Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SECOND TEST.

AUSTRALIA’S EASY WIN. INNINGS AND 92 RUNS. ENGLAND’S POOR SHOWING. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Received Jan. 4, 7.50 p.m. Melbourne, Jan- 4. The weather was bright and fine for the resumption of the second test match. The attendance was fair and the wicket good- ... Australia made 199 i.i their first innings, tc which England replied with 251. V\ hen play ended yesterday England had lost five wickets in their second innings for 76. To-day Douglas and Woolley, the not out men, faced the bowling di Gregory and Collins. Douglas hit Collins well at times for four to leg, and Woolley cut Collins beautifully for four. A single by Douglas brought up the hundred in 135 minutes. Douglas was then clean bowled by Gregory, and six wickets were down for 104. Strudwick, who followed, began by a nice stroke to the off for two, from Collins. At 6 wickets for 121 runs Ryder replaced Gregory, whose average was 1 wicket for 32 runs. Strudwick then hit a brilliant four, all of which were run out. Replacing Collins, who had taken 2 wickets for 47 runs, Armstrong tempted Strudwick with the first ball, which Oldfield caught cleverly. Woolley was batting neatly, making good strokes all round the wicket, reaching 50 in 103 minutes, and the board showed 150 in 189 minutes. Parkin followed, and was caught hy Taylor near the boundary. Howell was not out, and the innings closed for 157, after 202 minutes.

Australia thus won by an innings and 92 runs. Details are. AUSTRALIA. First innings 4 99 ENGLAND. First innings 251 Second Innings. Hobbs, b Kelleway 20 Rhodes, c Collins, b Armstrong .... 28 Makepeace, c Gregory, b Armstrong 4 Hendren, c and b Collins 1 Russell c Armstrong, b Collins .... 5 Woolley, b Ryder 50 Douglas, b Gregory 9 Strudwick, c Oldfield, b Armstrong 24 Parkin, c Taylor, b Armstrong .... 9 Howell not out ’ 0 Extras 7 Total .v 137 Hearne was unable to bat. The wickets fell as follows: one for 36, 2 for 53, 4 for 58, 5 for 70, G for 104, 7 for 141, 8 for 151, 9 for 157. Bowling averages: Kelleway 1 for 24, Gregory I for 32, Armstrong 4 for 26, Collins 2 for 47, Ryder 1 for 17, Pellew 0 for 4.—Aus.-N-Z. Cable Assn. ENGLAND HEARS RESULT. ACCEPTED PHILOSOPHICALLY. AUSTRALIA’S SUPERIORITY. Received Jan. 4, 9.40 p.m. London, Jan. 4. The result of the test match ia accepted philosophically, in view of the condition of the wicket, but it is considered that the Australian position was strong before the rain fell. Some critics are disposed to blame the English side for missing catches on Friday, but the unsuspected strength of Australia, both in batting and bowling, continues to be the subject of comment. The Manchester Guardian specially draws attention to the success of the newer men—for example, Pellew, Gregory, Taylor and Collins; also OldfieL as wicket-keeper. The Daily News considers that, irrespective of the luck of the wicket, Australia has already demonstrated her superiority in all departments of the game The paper says that, after all, England sent almost the best procurable combination, and perhaps individually they are the more brilliant team on paper, but the Australians are superior work, soundness and steadiness. —Aus and N.Z. Cable Assn.

PRESS COMMENTS. Melbourne, Jan. 4. The Herald, describing Hobbs’ innings, savs: “He displayed a most admirable biend of artistry, versatility, and soundness. Seldom has a more skilful century been played in a test match.” The Telegraph, paying a glowing tribute to Gregory's bowling, expresses regret at England’s ill-luck and says: “Whilst it may be part of the game, it is in no sense of the word a test. It is to be hoped that the boot will be on the other foot next time.”—Aus-N.Z. Cable Assn. London, Jan. 3. Critics are perplexed at Douglas’ neglect of Rhodes as a bowler. They cannot explain the preference shown for Woolley over tlie man who headed the English averages in 1920. —Unfed Service. REMAINING MATCHES. January 7.—v. Ballarat. January 11. —v. Stawell. January 14—Third Test, at Adelaide. January 21. —v. Geelong. January 25.—v. Tasmania. January 28. —v. Tasmania. February 4.—v. Victoria. February 11-—Fourth Test, at Melbourne. February 18.—v. New South Wales. February 25.—Fifth Test, at Sydney. March 6—v. Albury. March 7. —v. Benell a.. March 11. —v. South Australia, at Adelaide.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19210105.2.41

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, 5 January 1921, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
725

SECOND TEST. Taranaki Daily News, 5 January 1921, Page 5

SECOND TEST. Taranaki Daily News, 5 January 1921, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert