EW Swanton: Endless appeal in burning issues of a classic conflict (02 June 1997)
By E.W
02-Jun-1997
Monday 2 June 1997
Endless appeal in burning issues of a classic conflict
By E.W. Swanton
THE Ashes! To anyone attracted by the history of cricket -
which is to say most lovers of the game - the story is endlessly
fascinat- ing. Which were the strongest teams? Who were the
best captains? What were the greatest matches? And so on. I am
lucky enough to have followed the ebb and flow of success and
failure since the Oval Test of 1921 wherein England, under Lionel, the future Lord Tennyson, fought a favourable draw
against one of Australia`s most powerful sides, led by Warwick Armstrong, who had already retained the Ashes.
This first recollection of a match where the Ashes were not at
stake brings me to say at the outset that although the urn and
the Ashes are symbolic of the ancient continuing battle, every
encounter is a high event regardless of them. Some of the
greatest games indeed have been played after the Ashes had been
regained or retained. This was so in 1902 when at the Oval, after
Jessop`s wonderful hundred, Hirst and Rhodes got the necessary 15
runs together for the last wicket. Leonard Hutton`s monumental
364 in 1938 was made after Australia had secured the Ashes.
England, after the last war, lost 11 Tests over three series
before what we called the Elusive Victory at Melbourne in the
fifth Test of 1950-51 came as a vast relief as though a reproach
had been wiped away. Again, English relief was the keynote,
also at Melbourne, in 1974-75 (at the end of my eighth and last
reporting tour of Australia) when victory by an innings and
four runs did much to assuage the early batterings of Lillee and
Thomson.
From the first there was about Tests between England and Australia a special savour, the relish of raw colonials tweaking
the lion`s tail. Over the century and more, despite the population disparity, it has happened more often than not: 111
wins to Australia, 90 to England, with 84 matches drawn. On
Thursday at Edgbaston yet another series gets under way, the
68th since the first confrontation at Melbourne in 1876-77.
The oldest recollections are generally the clearest, and the
picture remains sharp of A P F Chapman`s recovery of the Ashes
at the Oval in 1926, of his ushering forward, as they made for
the pavilion in advance of a vast, cheering crowd, the
48-year-old Wilfred Rhodes who had played his first Test under W
G Grace 27 years before. Rhodes and young Harold Larwood
had each taken six wickets apiece, but the brightest glory belonged to Hobbs (100) and Sutcliffe (161) who had with utmost
skill weathered the attack on a pitch made horribly spiteful by
an overnight storm.
I was lucky in that the first Test I ever reported was a classic almost beyond compare wherein 1,601 runs were scored at
Lord`s inside four days and young Don Bradman`s 254 set him on a
pinnacle where he has remained ever since. Australia won by seven wickets, thus breaking the sequence of six successive victories by Chapman (despite his own 125), a record no captain is
likely to challenge. The Lord`s Test of 1934 is a landmark because it denotes England`s only victory over Australia at
Lord`s since 1896, and that gained only because Hedley Verity
with 14 wickets in the day took utmost advantage of a pitch made
difficult after weekend rain.
The peak of national jubilation after the war was, of course,
England`s regaining of the Ashes under Sir Leonard in the
Coronation year of 1953, the first of three series won before a
horrible descent Down Under in 1958-59. Three series out of four
were halved in the 1960s before Ray Illingworth`s side brought
the Ashes home in 1970-71.
The Packer intrusion and attempted takeover of Test cricket
scarred the two series at the end of the 1970s, since when the
one perpetually recalled to revive English spirits is that of
1981 marked by the heroics of Ian Botham and Bob Willis. England`s winning of the Ashes in 1985 under David Gower established his greatness as, I think, the best English left-handed
bat since Frank Woolley, after which Mike Gatting achieved a
well-fought success in Australia in 1986-87.
When Australia won a consolation victory in the sixth and last
Test they were celebrating the end of a barren run without
prece- dent of 14 Tests against all opponents, a statistic which
perhaps discounts, if only slightly, England`s dismal showing
in the four subsequent Anglo-Australian rubbers which we trust
may be about to come to an end.
To ponder two of the questions I posed at the outset, perhaps
the best-equipped England side in Australia was that of 1928-29.
In batting order it was Hobbs, Sutcliffe, Hammond, Jardine, Hendren, Chapman, Larwood, Geary, Tate, Duckworth, White. At home
I doubt whether the XI that won at the Oval in `53 has been improved on: Hutton, Edrich, May, Compton, Graveney, Bailey, Evans,
Laker, Lock, Trueman, Bedser. This might have fought a rare battle with the 1948 Australians: Morris, Barnes, Bradman, Hassett,
Miller, Harvey, Loxton, Lindwall, Tallon, Ring, Johnston. As to
leadership, Chapman, Brearley and Illingworth commend themselves
especially on one side, Bradman (after the War), Benaud and
Ian Chappell on the other. But in such a field they can only be
invidious choices.
I expect it may be thought that, while I discount the dire
episode of Bodyline, my preferences favour the past as no doubt
do those of most in the sere and yellow. There have been fine
England cricketers of late if no recent sides of the old quality, up to and certainly including Michael Atherton. Forgive me
if I paraphrase Francis Thompson`s lines: As the run stealers
flicker to and fro, Oh, my Hobbs and my Woolley long ago.
Source :: The Electronic Telegraph (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/)