Cricket 1882

94 CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. JUNE 22, 1882. T H E C R IC K E T E R S OF MY T IM E . (By J ohn N yp . en of the Hambledon Club.) No. VI. Hitherto I have spoken only of Beldham’s batting-. In this department alone he had talent enough to make a dozen ordinary cricketers, but as a general fields­ man there were few better; he could take any post in the field, and do himself credit in it ; latterly he usually chose the place of slip. But Beldham was a good change bowler too > he delivered his balls high, and they got up well. His pace was a moderate one, yet bordering upon the quick. His principal fault in this department was, that he would often give a toss; taking him, however, as a change-bowler, he was one of the best. He would very quickly discover what a hitter could do, andwhat he could not do, and arranged his bowling accordingly. Finally, although his balls were commonly to the length, he was much better cal­ culated for a change than to be continued a con­ siderable length of time. One of the finest treats in cricketing that I remem­ ber, was to see this admirable man in, with the beautiful bowling of Harris. Having finished with the best batter of his own, or, perhaps, of any age—Beldham, we proceed to the very best bowler; a bowler who, between anyone and himself, comparison must fail. David Harris was, I believe, bom, at all events he lived at Odi- ham, in Hampshire, he was by trade a potter. He" was a muscular, bony man, standing about five feet nine and a half inches. His features were not regularly handsome, but a remarkably kind and gentle expression amply compensated the defect of mere linear beauty. The fair qualities of his heart shone through his honest face, and I can call to mind no worthier, or, in the active sense of the word, not a more “ good man ” than David Harris. He was one of the rare species that link man to man in bonds of fellowship by good woi'ks ; that inspire confidence, and prevent t1" structure of society from becoming disjointed,: nd, “ as it were a bowing wall, or a tottering fence.1' He was a man of so strict a principle, and such high honour, that I believe his moral character was never impeached. I never heard even a suspicion breathed against his integrity, aud I knew him long and intimately. I do not mean that he was a canter. Oh, no ; no one thought of standing on guard, and buttoning up his pockets in Harris’s company. I never busied my­ self about his mode of faith, or the peculiarity of his creed; that was his own affair, not mine, or any other being’s on earth ; all I know is, that he was an ‘ ‘ honest man," and the poet has assigned the rank of such a one in creation. “ It would be difficult, perhaps impossible, to con­ vey in writing an accurate idea of the grand effect o f Harris’s bowling; they only who have played against him can fully appreciate it. His attitude, when preparing for his run previously to delivering the ball, would have made a beautiful study for the sculptor. Phidias would certainly have taken him for a model. First of all, he stood erect like a soldier at drill; then, with a graceful curve Of the arm, he raised the ball to his forehead, and drawing back his right foot, started off with his left. The calm look and general air of the man were uncom­ monly striking, and from this series of preparations he never deviated, I am sure that from this simple account o f his manner, all my countrymen w ho w ere acquainted with his play will recall him to their minds. His mode o f delivering the ball was very singular. He would bring it from under the arm by a twist, and nearly as high as his arm-pit. and with this action push it, as it were, from him.; How it was that the balls acquired the velocity' they did by this mode of delivery, I never could’ comprehend. \\lien first he joined the Hambledon Club, he was"1 quite a raw countryman at cricket, and had very^ little to recommend him T>ut his noble delivery. H e1 w as also very apt to give tosses. I have seen old Nyren scratch his head, and say,—“ Harris would make the best bowler inEngland if he did not toss.” By continual practice, however, and following the advice of the old Hambledon players, he became as steady as could be wished; and in the prime of his playing very rarely indeed gave a toss, although his balls were pitched the full length. In bowling, he never stooped in the least in his delivery, but kept himself upright all the time. His balls were very little beholden to the ground when pitched; it was but a touch, and up again; and woe be to the man who did not get in to block them, for they had such a peculiar curl that they would grind his fingers against the bat; many a time have I seen the blood drawn in this way from a batter who was not up to the trick ; old Tom Walker was the only exception —I have before classed him among the bloodless animals. Harris’s bowling was the finest of all tests for a hitter, and henee the great beauty, as I observed before, of seeing Beldham in, with this man against him ; for unless a batter were of the very first class, and accustomed to the first style of stopping, he could do little or nothing with Harris. If the thing had been possible, I should have liked to have seen such a player as Budd (fine hitter as he was) standing against him. My own opinion is, that he could not have stopped his balls, and this will be a criterion by which those who have seen some of that gentleman’s brilliant hits may judge of the ex­ traordinary merit of this man’s bowling. He was considerably faster than Lambert, and so superior in style and finish, that I can draw no comparison between them. Lord Frederic Beauclerc has been heard to say that Harris’s bowling was one of the grandest things of the kind he had ever seen ; but his lordship could not have known him in his prime ; he never saw him play till after he had had many fits of the gout, and had become slow and feeble. To Harris’s fine bowling I attribute the great im­ provement that was made in hitting, and above all in stopping ; for it was utterly impossible to remain at the crease, when the ball was tossed to a fine length; you were obliged to get in, or it would be about your hands, or the handle of your bat; and every player knows where its next placc would be. Some years after Harris had played with the Hambledon Club, he became so well acquainted with the science of the game of cricket, that he could take a very great advantage in pitching the wickets. And not only would he pitch a good wicket for himself, but he would also consider those who had to bowl with him. The writer of this has often walked with him up to Windmill-down at six o’clock in the morning of the day that a match was to be played, and has with pleasure noticed the pains he has taken in choosing the ground for his fellow-bowler as well as himself. The most eminent men in every walk of life have at times been the most painstaking; —slabberdash work and indifference may accoih- pany genius, and it does so too frequently; such geniuses, however, throw away more than half their chance. There are more brilliant talents in this world than people give the world credit fo r; and that their lustre does not exhibit to the best advan­ tage, commonly depends upon the owners of them. Ill luck, and the preference that frequently attends industrious mediocrity, are the only anodynes that wounded self-love or indolence can administer to misapplied or unused ability. In his walk, Harris was a man of genius, and he let slip no opportunity to maintain his pre-eminence. Although unwilling to detract from the fame of old Lumpy, I must here observe upon the difference in these two men with regard to pitching their wickets. Lumpy would uniformly select a point where the ball was likely to shoot, that is, over the brow of a little h ill; and when by this forethought and contrivance the old man would prove successful in bowling his men out, he would turn round to his party with a little grin of triumph ; nothing gratified him like this reward of knowingncss. Lumpy, however, thought only of himself in choosing his ground; his fellow bowler might take his chance; this was neither wise nor liberal. Harris, on the contrary, as I have already observed, considered his partner; and, in so doing, the main chance of the game. Unlike Lumpy, too, he would choose a rising ground to pitch the ball against, and he who is well acquainted with the game of cricket will at once perceive the advantage that must arise from a wicket pitched in this way to such a tremendous bowler as Harris was. If I were urged to draw a comparison between these two great players (the greatest certainly in their department I ever saw), I could do it in no other way than the following:—Lumpy’s ball was always pitched to the length, but delivered lower than Harris’s, and never got up so high; he was also slower than Harris, and lost his advantage by the way in which he persisted in pitching his wicket; yet I think he would bowl more wickets down than the other, for the latter never pitched his wicket with this end in view; almost all his balls, therefore, rose over the wicket; consequently, more players would be caught out from Harris than from Lumpy, and not half ,the number of runs got from his bowling. I passed a very pleasant time with Harris when he came to my father’s house at Hambledon, by invitation, after an illness, and for the benefit of the change of air. Being always his companion in his walks about the neighbourhood, I had full opportunity of observing the sweetness of his disposition; this, with his manly contempt of every action that bore the character of meanness, gained him the admiration of every cricketer in Hambledon. In concluding my recollections of Harris, I had well nigh omitted to say something of his skill in the other departments of the game. The fact is, the extraordinary merit of his bowling would have thrown any other fair accomplishments he might possess into the shade ; but, indeed, as a batter, I considered him rather an indifferent hand; I never recollect his getting more than ten runs, and those very rarely. Neither was his fielding remarkable. But he was game to the back-bone, and never suffered a ball to pass him without putting his body in the way of it. If I recollect, he generally played slip. (To be continued.) B owdon D owns v . B ow don E llesm ere , o n the ground of the former on June 17. Score :—Downs, 51 and 9 ; Ellesmere, 30 and 37 for eight wickets. In the Downs second innings, F. Walker took six wickets (four in one over) for four runs. M arylebone C lub and G round v . O rleans C lu b . —P. S. McDonnell, one of the Australian eleven, assisted the Orleans Club in this match at Twickenham on Saturday. He made 82 out of # total of 214. M.C.C. scored 102 and 36 for two wickets. C lifton V. W estern W a n d e r e r s . —Played on Durdham Down, Clifton, on Friday and Saturday. Score:—Clifton, 418 (F. Townsend 142); Wan­ derers, 103 and 117. B righton and D istrict T eachers v . A rdingia - C ollege . —Played at Ardingly on June 17’ Brighton Teachers, 100; College, 380 for five wickdts (G. Brann, notout, 175, W. A. Betteswortli 103). C h e p stow v . T h o r n b u r y . —Played at Chepstoiv on Thursday. Score:—Chepstow, 48 ; Thornbury, 45and 236 (W. G. Grace 21 and 177 not out). In the second innings Mr. W. G. Grace carried his bat throughout. S peech Day at Cheltenham College is fixed on Juno 30th. Any O.C.’s who care to play in any of the matches would greatly oblige by writing to C.'E- Greenway, Cheltenham College. M.C.C. a n d G round v. E ton C ollese . —Playe“ at Eton on Tuesday. Score :—M.C.C., 156 ; Eton, 92 and 70. Fothergill took all eleven wickets of the school in the first innings. T he C anadian C ricket F ie l d . — A weekly R e co rd and Review o f Canadian Cricket. Published every Wednesday during season except May an(‘ September, when there will be only two issues- Advertisements and Subscriptions will be received at the otfico of “ C ricket ,” the London Agency-" Advt.