Cricket 1882

30 CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. a u g u s t 17 , uss. [n a match between the Nondescripts v. dted Service, finished at Portsmouth on ,/ursday, 1,042 runs were made for 14 ;kets, an average of 43i runs. The total '734 made by the Service has only twice fore been exceeded in England, and the J>re of 886 by Capt. Spens beaten on it three occasions, by Messrs. W . N. Roe 5 not out in 1881, E . P. S. Tylecote 404 It out at Clifton, in 1868, and by Mr. W. i Grace 400 not out, against 22 of Grimsby 11876. ! ---------- A nother instance of tall scoring which I ve not seen recorded, occurred in the itch between Incogniti and Exmouth, kyed on the Exmouth ground on August and has been, kindly sent me by a corre- bnuent. Here are the details, which, I iiy add, may be accepted as thoroughly liable. O. B. Martyn and C. W . Dale, jiying for the former, scored 200 runs in i hour and 15 minutes. The Exmouth pund not being very large, boundary hits B pretty frequent, but nothing like so large, iso rapid, a score, has been got there. The ^al of the Incog, innings was 445, which tre got in about 5 hours, but the above- jjntioned 200 were got in 1 hour 15 'nutes; 190 was hoisted at about 7 ;nutes to 5, and 390 at 7 or 8 minutes 1st 6, and during this period several inutes were spent in searching for the ball, 'lich was lost, and providing a new one. B. Martyn scored 137, containing 2 sixes, five, and 19 fours ; C. W . Dale scored 99, d the latter was run out in running his '0th run. .S u r e l y a forcible protest may be lodged ainst the now almost common fashion displaying open dissatisfaction with the cisions of the umpires. Hardly an im- irtant match takes place now but some tsman who ought to know better openly allenges the verdict of the umpire len it is not quite to his hking. It is coming quite1the thing now to dispute catch at the wicket, or a case of 1 b w, and en to demur at leaving the wicket when a jcision is given. It would seem to be un- icessary to urge that such form is thoroughly lsportsmanlike. Personally, I am strongly favour of the competency of umpires to [minister the laws being proved, but it has ways been regarded as ordinary pro- •iety to accept the decisions of the ficials without murmur. It is much to be gretted that there appears to be a growing ndency to question not only the correctness an umpire’s fiat, but also his honesty. In my notes of last week, I called attention what I knew as the best performance of ,e kind when Jones sent a bail 45 yards foot 11 inches at the Oval. A corre- (ondent informs me that in a match between pper Tooting v. Clifton College at Tooting, i the 27th July, Mr. J. C. Ker sent a bail to a longer distance, the measurement being exactly 46 yards. Can any one give me a better record ? S till another curiosity, this time quite unique. In a match between the Crystal Palace and Oakfield at Croydon on Satur­ day last, Mr. A. A. E. Oelrichs for the former scored 70 (1,7 in one over), and in Oakfield’s first innings had eight batsmen at the wicket. He caught five, stumped two, and ran one out. In all probability the eleven to represent England against Australia on the 28th inst. at the Oval will be selected from the fol­ lowing :—Hon. A. Lyttelton, Messrs. W . G. Grace, C. T. Studd, A. P. Lucas, A. G. Steel, Ulyett, Barlow, Peate, Barnes, Flowers, Morley, and Read. T his is howMcDonnell was out on Friday in the first innings of the Australians at the Oval according to the Globe of that even­ ing :— “ After adding a single, McDonnell was caught off Peate from a straight drive, Peate taking the ball after it had grazed the wicket-keeper’s glove.” Graphic, isn’t it ? Quite an original kind of stroke, too ? «HFP*J3C0RE*B00K*' (Continued.) THE AUSTRALIANS v. THE PLAYERS OF ENGLAND. The victory of the Players in this match at Ken­ nington Oval was eminently satisfactory to Eng­ lish cricketers, for more than one reason. It was some compensation in the first place for the defeat experienced by the Gentlemen of England on the same ground in June. Then, again, it tended to show that Australian cricketers were not, as some critics have tried to represent, much, if at all, superior to a thoroughly representative team, and there was certainly much consolation in the thought. The Gentlemen were beaten chiefly by the mani­ fest weakness of their bowling, and those who argued that the superiority of the Players in this respect would make them more of a match for the Australian team, proved to be quite correct. When it is remembered that in the absence of Barlow and Midwinter the Players were deprived of two of their most useful all-round men, their success is all the more creditable. Their victory it must be admitted was won by sheer hard work and good all-round play, and it will hardly detract from the brilliance of their achievement to say that they had the best of the luck. In winning the toss, a side always has a certain advantage, but as the light is late in the day at the Oval, and as the wickets have worn this year there first innings goes a longway towards winning the game. On the first day the ground played very easily, and the Australian bowlers, with Spofforth away, certainly appeared rather stale, to judge by the comparative ease with which they were met by the batsmen. The Players began very badly, losing four of their best wickets for 37 runs. Had the Australian fielding only been up to its usual mark, in all probability the English team would not have reached a large total. As it was, Bonnor at short slip gave Read and Barnes, who made the stand of the innings, each a life, and had these chances only been taken, the game would have pre­ sented a very different aspect. Up to luncheon time the batting had shown a noticeable lack of con­ fidence, but afterwards Read and Barnes played with any amount of nerve, and while they were together they put on as many as 159 runs. Barnes’s 87 was the better innings of the two, but although Read was badly missed at long-on when he had got 87, his hitting all round, particularly to leg, was very well-timed, and his score of 130, the highest be it added as yet made against this Australian team, was immensely popular with the spectators, so*mueh so indeed that a collection of upwards of £41 was raised for him on the ground. The Australians had a difficult task of course in going in against such a total as 322, and their chances were certainly not improved by the state of the ground- Though it was never dangerous it was decidedly more in favour of the bowlers than on the first day while the Players were batting, and the ball at times got up very - straight. Still, making all allowances, the batting of the Australian team was generally disappointing, very different to their show against the Gentlemen. Then, it is true, they were playing a winning game, whereas on this occasion they were losing, and the difference is immense, as cricketers know well. The Players were thoroughly on their mettle it must be owned, and there was hardly a fault to be found with their out cricket throughout. Lockwood, as captain, was a distinct success. He managed his bowling with much ability, and the field was placed with great judgment. Sherwin, whom some thought hardly good enough to have been in the eleven, thoroughly justified his selec­ tion as wicket-keeper. He got a nasty blow in the eye from a hit, but he stood up with the greatest pluck, and to take Morley without a long-stop is no mean feat. Without an exception the Players fielded up well, and if the exuberance of some of them at the fall of every Australian wicket was hardly in good taste, their exhibition all round was certainly the best seen at the Oval this season. In the first innings, Horan and Murdoch both played steady cricket, but in the second the batting of the team generally showed a great want of spirit. On Saturday, Murdoch was in for thirty-five minutes without scoring, and with the exception of Giffen no one made any stay, and some of the team seemed to be acting unwisely in playing with such unnatural caution. Morley bowled extremely well, and as the picket played on the third day it was certainly good policy to utilise him and Ulyett, the latter of whom has never bowled better. The success of the Players was im­ mensely popular as may be imagined, but we do not for a moment believe that the victory by an innings and 34 runs was a real test of their merits. Still they are to be congratulated on the check they have given to what was becoming a monotonous succession of Australian triumphs, and their win was due if not altogether, in a great measure, to excellent all-round cricket. Score and analyses :—• Shrewsbury, c Bonnor, b Palmer ............................6 Ulyett, c Bannerman, b Garrett ..........................12 Bames, b Bannerman .. 87 Bates, c Bannerman, b Garrett ............................0 Lockwood, b Palmer.. .. 3 Read, run o u t .............130 Flowers, b Boyle .. .. 25 Emmett, c Bonnor, b Gar­ rett .............................21 Peate, c Boyle, b Banner­ man ............................. 1 Sherwin, not out .. .. 10 Morley, o Bannerman, b Palm er......................8 B 7 ,1-b II, n b X .. 19 Total .322 A u stralian s . First Innings. Second Innings. A. C. Bannerman, o Shrewsbury, b Peate...................................0 b Peate............................14 H. H. Massie, c Sherwin, b Mor­ ley..........................................0 c Barnes, b Peate ..8 1 W. L. Murdoch, b Peate .. .. 35 c Lockwood, b Ulyett. 15 P. S. M'Donnell, c Peate, b Ul­ yett ......................................12 c Sherwin, b Ulyett.. 18 T. Horan, c Peate, b Morley .. 47 c Shrewsbury,bMorley 3 G. Giffen, e Shrewsbury, b Em­ mett .................................. 12 c Ulyett, b Morley .. 23 J. M‘C. Blackham, h Morley .. 17 c Bames, b Morley .. 1 G. J. Bonnor, b Ulyett..............9 c Sherwin, b Bames.. H. F. Boyle, run o u t ..............1 e Flowers, b Pcate .. 0 T. W. Garrett, b Morley .. .. 0 uot out............................15 C. E. Palmer, not ou t............. 3 b Bames ........................ 0 B 11,1-b 2 w 1 .14 B 6 ,1-b 4 .. ..1 0 Total................................. 150 Total ..Is