SECOND TEST.

Taranaki Daily News, 3 January 1921, Page 5

SECOND TEST.

•AUSTRALIA v. ENGLAND. FIRST DAY’S PLAY. AUSTRALIA AT THE WICKETS. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Received Dec. 31, 7.30 p.m. Melbourne, Dec. 31. The weather and the wicket were perfect for the second test match; tremendous interest is being displayed, and there was a record attendance for the first day. Armstrong won the toss for the second time, and sent Collins and fiards - ley in to face the bowling of Howell and Douglas. Collins shaped poorly for the first few strokes, and was missed by Rhodes off Howell’s fifth ball. He later had a lucky let off in the slips off Howell. Runs came slowly, and with the score at 32 for no wickets Douglas sent Parkin on in place of Howell, and Douglas gave way to Hearne when the score was 37. Runs came slowly from each end, the first fifty being reached in fifty-two minutes. Both batsmen were treating the bowlers with ease. Parkin bowled a wide, and Makepeace saved several runs by good fielding. Woolley was sent on to replace Hearne, when the score was 71, and bowled a maiden over. Howtll again replaced Parkin, but without much effect on the batsmen, who played out time until lunch, when the score was 85 for no wickets.

On play being resumed the crowd had increased to thousands. Howell resumed bowling, and Woolley twice bowled a “no ball”, the second of which Collins hit for three. Bardsley was cheered for several fine strokes off Howell.

Collins was then caught by Hearne, and Park was bowled bv Howell’s first ball.

Taylor joined Bardsley, and when the score was 118 Bardsley was caught by Strudwick off Woolley, his score being

Taylor opened with a single off Howell, and then hit Woolley for four to leg. Parkin resumed bowling. He took time to arrange his field, whereupon Taylor clouted his next ball to the leg side for i four, no fielder being there. Taylor, continued to bat freely, and Douglas resumed bowling with the score at 176 for three wickets, while Hearne replaced Parkin. When the score was 194, Armstrong was given out leg before to Dftuglas after he had been at the wicket for sixty-one minutes for his 39. Taylor was giving a great exhibition of strokes, and reached his fifty, amidst cheering, in ninety minutes. Kelleway was caught behind the wickets through giving an easy -chance to Strudwick, which was gladly accepted. Pellew, the only South Australian representative in the team, began timidly, but played some nice strokes. A little later Taylor, after being 130 minutes "at the wickets, was caught by Woolley off Parkin. Ryder received a great ovation on going to the wickets, and he took no risk of being run out as in the previous test. Play now became uninteresting, with the scoring slow, Ryder showing no signs of dash, but Pellew, in response to encouragement from the spectators, began to hit out and pleased them by bringing his score up to 25. Hearne again took up the bowling and runs came slowly. Ryder continued to show an unusual amount of caution in running between the wickets. Rhodes was brought on to bowl for the final over, and sent down a maiden.

SECOND DAY’S PLAY. .AUSTRALIA OUT FOR 499. TWO CENTURIES MADE. Received Jan. 2, 5.5 p.m. Melbourne, Jan. 2. The test match was continued yesterday, when Pellew and Ryder resumed the Australian innings to the bowling of Douglas and Howell. Both began slowly, taking very little risk. After making thirteen Ryder was caught by Woolley, off Douglas. Gregory followed and received a tremendous reception. He pleased the spectators by very bright batting, cheers greeting almost every stroke. Pellew brought 300 on the board by a beautiful drive off Douglas, after 299 minutes’ play. Pellew reached his 50 in ninetyfour minutes. At 7 wickets for 323 Woolley came on in place of Douglas, and Parkin in place of Howell, but both batsmen continued to play the bowling with ease. Pellew caused the crowd, to cheer for several seconds for a great hit off Parkin, for which the batsmen ran five. Douglas was troubled by the batsmen becoming set, and brought on Rhodes in place of Parkin, but the change had no effect on the batsmen. Pellew passed Taylor’s score with a beautiful four off Rhodes. Douglas again changed the bowlers, bringing Howell on and trying Rhodes from the other end. Pellew caused 400 to appear on the board after 366 minutes’ play. At the lunch adjournment the score was 7 for 404, Pellew then being 95 and Gregory 59. When play was resumed Gregory opened up to Douglas, and sent him hard for four. Howell was again tried without success. Tremendous cheering greeted Pellew when he reached 100, which he made in 168 minutes, the crowd urging him to go on and make “Burke’s quids”, referring to an offer by Mr. T. M, Burke of £1 for each run over a hundren.

Woolley and Parkin went on again at 7 for 432, both batsmen going strong and showing no signs of fear. Pellew was hitting out briskly, seventeen being scored off Parkin’s over. When Pellew reached 116, after 181 minutes at the wickets, he was bowled by Parkin. A great ovation, worthy of his effort, greeted him on his return to the pavilion. The Pellew-Gregory partnership had contributed 173 runs to the innings. Oldfield joined Gregory, who still -continued to score freely, and eventually reached his century, but. after being at the wfc’kets’for 125 minutes he appeared to tire, and hit one from Woolley and was caught by Russell. It was a great innings, and the .crowd showed their appreciation by cheering .him all the way from the wickets. Mailey, the last man in, kept going steadily with Oldfield. When the score had reached 499. in 448 minutes, Oldfield hit on-' back to Rhodes, who ac-. & uud tha innings closed..

Hobbs and Rhodes opened for England against Gregory and Kelleway, and gave a very poor display. Gregory, although tired after his great effort, was sending down some good stuff, and bowled Rhodes when he had made seven. Makepeace joined Hobbs, but was given out, leg before, to Armstrong when his score stood at 4.

Hendren followed, and the- crowd at once urged hiih to hit out, but Armstrong was bowling with a fine length, keeping both batsmen quiet. Hobbs hit one and was caught, but the umpire had already called “no ball”. Both men continued to play cautiously until stumps were drawn, when the score stood at 2 wickets for 93 runs. The attendance was estimated at 36,000, and the takings were £2986. Details: AUSTRALIA.’ First Innings. Collins, c Hearne, b Howell 64 Bardsley, c Strudwick, b .. 51 Park, b Howell - 0 Taylor, c Woolley, b Parkin ...... 68 Armstrong, lbw, b Douglas 39 Kelleway, c Strudwick, b Howell ... 9 Pellew, b Parkin 116 ftyder, c Woolley, b Douglas 13 Gregory, c Russell, b Woolley 100 Oldfield, c and b Rhodes 24 Mailey, not out 8 Extras 7 Total 499 Bowling analysis: Howell, 3 for 142; Douglas, 2 for 83; Parkin, 2 for 116; Hearne, 0 for 38; Woolley, 2 for 87: Rhodes, 1 for 36. The wickets fell as follows: 1 for 116; 2 for 116; 3 for 118; 4 for 194; 5 for 220; 6 for 251; 7 for 282; 8 for 455; 9 for 469; 10 for 499. ENGLAND. First Innings. Hobbs, not out 53 Rhodes, b Gregory 7 Makepeace, lbw, b Armstrong 4 Hendren, not out 29 Total for two wickets 93 —Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn. FIRST DAY COMMENTS. VIEWS OF'SYDNEY PAPERS. Received Jan. 1, 7.5 p.m. Sydney, Jan. 1. The Daily Telegraph, commenting on yesterday’s cricket, says the play on the whole was dull. The batsmen, excepting Taylor and Bardsley, .took no advantage of the fast wicket. The Australians were lucky in the Englishmen missing several chances. The Herald says the day’s play provided keen cricket—cricket punctuated by stirring individual successes, with contrasts in style and frequent fluctuations of fortune. England's poor display in slip fielding was the only blemish on a fine day’s cricket.—Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.

INTEREST IN ENGLAND. STRONGER HOPE IN VICTORY. “BARRACKING’- CONTROVERSY RENEWED. Received Jani 1, 5.5 p.m. London, Dec. 31 The test match is overshadowing all other themes of interest in England. Commentators agree that the English team is strengthened, though they regret the loss of Hitch’s services as fieldsman. The cautiousness of Australia’s batting is regarded as a tribute to England's strengthened attack. The Pall Mall Gazette says that Howell’s inclusion is already justified. A feeling of hopefulness permeates the comments, partly due to batsmen’s lucky escapes at the hands of fieldsmen. The Manchester Guardian says England has no reason for despondency, and still believes her batsmen, despite the Sydney match, better than Australians. Much is being made of the barracking incidents, and the general feeling is that some English players arc unduly sensitive. The Daily Mail says the onlookers’ frank, sometimes uncomplimentary remarks are really harmless. Barracking springs from excitement and sensitive players should remember that if cricket and football did npt arouse enthusiasm among the onlookers they would, not keep alive. The Daily Express states all good sportsmen deplore barracking, or rather, the necessity therefor. Barracking, as practised throughout Australia, is unpleasant and undesirable; it is a crime against the laws of sport, because it upsets the visitors and affects their play. The Daily Herald, on the other hand, says the amazing decision is most difficult to understand. The trouble at Bendigo was the direct outcome of the offensive criticism of Wilson, followed by satirical booing; he was really the sole cause of the unpleasantness. The paper suggests players should not be allowed -criticisms in the Press.

The Daily Mail states it is difficult to understand the decision regarding special constables, as barracking in the first test was infrequent and inoffensive. The paper predicts a riot On the Melbourne ground if action is taken by specials. The Morning Leader says it is a pity any of our team should have allowed barracking at Bendigo, and so set their nerves as to require specials. Sporting Life says that apart from winning one thing we desire is that those of our players cabling messages to England should refrain from criticism that will lead to the undesirable incidents witnessed in the last game, when Wilson was the recipient of considerable barracking. It is not a good thing for English cricket, and is not conducive to friendly rivalry.—Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.

MORE ENGLISH COMMENTS. OBJECTION TO PRESS CONTROVERSY. WORD WRONGLY INTERPRETED. Received Jan. 2, 5.5 p.m. London, Jan. 1. The opinion in cricketing circles in Britain is that the exchange of cablegrams commenting on episodes apart from the actual game is doing great harm. It would be better if the struggle for rhe ashes were fought out on the cricket field rather than in the columns of the newspapers. Thus it has been announced in London that it has been cabled to Australia that London was plastered with contents bills announcing nnline protection for test plwera. This

is manifestly false. As a fact a single edition of one evening paper issued an absurdly misleading placard, despite the fact that Douglas’s cabled interview says a mountain was made out of a molehin. In regard to barracking, Sporting Life to-day publishes an anonymous letter from the Naval and Military Club. The writer claims to have seen as many test matches as any man alive, and goes on: “I had hoped to have seen some commentary by an official body on the behaviour of our team in Australia. Bar' racking conveys an entirely erroneous impression to our ears. The Australian barl-ackers are amusing, and absolutely impartial; either side gets it in the neck. The Australian crowd’s knowledge of cricket is on a far higher plane than either that of the Oval or Leyton, and I cannot credit Armstrong or any of the Australian Press permitting such cables to be sent home discrediting our captain and others, without a very grave suspicion of truth in these statements.” The letter* ends: “Marylebone are responsible for this team, and however drastic action it may take this will meet with the approbation and support of all lovers of cricket as it should be played. Let our side come back defeated, but not disgraced.” Commenting on yesterday’s play, the Morning Post says that on a perfect Melbourne wicket the Australian total on Friday is nothing to be afraid of. The paper regrets the non-inclusion of Wilson, who kept a length as perfect as any bowler since Alfred Shaw, in addition to being a batsman of no mean capacity.—Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn. w THE .BENDIGO INCIDENT. REASON FOR THE “BARRACKING” STEPS TO PREVENT REPETITION. Received San. 1, 7.5 p.m. Melbourne, Jan. 1. The Board of Control’s decision to employ special constables was to some extent the outcome of the barracking the Englishmen received during the Bendigo match. The crowd was specially demonstrative against the vice-captain, Wilson, resenting some of his cables to the English newspapers. As a result of complaints by Douglas and Wilson, steps were taken by the Mayor and the Cricket Association to have barracking suppressed on the second day. The incident was revived by a Press statement that Wilson told the Mayor that he would endeavor to prevent future English teams visiting Bendigo. Wilson declares that he said that unless the authorities attempted to stop barracking they could not expect an English team to wish another visit to Bendigo The Mayor and the president of the Cricket Association adhere to their statement that Wilson said Marylebone would in future delete Bendigo owing to the way he had been treated. —Aus. and N.Z. Cable Aa»n. (