THE ENGLISH TEAM.

Hokitika Guardian, 1 November 1924, Page 4

THE ENGLISH TEAM.

“NEW PACES” IN AUSTRALIA PERFORMANCES AND PROSPECTS.

(By L. O. S. Poidevin in Sydney “ Herald.”) Interest in the prospects of the coining English team regaining the ashes is wonderfully keen amongst all sections of the cricket community. Not for a long time has the advent of an English team caused such wide-spread enthusiasm and such prophetic anticipation. The truth seems to be that though, the team comes with the very best of cricket credentials, it is a very difficult problem for several reasons to estimate its prospects. One of the principal reasons, no doubt, is the laet that the party includes no fewer than eight players new to Australian conditions, and a great deal must necessarily depend upon the manner in which these players settle down and adapt their skill to the altered conditions of the play. The players in this party who have not previously visited Australia are A. Saiidham (Surrey), 11. Sutcliffe (Yorkshire), AY. Whysall (Notts), M. AY. Tate (Sussex), R. Kilner (Yorkshire), A. E. R. Gilligan (Sussex), .T. L. Bryant (Kent), and R. Tyldesle.v (Lancashire). Of these all are “professionals " excepting Gilligan and Bryan, and they are all cricketers of considerable experience in the firstclass arena. Sutcliffe. Sandliani. AA’livsall, and Bryan, for instance, are batsmen with high-class performances to recommend them. 11. SUTCLIFFE AND A. SAN DM AM Sutcliire lias made bis ‘‘thousand” runs for Yorkshire for several seasons; indeed, be lias exceeded ”(100 runs in each of his last three seasons. A watchful, solid type of batsman, lie opens the hatting for his county, and in the recent series of tests against South Africa proved a splendid opening partner for llobbs. One of the special features of these partnerships was the busy methods of both batsmen, and their entertaining running between the wickets, which is said to have been reminiscent of the TriunpeiI>nlf nr the llill-Gregory pariiicrships. I) Sutrlilfo ami llobbs should succeed in anything like the same manner against our cricketers as they did against the South Africans, it will provide a pretty tough problem for mu bowling. In this respect the English team is fortunate in having in Sandlinm. another very capable opening partner for Hobbs. Saiidham is a solid yet forceful batsman, who invariably opens the innings for Surrey also in partnership with llobbs, and it is very interesting to note the similarity of their results last season. Sandliani 2082 runs at of).-IS per innings, Hobbs 2001 runs at 08.10 per innings. Til the matter of performance, they were the two leading batsmen of the English season. Sandliani, though not wellknown to Australians, is a seasoned cricketer, 31 years of age, with a long list of hatting successes—and a “penchant” for getting out l.h.w. Twice ho played against the howling of the 1021 Austraian team, and he was successful mi each occasion ; indeed, it was his fine hatting for 50 and 50 in the last match of the tour at Scarborough which had a good deal to do with the defeat administered to our team. Sandliani and Sutcliffe are both nf the sound persevering type of batsmen likely to stieeced on our good wickets.

A SURPRISE. AY. AVhysall, as the wicket-keeping understudy to Strudwick, notwithstanding his batting ability, is somewhat of a surprise selection. AA'ith a party consisting of eleven players, it would seem that the next best wicketkeeper in England, to Strudwick, quite irrespective of any other accomplishments, should have been chosen. It is peculiar that neither of (be “keepers” chosen for the “big” match in England last season—Gentlemen v Players, at Lords—found a place in the touring side. In this match, which always represents the best cricketing talent in England. Duckworth kept wickets for the “professionals” (nine of whose eleven were selected for the Australian tour), and Lyon for the “amateurs.” AA’bysall, however, may be a better wicket-keeper than would appear to be the ease. He plays in the same county team with Oates, who lias for a long time been one of England's best ’keepers, so there lias been little* need for hint to go behind since his batting keeps him always in (lie team. At all events lie is a very successful batsman. Tie made his first appearance fur Nottinghamshire in 1910, playing for the second eleven. llis best performance that season is worth recording, it was tho making of TOO and 73 in a match against Staffordshire, whose team included S. F. Barnes, England’s great international bowler, who has taken more Australian wickets in Test cricket than any other bowler. Whysall commenced batting on this occasion in a very confident way, and at the end of a few overs his partner asked him if lie knew who it was lie was hitting about so unceremoniously. He replied that “he didn’t,” and when told it was Barnes, added that “he had never heard of him.” lie went on his way quite unimpressed, and continued knocking Barnes all over the field until he had scored a very brilliant century innings, which won him a place in the first eleven. In the following season lie had the misfortune to break one of his logs, and for some time subsequently he seemed to have dropped right out of cricket altogether. However, a couple of seasons later his chance came again, curiously enough, through his wicket-keeping, when lie was called upon to keep wicket in a few matches, Oates being injured; lie at once made good again with the bat, and on the return of Oates lie kept his place in.

the side without any difficulty. In each of his last four seasons lie has made well over 1000 runs for Nottinghamshire ; indeed, last season in England he was the first batsman to do so. In one match ngaint Kent, going in first, ho carried his bat right through the innings for 109 not out, with George Omni, the stylish batsman so well remembered here, lie lias participated in a considerable number of opening partnerships of over 100 runs, and there can be no doubt tlmt bis game lias benefitted and improved very much through hatting at the opposite end to Gunn. lie is a watchful and sound player, especially in his play on the oil-side, where he forces the ball very hard, and makes a majority of bis runs, and lie is also very strong in his driving. He should he a very useful member of this team. BRYAN—LEFT-HAND BATSMAN. ,1. L. Bryan, one of the younger members of the party (28 years of age) is a left-handed batsman, sound in defence, but possessed of good scoring ability to make runs quickly if the occasion demands it. He learnt the rudiments of bis crckct at Rugby, where Rev E. F. AA'addv is a master, and lie bad n successful career at Cambridge University, which lie has followed up in county cricket oil behalf of Kent, lie does not annually reach the high aggregates of some of the others because being all amateur, lie is unable to plav regularly throughout the season, hut he is usually well tip amongst the hatting averages. His highest aggregate in county cricket was 1858 runs in 1921 for 10 innings, with a highest score of 231 against Surrey, and an average of 50.21 per innings. He is also an opening batsman, and, being left-handed, lie is very useful in that position in taking the hostile “swingers” of the right-handed howlers with the new hall—which are relatively easy to him—and thus protecting the right-handed batsmen at the start of the innings. lie should he one of the attractive batsmen of tho party; in addition lie is an exceptionally good fieldsman, ns are also Sutclifi'e and Saiidham. GILLIGAN AND TATE.

Two of the most interesting personalities undoubtedly will he A. E. R. Giulignn, tho captain, and Maurice Tate. The former will lie faced with many difficult problems during the season both on and off the field. He is young (29 years of age), enthusiastic, optimistic, and popular, hut it will lie a great trial for him to lead an English team such as this on his first trip to Aiitrnlia, and a groat triumph if lie is successful. AA’itli the hat lie is a courageous performer likely to make his 50 in any game; lie is a magnificent fieldsman on the oll'-side, hut it is as a howler, perhaps, that he will attract most attention. He is not altogether a fast howler, coming rather under the category of fastish medium, I>nt lie seems likely to be very good—in something the same way that Barnes was—under Australian conditions (which call especially for good length, perseverance, and a dash of swerve). Maurice Tate, with his med-ium-paced deliveries, appears also to fulfil these hitter conditions very well ; lie is said to impart quite a lot of spin which makes the hall “fizz” oil the pitch must faster than appears likely, and which always spells hostility on our fast pitches. Together these two have been extraordinarily successful during the past season for Sussex, and ns the opening pair for England, hi lhe first Test match against South Africans they completely routed tin* side in the first innings, Gilligan taking six wickets (live clean howled and one 1.b.w.) lor 7 rims, while late secured four wickets (three clean bowled) lor 1” runs—and this on a good wicket. Between them they also captured all the wickets in (lie second innings—live for 85 and four for 103 respectively. In tin' English season just, closed Tate secured 205 wickets at an average cost of 13.71 runs nor wicket, and Gilligan.

who missed liinnv wickets owing t» injuries. 103 nickels ;ii an average cnsl of 19.30 per nickel. Undoubtedly they are a line pair of bowlers, and, tliougb we can hardly expect them to achieve the results of that famous pair Barnes ami Foster, it seems quite certain that their success or otherwise oil this lour will provide one of the principal factors in tin* solution of the problem as to whether England or Australia will win tfio ashes.