Until recently the same difficulty beset the path of English teams touring in Australia, that they were sent to play ridiculous matches against battalions of bad players, and probably the M.C.C. in organising this tour found it difficult to persuade the best amateurs to devote so much time to a campaign which, roughly speaking, includes so few first-class matches. And so Mr. Warner apparently finds himself in the uncomfortable position of taking round a team too good for the country players and not good enough for the town players.
In the second Test Match the scoring was singularly low for a good matting wicket at Johannesburg. The Africans won with scores of 277 and 34 for one wicket, as against 148 and 160 by the M.C.C. team; and in the M.C.C. second innings eight men made only 16 runs between them, which reads like disappointing batting. On the other hand, eight of the Africans scored double figures.
The third Test Match found Africa starting well enough with 385, every one scoring double figures except Mr. Hathorn, who made 102. Thanks to a fine innings by Mr. F. L. Fane, who made 143, the Englishmen got to within 90 runs of their formidable opponents at the end of the second day’s play, but in this innings six men only scored 17 runs between them.
The third day of the third Test Match was good business for the Africans, who hit up 349 runs for the loss of only five wickets, and then dismissed Messrs. Warner and Hartley before the call of time, leaving the Englishmen 425 run to the bad with only eight wickets in hand. The English bowling was clearly to the liking of their opponents, for again, with the exception of the not-out men, all scored double figures. White 147, Tancred 73, Nourse 55, and Sinclair 48, doing most of the damage. Mr. Crawford could not get a wicket, and Hayes was not put on to bowl in the whole course of the match, and Lees with nine out of the fifteen wickets that fell was the most successful of our bowlers.
The last day’s play brought the match to its logical conclusion, and the M.C.C. team were easily beaten by 243 runs. Denton 61 and Crawford 34 being the only two men to score more than 20 runs.
An odd feature of the game was the success of the cricketers whose names begin with S. It is needless to say there were none on the English side, but the five who played for South Africa got all the wickets between them, and caught all the catches, bar two; for Shalders, Sinclair, Schwartz, Snooke, and Sherwell are the only African names which appear in the score of M.C.C. except Vogler and White, who made three catches between them. Snooke took twelve wickets in the match, and Sherwell caught five men at the wicket.
So the first three of the so-called Test Matches were all lost, each one by a bigger margin than its predecessors.
There can be but little interest left now in the tour of this M.C.C. team, which went to Africa practically asking for defeat, and has certainly suffered it. Probably the next time the South Africans desire to entertain a good cricket team they will invite an Australian team to come over and give them a good game, for the Australians can be trusted to bring their best men upon such an occasion, and that is the way to set about International cricket.
The recent headings in the newspapers, “England v. South Africa. Crushing Defeat of England,” are not very pleasant reading, and are not calculated to advance the prestige of English cricket, and it is our sincere hope that in future, should the Marylebone Club be ever again invited to organise a team to visit our cricket-playing Colonies, those who are entrusted with the selection of the players will send either the best or none at all.
It is unfair to the men themselves and to their Colonial hosts, and especially to English cricket, that a team such as the one at present touring in Africa should by any misnomer be regarded as representative of England.