CRICKET

Hokitika Guardian, 30 September 1930, Page 5

CRICKET

CRICKET SELECTION

(United Press Association—By Electrio Telegraph.—Copyright.)

LONDON, Sept. 29

“Plum’’ Warner in a hook “Eight For Ashes, 1930,” which has just been published, says t(iere is no need for despondency about English cricket. He suggests the eleven for the 1932 tour on which •England mustconcentrate immediately is:—Dulc-ep-siuliji, Hammond, Sutcliffe, Wyatt, Ley land, Ames. Allom, Peebles, Robins, Allen and Crawley. The Book deals exhaustively with every first class matter in which the Australians were engaged, in addition t-o tests, much of which was prepared from the ‘Morning Post” from which extracts were cabled to New Zealand during the tour. He pays mellowing tributes to Woodfull’s captaincy and personality. “There was never more popular or better liked Australian captain in England. His characteristic walk, charming smile and general demeanour made a friendship legion. Tt is impossible to imagine a nicer captain. He was one for whom the eleven would do anything.

Summing up individuals other than Bradman and Crimmett, whom he lengthily praises, lie says that Kippax is the most stylish of the team. McCabe is the finest straight driver and is g-oing to be a, great batsman. Jackson was somewhat. disappointing here, hut genius is inherited in him. Fairfax is one of the best all rounders. He lias a lovely howling action and is more difficult to dismiss from the wicket, had a beautiful action and length, which is not always what is expected from a left hander.

Oldfield is the greatest wicket keeper in the world while Abeckctt is a great fieldsman. His fielding on the whole was good,' without being exceptional. His slip fielding is a weak point.

AAhirner approves of four clay tests and a limitless fifth, if necessary. The covering of wickets before the start, he says, places an over great premium on the tests and makes the game too artificial. It destroys somewhat, the elemnet of uncertainty.

He deplores the attack on' selectors by certain writers who appear to have lost all sense of proportion. Such misguided criticism lowers the dignity of the press which in the past has done a great deal for crickets .Unfortunately cricket is in grave danger of being “stunted”. Tt upset cricketers, when tney find, if they miss a catch or make a duck that they'are treated ,as though they had lost the Empire, > "Summing of personalities, Warner discussed Chapman’s captaincy. In the first test, no captain could have done better. There was a marked falling off at Lords, though at Leeds he was himself again. At Old Trafford his captaincy dropped sixty per cent, below his first test standard. “It is difficult to account for the variation. I am indeed at a complete loss to explain it. Chapman seemed to have lost his tactical sense and did not associate himself mentally and physically with the bowlers.”

The writer proceeds to criticise Chapman’s interview with a newspaper when he was dropped. “I fancy everyone regretted it, no one more so than Chapman, when his feelings had cooled down.”

Subsequently Chapman wrote for the same newspaper “a fair temperate description of tests” hut one had the impression that he was being used as a stunt, a position which his best friends deprecated sincerely. That the office of captaincy of English cricket suffered momentarily some loss of dignity and prestige, cannot be doubted. He regrets Wyatt’s ill luck in hawing Duckworth off form, and concludes that if Duckworth had caught one or at anyrate two or the three catches England might, have won the the match.