TEST BATSMEN

Hokitika Guardian, 5 January 1932, Page 3

TEST BATSMEN

VIEWS OF ENGLISH CRITIC. BRADMAN AND DEMPSTER. LONDON, Nov. 10. Mr Trevor Wignall in his “Daily Sportl’ight” column of the “Daily Express,” to-day has a good deal to say about cricket and cricketers. “Whether Don Bradman is the greatest batsman in the world,” lie writes, “is bound to he a matter oi opinion.”

1 do not pose as a judge (lie proceeds), hut he is decidedly the most wonderful cricketer of his age that 1 have ever watched. Some say that he has not the strokes or the polish of certain famous Englishmen, hut is this really important ? Bradman gets the runs, and in Test cricket in particular that is about the only tiling that matters. An Australian with whom I conversed on Saturday last produced the theory that young Stanley McCabe, another Australian, is superior to Bradman as a stylist and in sheer prettiness of strokes. This may be true, but 1 can s e e the contention starting another argument. McCabe was the baby of. the last Australian team, but although lie was quite a success lie did not approach Bradman for scores or as an attraction. 'There is not much difference in the ages of this couple, McCabe being slightly the younger, but a big score lie ran up against Gilbert, the aboriginal fast howler, last week, demonstrates that he is still improving. DEMPSTER’S ENCELLENCE. It should not he forgotten, however, that there is a New Zealander named Dempster who is clearly in the Bradman and McCabe class. Me was one of the b ; g hgures in English cricket last summer, and if lie were given an opportunity of playing on this side for one of t.he chief countries it is conceivable that he would jump even nearer to the very top. I was able to watch Dempster only once, for I had to leave for the United States just when lie was settling down, but he struck me as a batsman with all the known strokes, and with a method that was most excellent to watch. It is frequently stated of Australian cricketers that they were hardly more than Saturday afternoon players. This is said by way of emphasising that they do not get the same practice as Englishmen. I do not altogether agree with the assertion, but it is perfectly correct that New Zealanders are limited to what in effect are club games- The r,:se ot a man like Demster is therefore all the more significant. I think be can be counted with twelve of the best on earth. Many, I admit, would be ready to reduce this number to six. IRRITATING COMPARISONS. Two of the best of our young play ers are Bakewell and Arnold who are fairly sure to go to Australia next autumn. But I doubt we have any newcomers who as yet are quite so skilful as Bfadninn, McCabe, and Dempster. Englishmen take longer to develop than the youths of the Dominions. Bradman and McCabe were only boys when they played in the r first Tests, yet they conducted themselves like veterans. It would have required an oxph.sion beneath his feet to have rattled Bradman. I am afraid that, like other writers, ’I am sometimes inclined to compare the old with the new. It is an irritating habit, and, what is worse, it never serves much of a purpose. To attempt to comp ire. say Bradman with Jack Hobbs or Reggie Spooner is really a waste of time, lor tlie trio are as polos apart. There never will he another Hobbs, and probably never another Spooner, and by the same token it is e s.Y to guess that we are seeing the only Bradman of our lifetime. BATSMEN OF THE PAST. Writing t« the “Daily Telegraph,” Air Oscar Asclie, the well-known actor, recalls that lie saw Charles Bamtennan make 163 runs, retired hurt, in the first Test match at Melbourne, .March, 1877. As 1 was only five years old at the time (he says), I could only subscribe to tin l opinion, held by many old Australians that be was the greatest hat Australia ever produced. But I saw both Hill and Trumper in their hey-dav, and 1 saw Don Bradman hero in MO.

lie certainly did not give me the impression of a seeker alter publicity, though he quite rightly took advanage of the big fees offered him to write the story of his life, thereby incurring the displeasure of the autocratic Australian Hoard of Control. In fact, lie was very reserved even amongst his comrades. He had nearly excry stroke except the lofted drive, ft was because lie kept nearly everything on the caipct and looked so safe that he was at time slightly boring to watch. As a run-getter lie stands head and shoulders above all other Australian b'tsmen, and is, I think only approm-lied by Sutcliffe in this particular quality. Hut, close 1 your eyes and dream hack On the individual performances which have given you most pleasures and tv of style, and the figures of Triirnper and Macartney stand out clear from that fog of years.

So with English batsmen. There arc hats one remembers having watched with greater enjoyment than Herbert Sutcliffe at his best, though none lias equalled bis record. Haiiji, “T'p” Forrester, Spooner, Halairel, Woolley, George Gunn, all strike at Hu l door of memory. Headman had liis foults, which may get him into trouble when lie lias lost thill schoolboy eye. There was one bel in the last Australian eleven who was more exhilarating to watch than the Don, am! one who may prove liis equal as it run getter—.McCabe.