Cricket 1882

MAY 25, 1882. CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OE THE GAME. 35 PUTNEY v. HORNSEY. This match was played at Hornsey, on Saturday, May 20. Putney unfortunately turned up two men short, and had to play substitutes, otherwise they would probably have made a much better match of it. H ornsey . S. Summers, b I. Bailey .. 10 T. A. Nicholls, b GUI .. 19 A. W. Hirst, b Gill .. .. 0 F. Orton, b Gill..................29 E. W. Nicholls, b Gill .. 0 F. G. Beyer, c Shepherd, b Webb ..........................14 W. P. Harrison, run ou t.. 0 T. S. Webb, b H irst.. . . 1 5 I. Bailey 1b w, b Hirst .. 7 C. 0. Minchin, b Paige .. 1 A. D. Shepherd, b Hirst .. 10 G. H. Gill, b Paige .. .. 0 A. P. Kent, b Paige . . .. 1 W. M. Venning, c Nicholls, b P a ig o ..........................9 C. Bailey, b Hirst .. .. 2 R. H. King, b Gill .. .. 0 E. Paige, run out .. .. G H. Geff, c substitute, b I. Bailey ..........................5 W. Gate, not out .. .. 0 B 13,1-b 7, w 1 .. 21 T ota l..................104 T. Eastgate, not out .. 0 C. L. King (substitute), b H ir s t ..............................3 B. A. Clarke (substitute), b P a ig e ..........................1 B 3 ,1-b G ..................9 T o t a l..................5 AUSTRALIANS v. SUSSEX. T he L argest E nglish I nnings in a B ig M a tch . The heavy scoring of the Australians in their opening match against Oxford University early in the week, prepared the public for a sensational per­ formance when they came to meet Sussex at Brigh­ ton, on Thursday last. Bonnor,who had not figured in the Colonial team at Oxford, was again chosen to stand out, but with the exception that Horan, who was an absentee against the University, took the place of Boyle, the elevens at Oxford and Brighton were the same. Sussex was deprived of the ser­ vices of Mr. M. P. Lucas and Henry Phillips, neither of whom could play owing to recent injuries, as well of James Phillips; Walter Humphreys filled the place of tho amateur, and A. Payne took the wicket in lieu of H. Phillips, so that the County had certainly not its strength. The English Eleven began well in winning the toss and securing first hit on a splendid wicket, but that piece of good fortune was the only advantage they were able to claim during the game. At 12.20 on Thursday Messrs. Ellis and Greenfield began their innings to the bowling of Spofforth and Palmer, and in two hours all was over. A splendid catch at cover-point by Giffen, who held the ball, at the third attempt got rid of Mr. Greenfield. He had made 23 of the first 30, but Palmer, the slow bowler of the Australian team, created a “ funk” by clean bowling Messrs. Whitfeld, Blackman, and Lucas with successive balls, and the innings closed for 95, Palmer taking eight wickets for 48 runs, an ex­ cellent performance on such a wicket. With this score fell any hopes that the most hopeless parti­ sans of Sussex could ever have had. A formal pro­ test was lodged against the bowling of Mr. Black­ man by the Australian Captain (Murdoch), on the ground that he threw, but the umpires allowed his delivery, and he began with Lillywhite. Massie, who went in first with Bannerman, at once got on the best of terms with the Sussex bowling, and the first wicket (Bannerman) fell for 127. When Murdoch came in it was merely a question of how high the Australian total would be. Murdoch was twice missed, once badly by Humphreys from a re­ turn, a second time at point from a hard hit to Mr. Greenfield,and for these escapes Sussex suffered very heavily. Giffen, who hit very hard, helped Murdoch to raise the score from 389 to 507, and ultimately the innings closed for 643—the largest score made in a first-class match in England. Murdoch carried out his bat for 28G, in which there were no chances beyond those already named. His figures were made up of one five, thirty-nine fours, five threes, and sixteen twos, and seventy- eight singles. In their second attempt Sussex made an excellent start, and the effective batting of Messrs. Greenfield, Ellis, and Whitfeld enabled them to reach 120, with only one wicket down. After the departure of Mr. Ellis, the second bats­ man, came the “ rot.” Mr. Whitfeld played very careful cricket, but no one stayed with him, and all were out for 192. The Australians thus won by an innings and 355 runs. This is, we believe, the easiest victory ever recorded in a first-class match. It will be noticed that Murdoch alone scored within two runs of the aggregate of the Sussex Eleven in two attempts. Palmer’s slow bowling was very effective, resulting in fourteen wickets for 110 runs, a rare analysis on a batsman’swicket. Spofforth was again expensive, his three wickets costing 80 runs. Score:— S ussex . First Innings. Second Innings. Mr. R. T. Ellis, st Blackham, b Palmer ................................. 10 b Garrett .......................52 Rev. F. F. J. Greenfield, c Giffen, b Spofforth ..........................23 Mr. H. Whitfeld, b Palmer.. .. 13 Mr. A. H. Trevor, b Palmer .. 2 Mr. W. A. Betteswortli, c Horan, b Spofforth , ........................10 b Palmer .......................0 Charlwood, c Bannerman, b Palmer ..................................5 Mr. W. Blackman, b Palmer .. 0 Mr. C. J. Lucas, b Palmer .. .. 0 W. Humphreys, st Blackham, b P a lm e r ..................................18 A. Payne, b Palmer ..................5 J. Lillywhite, not o u t ..................5 B, &c.........................................4 b Spofforth..................31 not out..........................54 b Palmer ..................5 c Murdoch, b Palmer 0 b G a r re tt..................3 c and b Palmer .. .. 15 c Jones, b Garrett, 13 st Blackham, b Palmer 1 b Palmer ..................4 L-b 9, w 5, n-b 1.. 15 T o t a l..........................95 A ustralians . Total.. ..193 H. H. Massie, c Bettes- worth, b Blackman .. 45 A. C. Banuerman, c Trevor, b Lillywhite .. .. GO W. L. Murdoch, not out . .28G T. Horan, c Humphreys, b B lackm an...............51 P. S. M‘Donnell, b Hum­ phreys .......................11 J. M. C. Blackham, 1-b-w, b L illyw hite.............. 27 G. Giffen, c and b Black­ man ..........................74 S. P. Jones, c Humphreys, b Lucas ..................5 T. W. Garrett, b Hum­ phreys ..........................9 G. E. Palmer, b B'ackman 28 F. R. Spofforth, c Hum­ phreys, b Greenfield.. 8 B 17,1-b 22 .. .. 39 Total 643 NOTTS V. YORKSHIRE. The matches between these counties are always productive of some of the be3t cricket of the year, and that begun on the Trent Bridge Ground on Thursday last was no exception to the rule. York­ shire had its full strength, but though Shaw re­ appeared in the Nottingham eleven, for the first time since the Sussex match on May 26th, 1881, the team was still incomplete without Arthur Shrewsbury, a great loss, considering the splendid cricket he showed in Australia. Although they had the first use of an excellent wicket, Notts only made a poor show of 104, and at the end of an innings were in a minority of 87 runs. In the second innings, however, the Yorkshire bowling did not prove so deadly, and Selby, Butler, Scotton, and Wright were mainly instrumental in securing a very respectable aggregate of 241. Yorkshire still had an excellent chance when they went in with 155 to win, but two stupid cases of run out helped Notts materially, and Shaw and Morley in addition bowled so well that the home county were able to claim a very creditable victory by 90 runs. York­ shire for the firsttime played T. Brackin, of Thornes, one of the most successful batsmen in the colts’ match at Sheffield early in the week, but his debut was not particularly successful, as will be seen. The Nottingham eleven when its full strength is in the field bids fair to be stronger than ever this year. N ottinghamshire . First Innings. Oscroft, c Hill, b Peato .. 29 Seoond Innings. 41 Barnes, b P e a t o .................. .. 15 23 Selby, c Hunter, b Bates .. .. 3 c Bates, b Ulyett . 66 Cun 1, st Hunter, b Peate .. .. 6 . 1 Seotton, c Hall, b Peate Flowers, b U lyett.................. Wright, c Lockwood, b Peate .. 12 . 39 .. 18 1-b-w, b Emmett.. . 0 .. 4 b H i l l ........................ 20 A. Shaw, not o u t .................. .. 0 c Hill, b Peate .. . 12 Sherwin, b Ulyett.................. .. 3 st Hunter, b Peate . 0 Morley, b U ly e tt.................. .. 7 not out........................ 0 B 6,1-b 1 .......................... B 13,1-b 5, w 2 . 20 T otal........................ 104 Total .. 241 First Innings. Second Innings. Brackin, c Wright, b Morley .. 9 c Wright, b Morley . 0 Ulvett, st Sherwin, b Morley .. 46 c Shaw b Morley.. 14 Bates, c Gunn, b Shaw .. 88 st Sherwin, b Shaw . 1 E. Lockwood, b Wright .. 34 c Barnes, b Shaw 9 Grimshaw, c Shaw, b Morley .. 44 2 Emmett, c Selby, b Morley .. .. 15 c Shaw, b Morley 19 Hall, 1-b-w, b Morley .. 3 0 H. Lockwood, c Sherwin, b Shaw 0 10 Peate, c Sherwin, b Shaw .. .. 0 c Flowers, b Morley . 4 Hill, not o u t .......................... .. 0 4 Hunter, c Barnes, b Morley .. 0 0 B .................................. .. 2 B .......................... 1 T otal........................ 191 Total.. .. 64 BOWLING ANALYSIS. N otts . First Innings. O. M. R.W. Peate..................3G 11 54 6 H i l l ..................9 4 16 0 Bates.................. 18 8 25 1 Ulyett .. .. 9 5 12 3 Peate ... Hill .. . Bates Ulyett Emmett . Second Innings. O M. R.W. 5G 39 36 . 25.3 11 38 . 51 17 23 . 22 11 31 .2 9 12 31 Y orkshire . First Innings. O. M. R.W. Shaw .. .. 43 23 45 3 Morley .. .. 63-3 25 71 6 Wright .. .. 24 10 37 1 Flowers .. .. 10 8 19 0 Barnes .. .. 9 2 17 0 Second Innings. O. M. R.W. S haw ............. 32 17 30 2 Morley ..31.21833G VINCENT v. BRUNEL. This match was played at Nunhead on May 20, and resulted in a victory for the Vincent by ten runs and one wicket. Murden and Jones batted well for the winners, and Suftield was very success­ ful with the ball, taking six wickets at a cost of 16 runs. For the Brunei, T. H. Jones and C. Butten- sliaw scored well, the former also doing good service with the ball, five out of eight wickets being credited to him. V incent . C. A. Turner, b Aycliffe .. 4 E. H. Dines, run out .. 3 W. Murden, c E. Moore, b Jones ..........................20 O. Jones, b Jones .. .. 16 G. F. Reckitt, b Jones .. 2 Suffield, b Jones .. .. 3 G. F. Lee, b Jones .. .. 0 C. T. narrison, c Aycliffe, b W. M o o re ................ 3 Hodge, b W. Moore .. .. 0 J. Southgate, not out .. 0 E. Saville did not bat. B 30,1-b 2 ................3-3 T o t a l............... 83 BRUNEL. F. Buttensliaw, b Murden 2 E. Moore, b Murden.. .. 0 T. II. Jones, b Murden .. 28 A. Clayson, b Sufiield .. 6 W. Moore, b Suftield .. 0 II. J. Aycliffe, c Suflleld, b M u rd en ..........................2 E. Allport, b Suftield .. 1 W. Clark, c Saville, b Suf- field....................................4 Davis, b Suffleld.................. 1 C. Buttenshaw, not out .. 13 Dubois, st Dines, b Suffield ..........................0 B 13,1-b 2, w l .. .. 16 T o ta l..................73 HAMPSTEAD v. BLACKHEATH MORDEN. Played at Blackheath on May 20. Won by Hampstead by 51 runs. H ampstead . A. R. Parker, c G. Stokes, b Penn..........................5 A. J. Leach, b Ireland .. 0 J. H. Walker, c Blaker, b P e n n ..........................4 A. Butcher, c G. Stokes, b Christopherson .. .. 34 S. D. Fairless, b Ireland.. 2 E. W. Charlton,b Ireland.. 1 R. Furber, b Godfrey .. 25 P. Dollar, b Penn .. .. 3 J. W. Cutler, b Christo­ pherson ..................10 A. Reid, b Christopherson 1 J. Lea, not o u t..................5 B 4 , 1-b 5, w 2 .. . . 1 1 Total 101 B lackheath M orden . H. P. Godfrey, b Walker.. 11 A. Penn, b Walker G. Stokes, st Furber, b Walker.......................... F. S. Ireland, b Parker .. H. C. Blaker, c sub, b Parker.......................... S. Christopherson, b Walker.......................... 12 G. W. Burton, c Dollar, b Parker..........................0 E. H. Nicolls, not out .. 4 G. O. Jacob, 1-b-w, b Walker..........................0 T. B. Heame, b Parker .. 1 R. Stokes, b Parker .. .. 0 B 1, n-b 1 .. . « Total Continued on Page 3.°