INQUEST ON THE ASHES

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1059, 25 August 1930, Page 9

INQUEST ON THE ASHES

CRITICS TELL ENGLAND WHY SHE LOST BETTER SIDE WON United P.,1. — By Telegraph—Copyright LONDON, Saturday. Commenting on Ihe result of the Test match rubber “The Times” says: “Neither England nor Australia produced bowlers sufficiently good to force victory within a reasonable time. Woodfull, both on and off the field, is a great captain.” The “Daily Telegraph” says: “Ham- , mond and Leyland were disappoint- j meats. Larwood and Tate definitely j failed. The dropping of Chapman [ was most unfortunate.” The “Daily Herald” says: “Nobody will grudge Australia -the fullest credit for the victory. Wyatt and his men were fairly beaten.” Mr. Trevor Wignall, in the “Daily Express,” says: “The first to be sacked should be the Selection Committee. Thereafter we should recognise that the day of our veterans is done.” KING’S MESSAGE Mr. P. W. Warner, in the “Morning Post,” says: "We have no excuses. The better side won. The Australians have always appeared on top since the last day of the first match at Trent Bridge when Bradman began his long series of wonderful innings. Woodfull is the most popular captain Australia ever sent -to England, which must follow Australia’s example and select a new side.” The King telegraphed his congratulations to the Australians on winning the Ashes, but their manager, Mr. W. L. Kelly, stated that he preferred that the text of the message should not be made public. WOODFUL RETICENT Woodfull, questioned regarding rumours of his retirement, said he preferred to make no statement at present. He would definitely play in Ryder’s benefit match. The Sydney newspapers devote considerable space to the Australians* recovery of the Ashes. M. A. Noble writes: “The team undoubtedly asserted its superiority over the Englishmen in this series and it is quite evident that the future is assured.” Noble says he expects England’s side in 1932 for Australia to be quite different and that as in Australia youth will predominate. THE AVERAGES The following are the Test match averages:— AUSTRALIA

INNINGS VICTORIES EIGHTEEN ON RECORD THIRTEEN TO ENGLAND Australia’s innings win is but the fifth victory she has scored by I that margin in the whole history ! of the England-Australia test series. The Australians won first by an j innings and 147 runs at Sydney In j 1594-5. Australia scored 284 and | England replied with 65 and 72. i In 1597-S at Melbourne, Australia ! again won by an innings and 55 runs, scoring 520 to which England replied with 315 and 150. In the same series at Adelaide, Australia won by an innings and 13 runs, scoring 573 as against 278 and 282. Her next overwhelming win by an Innings or over did not come till the 1920-21 series in i Australia, when at Melbourne AusI tralia scored 199, and as England could j only muster with 251 and 157, the Cornstalks won by an innings and 91 I runs. i That was also her last innings win I till the one now registered at the Oval. England has had 13 victories by an ( innings or more in the test series, ; more than twice Australia’s number, i The first was at Melbourne in 1882-3. England scored 294 and Australia col- | lapsed in both innings, totalling only ill 1 and 152. Thus England got home by an innings and 27 runs. THE BIGGEST WIN England scored a win by an innings and 5 runs at Lord’s again in 1884. She scored 379 and Australia’s reply was 229 and 145. At Melbourne in 1884-5 England won by an innings and 9S runs, scoring 386 against Australia’s 163 and 125. In ISB6, at the Oval. England won by the second biggest margin on record, an innings and 217. To her score of 434 Australia replied with 68 and 149. At Lord’s in the same series she won by an innings and 106. In ISSB at the Oval, England scored by an innings ad 137, scoring 317 to

which Australia replied with SO and 100. At Manchester during the same series, England won by an innings and 21 runs. Australia scored 81 and 70 in answer to the Home country’s 172. What must rank as the biggest win in the whole history of the test series was scored by England at Adelaide in 1891-2. England ran up 499 and Australia could only raise 100 and 169, leaving England the winner by an innings and 230 England’s next innings victory was at the Kennington Oval in 1893. England scored 453. Australia’s first innings yielded but 91, and even after a splendid recovery in the second in which she scored 349, Australia went under by the innings and 43 runs as well. In 1901-2 at Sydney, England won by an innings and 124, and at Manchester in 1905 she got home by an innings and SO runs. England scored another overwhelming victory at Melbourne in 1911-12. She scored 559 in a single innings, and as Australia was dismissed for 191 and 173 respectively, England won by the innings and 225 runs. England’s last big victory was at Melbourne in 1924-5. She scored 54S and Australia was out for 269 and 250, leaving England victorious by the innings and 29 runs. “The Australians deserved to win the ashes on their play in the final test; I congratulate them,” remarked H. D. Leveson Gower. ‘‘The better side won,” said Lord Harris. “Bradman is a cricket phenomenon.” MATCH AT BRISTOL AUSTRALIAN CRICKETERS WIN THE TOSS HOME TEAM OUT FOR 72 LONDON, Saturday. The Australian cricketers today be* fan a three days’ match against Gloucestershire at Bristol. Rain greatly delayed the start. There was enormous interest in the game. Thousands of people waited outside the ground for hours in spite of the fact that there seemed to be only a remote possibility of any play. Late in the afternoon about 8,000 people were admitted when the gates were opened. Torrential rain yesterday had left the ground very drenched, though there was a drying wind all the morning. Woodfull, Wall, Oldfield and Fairfax stood out of the Australian team. Winning the toss from Beverley Lyon, the visitors’ vice-captain, Richardson, sent Gloucestershire in on the bad wicket. This was the first time this action had been taken on the tour. Four wickets fell in little more than an hour for 32 runs. The ex-Xew Zealaider, Dacre, having completed his residential qualifications and beius now a regular Gloucestershire professional, was played in this match. He gave a’Beckett an easy catch. TRICKY WIND A strong wind caused the ball to play tricks. The remaining batsmen repeatedly failed to connect. Parker was wrarmly cheered, the crowd sympathising with his exclusion from the Test team. The innings closed for 72 runs, the second lowest against Australia on the tour. It ended in 139 minutes and stumps were drawn. Every thing had favoured the bowlers. Not even Hammond had batted confidently. Details of the score are: GLOUCESTERSHIRE First Innings FT I’PER. c Richardson, b Hurwood 1 STNFIEED. c Walker, b Hurwood . 1 HAJIMOND, c a’Beekett, b Hornibrook 37 E. LYON, b Hurwood 5 SMITH, c Richardson, b Hornihrook !♦; DACRE. c a'Beckett, b Grimmett . . I SEABROOK, c and b Grimmett .. .. ]!> XEALE. c Walker, b Hornibrook . . 2 BARNETT, b Hornibrook 2 GODDARD, c Kippax, b Hornibrook PARKER, not out *» Extras 2 Total 72 Bowling: a’Beckett, 0-9: Hurwood. 3-13; Grimmett. 2-28: Hornibrook, 5-20.

BATTING . N.O. H.S. Runs. Av. V — 334 9.4 139.14 1 155 345 57.50 0 — 110 7 1 S3 329 54.S3 2 51* 1 54 1 Richardson . — 37 Oldfield 6 1 43* 5 — 50 SO 16.00 1 7 5 2 S* The asterisk indicates not out. BOWLING Runs. Wickets. Average . 221 S . 335 12 . 025 20 31.S9 Hornibrook . 471 13 Wall . 593 1 3 A’Beckett 6H 1 Bradman 1 0 — ENGLAND BATTING Runs. Av. Sutcliffe 2 3 61 436 87.20 Duleepsinhji 7 Chapman . c> — 121 259 43.16 — 64 . A 2 50* . f — 113 . — 78 1 23* Allen • ? ~7 44 60 30.00 103 25.75 . s — 54 . A — 41 1 19 * 2 33 — 13 Tvldesley Nichols The asterisk indicates not out. BOWLING Runs. Wickets. Average. 33 2 16.50 49 2 24.50 Tvldesley . 234 7 Robins Tate . 574 15 . 354 9 3S.26 39.33 White Wyatt Hammond 3 4xrwood 58 1 . 302 5 . 292 4 95 1 58.00 60.40 73.00 95.00 Woolley Leyland . 95 0 Allen