FIRST TEST.

Taranaki Daily News, 1 June 1921, Page 5

FIRST TEST.

AUSTRALIA’S EASY WIN. MARGIN OF TEN WICKETS. ■FINE BOWLING AND FIELDING. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Received May 31, 5.5 p.m. London, May 30. Australia beat England in the first test match by ten wickets. England’s first innings produced 112, to which Australia replied with 232. In their second innings England made 147, Australia making the twenty-eight required without the loss of a wicket. The attendance to-day was 18,000. In Australia’s second innings the score was 182, when Pellew was caught by Rhodes off his own bowling. The newcomer hit vigorously, but the fieldsmen, particularly Hendren, were keen, and stopped many hard ones. Carter brought up 200 in 215 minutes. Andrews, when he had made six, was dismissed similarly to Pellew. 8—6—202. The weather was now mild and the sun shining through the clouds was casting shadows across •the ground. Hendry partnered Carter, who continued hitting confidently on both sides of the wicket under trying conditions. He eventually succumbed in attempting to hook Woolley, having batted for 65 minutes.

Macdonald, the last man, made several attempts to pull Rhodes over the ropes, and eventually almost succeeded, the ball dropping a few yards from the boundary. He later made ten in one over. After Hendry had made a couple of delightful shots to the boundary Macdonald closed the innings by attempting another. big stroke. He mishit the ball, which dropped into Knight’s hands. The Australians’ innings lasted 255 minutes. ENGLAND’S SEQOND EFFORT. England, with a deficiency of 120, opened their second innings with Knight and Holmes, and Gregory and Macdonald bowled from the river and pavilion ends as on Saturday. When Knight was three Gregory almost caught and bowled him. He ran half-way up the pitch, but slipped. Macartney relieved Gregory after two overs. lit; found his length immediately, and had the batsmen guessing. Macdonald was bowling well, varying the pace, and the batting was slow, until Knight lifted a no-ball of Macartney’s and ran four. Holmes, at seven, was dismissed by an excellent catch by Taylor, who somersaulted, retaining the ball. -Tyldesley followed. Armstrong relieved Macartney, and Gregory took Macdonald’s end. At tw mtyfive Armstrong had bowled three maiden overs, and had the batsmen tied up. The fielding was bright. At the luncheon adjournment the score was twenty-eight for an hour’s play. Gregory and Armstrong continued their attacks after lunch, and excellent length bowling and machine-like fielding made scoring difficult. Knight broke the monotony with two fine strokes off Gregory, and then a fast rising one of Gregory’s struck Tyldesley on the head and knocked him out for several minutes. The ball fell from his head on to the wicket, and he was thus out. A section of the crowd shouted “Take him off”. Fifty appeared after ninety-five minutes. The wicket was much faster than in the morning, and Gregory was still making the ball bump. The crowd •hooted and advised Armstrong to try another bowler, and he accepted the advice, Macdonald replacing Gregory. At 59 Hendren had joined Knight, who lost his wicket through a misunderstanding. Hendren tried to return, but Macartney picked up smartly and hit the wicket.— 3—38—56. Knight batted 110 minutes, with occasional attractive driving, but he was never really comfortable.

SLOW BATTING. Douglas filled the gap. Hendren had a short stay, having no confidence, and he was dismissed at seven by a clinking ball from Macdonald. Douglas and Woolley resorted to stone-walling in an attempt to retrieve the position. Douglas broke the spell by leg-glancing Macdonald to the boundary, and then he was nearly caught by Pellew off Armstrong. Macdonald gave signs of tiring at /rhis stage. Armstrong bowled sixteen overs, including six maidens for 21 runs. The batting was now painfully slow, W’oolley, after half an hour, succeeding in getting one, while Douglas made thirteen, which is far below test standard. The explanation was the wonderful fielding and the great bowling. Douglas was dismissed by a good catch by Hendry in slips. Jupp attempted to enliven the proceedings, but the fielding kept down runs. Gregory replaced Macdonald at 88, and the crowd was again demonstrative, shouting “Take him off” and hooting. Woolley made his second scoring stroke after thirty-five minutes. He took an hour compiling nine. Another ball of Gregory’s struck him on the shoulder, causing a sustained outburst of barracking. There was tremendous applause When he hit Gregory to leg for three and Armstrong to leg over the ropes. The century appeared after 190 minutes. The score at the tea adjournment was 5 wickets for 104 runs; Woolley 31, and Jupp 15. In the first over on resuming Jupp AUSTRALIA’S EASY TASK.

was brilliantly caught at mid-off by Pellew, whose fielding was one of the features of the match. Rhodes came to Woolley’s assistance, and Hendry replaced Armstrong at 110. The new bowler soon discovered a puzzling length, and the batsmen sneaked singles. Woolley made two pretty cuts off Gregory, and reached the Australians’ score. In the next over Rhodes gave a chance to Gregory, off Hendry, which he did not accept. He also survived an appeal for leg before from the same bowler. Woolley brightened up and gave the best display on the English side. His downfall came through a ball off the edge of his bat being snapped up by the wicketkeeper —7—34 —138. The next ball completely beat and bowled Strudwick. Macdonald relieved Gregory at 138, causing Rhodes’ dismissal in his first over. Rhodes batted solidly for 7,5 minutes. Macdonald sent Richmond’s bail fifty yards. The innings occupied 245 .minutes. Wanting' 28, Australia opened at six o’clock and finished in ’twenty minutes. Macartney and Bardsley knocking up the necessary runs. Details rf the scores are:

ENGLAND. First Innings v...... 112 Second Innings: Holmes, c Taylor, b Macdonald .« 7 Knight, run out 38 Tyldesley, b Gregory 7 Hendren, b Macdonald t . x ,- 7 Douglas, e Hendry, b Macdonald .... 13 Woolley, c Carter, b Hendry 34 Jupp, c Pellew’, b. Gregory 15 Rhodes, c Carter, b Macdonald ... 10 Strudw’ick, 'b Hendry 0 Howell, not out ....... 4 Richmond, b Gregory 2 Extras .... ....... , io Total 147 Grand Total 259 Bowling analysis.—Gregory took three wickets for 45 runs; Macdonald, four r’.,r 32; Macartney, none for 1!)-, Armstrong, none for 33; Hendry, two for 18.

AUSTRALIA. First Innings. Collins, lbw, b Richtnond 17 Bardsley, lbw, b Woojley 66 Macartney, lbw, b Douglas 20 .Taylor, c Jupp, b Douglas 4 Armstrong, b Jupp . 11 Gregory, lbw, b Richmond 14 Pellew’, c and b Rhodes 25 Andrews, c and b Rhodes 6 Carter, b Woolley 33 Hendry, not out Macdonald, e Knight;, b Woolley ... 10 Extras : 14 Total 232 Bowling analysis: Howell took no wickets for runs; Douglas, two for 34; Richmond, two for 69; Woolley, three for 46, one no-ball; Jupp, one for 14; Rhodes, two for 33. Second Innings: Macartney, not out 22 Bardsley, not out S Total (for no wickets) 30 Grand total 262 Bowling analysis.—Jupp took no wickets for 13 runs; Richmond, none for

NOTES ON THE PLAY.

SPLENDID GAME. TRIBUTES OF LONDON PAPERS. PROTEST AT BARRACKING. Received May 31, 5.45 p.m. London, May 31. A special correspondent writes: A drizzle, followed by sunshine, provided the English slow left-handers with a wicket to their liking, but neither Woolley nor Rhodes found their length for some time, and when they did the wicket was beginning to cut up. Woolley relied on his length, which was consistent to the c.ose. He was more consistently troublesome than Rhodes, who depended on constant variations of length and spin. He is still master of a tremendous finger spin. England played uphill in a determined fashion, but the precision of the bowling and fielding kept them on the defensive. The fielding was the best Australian display of the tour, Pellew excelling himself. Celebrated judges pronounce him the finest all-round fieldsman Australia has sent.

The crowd constantly barracked Gregory, who often rose head high, and there was a specially angry display when he struck Woolley on the forearm. Even when the game appeared a foregone conclusion the Australians continued to practice catching, which has become their own particular form of entertainment, and always interests the crowds. Hendry’s bowling was a revelation to his critics, having a good length and rising and pacing from the wicket. Tyldesley is suffering .from abrasions, but nothing serious. The question was raised whether he was out, as he disturbed the bails while staggering. The decision was that he , knocked the ball into the wicket with his foot. Collins is suffering from an injured finger, and Mailey fielded instead most of the innings. Aftef the dismissal of Knight and Tyldesley, England’s team, apart from Woolley, seemed to realise they were fighting a losing battle, while the Australians realised they were winning. Grimness and keenness were never displayed to better advantage. The Times cricket expert characterises the Barracking of Gregory as an unseemly display of ignorance and bad manners by a section of the crowd. Tyldesley was more to blame for his fccciderit than Gregory. Mr. Sewell, in the Daily Chronicle, says the tendency of a few spectators to barrack Gregory, presumably for dangerous bowling, is surprising in such a home of the gaine as Nottingham, and showed an astounding shortness of memory. The outstanding reason for Australia’s win was fair and square cricket, and beautiful fielding. Hendren made the mistake of his life when ho called Knight for a short run, as Knight was well set.

The Morning Post, editorially, hopes the selectors in future will remember that youth must be served. Jardine and Holdsworth, of Oxford, deserve notice, and Durstpn should replace Howell, who is too plain and straightforward. The claims of Morfec, the most successful Northern League bowler, should be considered.

The Daily News, referring to the crowd’s display of feeling against Gregory, after Tyldesley was struck on the jaw, says: “Our only comment on this unsportsmanlike demonstration is that there was no such outburst against Durston when he put Armstrong out 'of action.”

Warner, writing in the Morning Post, says that England was fairly and squarely beaten in circumstances which it was thought would “have been utterly unfavorable to the Australians. They surmounted the strange conditions' with nerve and doggedness surprising even to those familiar with Australian grit. We accept discomfiture in the true cricketing spirit. We are lost in admiration of the Australians’ magnificent bowling and fielding, and Armstrong’s gehius as captain.

THE HOURS CONTROVERSY. Received May 31, 5.45 p.m. London, May 30. Despite the apparent internal evidence that the Observer .article had high official inspiration the Australian manager expressed the opinion that it was merely the private view of somebody afraid to sign his name. If the writer comes into the open the manager says he -will reply forcibly. Mr. Smith says h\s relations with the authorities in securing shorter hours were so amiable that he cannot believe the attack was inspired. Armstrong, interviewed by the Aus- , tralian Press Association regarding the Observer’s article, states that the team 1 unanimously support Mr. Smith regard--1 ing the hours of play and the day’s FMt before the tuts.