis supporters were not quite strong enough. It was on the same

ground, two years later, that the Australians leapt to fame by snatching victory like a brand from the burning, with seven -runs to spare. Magnifi coiit.lv as SpofForth and Boyle bowled on that occasion, the win was probably mainly attributable to the dominating fielding of the Australians. AA’lion AV.

(L, champion that he was, had been dismissed after making 32 out of 53,

leaving six men to get 32 runs, the Australians got a grip of the game which never relaxed. It was not the snap of a terrier, but the crunching

grip of a bulldog. Relentlessly they closed in on the batsmen. Lyttelton and Lucas were courageous and able

enough to stay a while at the wickets, but they had not the daring to risk a shot over the heads of tho grim men

who surrounded them. It was the Australians who finally took the risk ot

purposely misfielding a ball so that the batsmen might change ends, and SpofForth immediately bowled Lyttelton, which was the beginning of tho end.

TRUMPER’S FORLORN HOPE. Many a time since have individual champions among the Australians, with control which almost suggested that they were callous, manifested the same calculated daring in times of crisis, and won out of tight corners. Sydney folk will readily recall Thumper's glorious knock of 185 not otit in 1903, when Australia Had faced a deficit of 383. Tlie remarkable feature of the innings was that the incomparable Victor played the bowling with ease and mastery that did not suggest that he was leading a forlorn hope. In that respect Trumper resembles his famous protagonist Clem Hill, whose two greatest innings each won a test match. On the first occasion, at

Ivlelhourne, in 1898, when still in his teens, and six of our leading batsmen had fallen for only 57 runs, he made the bowling look as simple as that of schoolboys, until at the end of the afternoon lie was 182 not out. THE SICK MAN’S TRIUMPH.

Possibly the most extraordinary individual batting performance in all the test matches was that of Hill at Adelaids, in 1908, when he left a sick bed and lay on the floor of the dressing room hoping that lie would not be needed, until, in our second innings, eight wickets were down for 161, and our two totals combined had not yet

reached England’s first. Then the

left-hander staggered out in scorching Adelaide heat and, although lie fre-

quently vomited on the field between the overs, defied tlio bowlers, Barnes included, until, when stumps were drawn, lie had notched 108, and the total had reached 311 for eight wickets —it. subsequently went to 506, and Australia won by 245. For indomitable courage, combined with amr/ung skill, that feat is difficult to parallel.

Not nil the fights against odds ended in victories; but one notable drawn game was almost as good as a "in, for it enabled the Australians, who had already one victory on the slate, to take the rubber that season in England. That was the time .at Manchester when we wore 176 in arrears an tlie first innings, and with no chance of winning outright. Mr A. Noble liattcd for over eight hours while the Lancashire crowd whistled the “Dead March.”

Another famous match was played at Manchester in 1902, when the Australians once more secured a relentless grip and won by three runs—the closest win in all the series of tests. SPLENDID ENGLISH FlOH^ It is undeniable that England lias figured as the winner in fewer games that have had thrilling finishes. Many Sydney people will recall one in 1894 when, after rain during the night had ruined the pitch, our men were mown down by Peel and P. iegs and beaten by 10 runs. And they had scored 586 in their first knock!

Englishmen remember with pardonably pride one match played at Konningtou Oval in 1902, in which, after being 141 behind on the first innings, and a poor start in the second, Jessop, taking his courage in both hands, and hitting like a whirlwind, banged together 104 in seventy-five minutes, alter which Hirst and Rhodes dug in, kept tlie howlers at bay, and gradually, chiefly with singles, made the necessary runs, and tlius alter twenty years, wiped away some of the hitter memories of the defeat at the Oval hv 7 runs. It was at kennington Oval, too, in 1890, that England won by two wickets after a fight which, in many respects, resembled that of 1882. A striking difference was that misfielding by an Australian finally decided the issue of a game which otherwise tlie magnificent howling of Turner and Ferl'is might have won on the post. Of course, Englishmen, and Australians, too, collectively and individually have to their credit many other n -table feats in test matches, but none quite so dramatic as those that have been mentioned.