CRICKET.

Putaruru Press, Volume VI, Issue 230, 29 March 1928, Page 8

CRICKET.

THE FIRST TEST. Some Impressions. The first test match was noteworthy for the great innings of Woodfull. Winning the toss to bat on an easy wicket, with the exception that every now and then the ball kept low, the Australians proceeded to “ dig ” themselves in. It was the typical Australian tactics. Those two great batsmen, Ponsford and Woodfull, probably the greatest pair of opening batsmen in the world, played themselves in and were never in trouble. Once a misunderstanding between them should have allowed Ponsford to be run out. It looked as if records were going to be broken, ui-.il in trying a glide to leg Ponsford gave Lowry a chanee at the wickets.

Woodfull is not an impressive batsman. He is not brilliant. He has no wrist shots and his strokes lack the force that mark the timing of Kippax, Ponsford or Richardson. At first one wonders how he achieved his reputation. But as he goes on batting and his game is studied it is seen that he is an example of the great cricket axiom “ keep your wicket up and the runs, will come.” Woodfull never lifts a ball—nothing but carpet strokes. His forward shot is not pretty. It is between a scoop and a push, and were it not for his wonderful footwork he would be unable to keep the ball down. His two principal scoring strokes are a pull or a forcing shot past mid-on and one past cover.- His placing was uncanny. No matter how the field was placed he got the ball through the cordon. Batting with a straight bat, he has a great defence and marvellous patience. It was not until the end of the first day, when the New Zealand bowlers and fieldsmen were tired, that he opened out at all. On the second day he forced the game and it was because of this he lost his wicket.

Ponsford is a better stylist than Woodfull. He follows his shots through better and gets more power into his strokes. He is not nearly so strong on the on side as Woodfull, but he has a greater variety of strokes on the off. The diminutive South Australian, Schneider, did not please the “ terracers.” When he joined Woodfull he proceeded to play himself in and refused to be hurried or drawn into traps. Towards the end of the day he opened up and showed he had plenty of strokes all round the wicket.

The public were sorry that that great stylist, Kippax, went early. When going there is no more delightful batsman to watch.

Dempster was easily the star batsman of the New Zealand side and was the most confident. Mills was very often in trouble and should have been stumped early. Hamilton, the Canterbury player, was not impressive. A left-hander, he hits hard. He was all at sea to Grimmett in the earlier stages and how his wicket remained intact was a mystery. Foley, the Wellington left-hander, batted far better than Hamilton. Lowry’s second innings was a great display of patience, restraint and determination. He played to keep his wicket up. Had he gone early it was quite on the cards that Australia would have won.

The New Zealand bowling was too steady and too much on the wicket. Most of the bowlers kept a good length hut Ponsford and Woodfull played the good balls and waited until they received one they could force. Finlayson, a medium-paced left-hand bowler with a fine length, bowled over the wicket on the leg pin. He kept the Australians quiet but he never appeared to be dangerous. Had he bowled round the wicket, outside the off stump and going away with the left-hander’s natural break, there was a chance of a batsman feeling for a ball. The one bowler who looked like getting a wicket was Badcock, who was npt afraid to give a few runs away to try a trap. Read bowled the leg theory well. Merritt kept a better length than usual but was riot troublesome. Gallichan, who was picked as a bowler, was never tried. The great les&on the New Zealand batsmen have to learn is to use their feet. The difference between the two sides was that the Australians made the length of the ball suit themselves, while the New Zealanders played the ball as the bowler chose to bowl it. Woodfull, Ponsford and Schneider were continually making good-length balls into half volleys by jumping forward to them. The Australians’ bowling was not nearly so impressive as their batting. If this is the best Australian attack then the chances of regaining the

ashes do not appear very rosy. Morton does not impress one as a great fast bowler. McNamee bowled better than Blackie, whose length was erratic at times. McNamee was very steady and very accurate and sometimes made a lot of pace from the pitch. Grimmett is always an unknown quantity. The batsman never knows when he will receive a “ hummer.” That was Badeock’s experience. He was bowled with a “ wrong ’un,” pitched on or just outside the off stump with a leg break action but nipping back and taking the centre pin. The New Zealand team for the second test is strengthened. The absence of a good wicketkeeper was noticed on Saturday. Lowry, who has had little practice this year, did well, but he is not equal to James or Rowntree.