Cricket 1882

38 CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. m ay 25, i882. < - C 0 W £ P 0 p E N C E ^ > TO THE EDITOR OF “ CRICKET.” S ir ,— O11 my return to England some weeks back I found the cricket world much agitated by a rumour that two of our English professionals, playing in Australia during our winter months with Shaw’s Eleven, had forgotten their own and their country’s honour, and had taken a bribe —not to do tlieir best —in a certain match; and that they had tried to gain over another of the team, and had failed. That this rumour was no hole and corner one, but had become public property, is evinced by the fact that the first number of “ Cricket” contained a leading article headed, I think, *‘ The Cricket Scandal in Australia.” Sir, a public rumour, such as this, is a public accusation, and, as such, ought to be, if possible, publicly contradicted. But has there been any public authoritative contradiction ? I have seen none. I noticed that, on their return, Shaw and Shrewsbury emphatically denied that there was any foundation for the rumour, but this contradiction was not made by any means as public as the rumour. I know George Ulyett as well as any professional in England, and I would willingly stake my honour on his ; Selby (for these are the two men accused of “ selling” or trying to “ sell” the match) I do not know as well, but I have no reason whatever for supposing him other than an honourable cricketer. Personally, I have never, since I first heard the report, believed one word of it ; but there are many lovers of cricket who do not know these men as well as I do, and I am but little acquainted with the cricket -loving public if it is not looking with well-founded anxiety for a contradiction as public as the rumour. If it does not require one, I am willing to rest under the stigma of having tried to make a “ mountain out of a mole h illw h ile , at the same time, I shall ever maintain that I made this demand solely in the interests of our honourable and manly national game. I demand then, Sir, for the reputation of English professional cricketers, for the honour of cricket, but. more than all, for the sake of the accused themselves, some public refutation of the “ Cricket Scandal in Australia,” and I would suggest that it take the form of an affidavit, sworn to and signed by every member of Shaw’s team, to the effect that to the best of each man’s knowledge and belief, no member of it did entertain any proposal not to do his best in any match during the tour in Australia. I am, Sir, Faithfully yours, HARRIS. E aling C ollege v . M aida V ale .— Played at Ealing on Saturday last, and resulted in an easy victory for the M.V.C.C., who played with only eight men. Score:—E.C.C.C., first innings, 40; second innings, 19; M .V .C .C ., first innings, 40; second innings, 55. S toics v . W imbledon S chool . — Played at Wimbledon, and resulted in a victory for the School by 79 runs. For the winners A. S. Arnold 73, and E. J. Diver 27, and for the losers G. W. Henderson 22 and 12, not out, F. W. Sothern 17 were the most successful. A ssociated C ricket C hallenge C u p . —The first round for this cup, which is confined to Cricket clubs connected with the largest retail drapery firms in London, will be played off on Saturday next, as under:—Grove House v. Kensington ; Kil­ dare v. Victoria ; Clarence v. Cavendish ; Totten- *n House v. Borough Albion; Waterloo House v. nt; Holborn Circus v. West End. H. M ^n. sec., Albion House, Borough. Qjidlbra*it rfm.Sic. * ! - C ^ I C K E ^ 7 l T 4 O T B r ( I D G E . - 5 > LANCASHIRE v. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY. Another reverse awaited the Lancashire players in this match, concluded at Cambridge on Saturday last. Two defeats in succession, and both at the hands of an eleven very inferior to many whom much the same team beat decisively last year, appear to be very much against the prospects of the Lancastrians attaining the same high position as last year, especially now that Nottinghamshire is again in its full strength. Mr. A. G. Steel was away, but otherwise the eleven was the same as played in the final engagements of 1881, and might fairly b3 termed representative. Cambridge liad only displayed moderate form against Mr. Thorn­ ton’s eleven early in the week, but 011 this occasion they confirmed the opinions expressed by many that they would improve considerably on the show of their opening match. Throughout the scoring was below the average of the Cambridge ground, but the University, chiefly through the good bowling and batting of C. T. Studd, assisted by Ramsay in the latter department, were able to pull through by the bare majority of 14 runs. C ambridge U niversity . First Innings. Mr. J. E. K. Sludd, b Barlow .. 11 Mr. C. B. Studd, c Pilling, b W a ts o n ..................................12 Mr. E. A. J. Maynard, b Barlow 1 Mr. W. N. Roe, c Barlow, b W a ts o n ..................................14 Mr. C. T. Studd, 1-b-w, b Barlow 69 Mr. W. H. Bather, b Crossland.. 6 Mr. R. Spencer, c Robinson, b Second Innings, b Barlow ..................4 b Crossland.................. 35 b Crossland..................1 b Crossland..................7 1-b-w, b Briggs .. .. 88 b Crossland.................. 2 Barlow Mr. W. P. Richardson, b Cross­ land ......................................... Mr. C. A. Smith, b Barlow .. Mr. R. C. Ramsay, not out Mr. C. H. Luxton, b Barlow B 4 ,1-b 1 .................................. 14 c Pilling, b Briggs 27 T otal..........................165 L ancashire . First Innings Mr. A. N. Homby, c Smith, b R a m sa y................................ 21 Barlow, b S m it h ........................15 Mr. E. H. Porter, b Ramsay .. 1 Mr. O. P. Lancashire, c Spencer, b Luxton ........................26 Robinson, b R a m sa y .................0 Briggs, 1b w, b C. T. Studd .. 3 Rev. V. F. Royle, c Richardson, b R a m sa y........................ .. .. 5 Watson, c Spencer, b C. T. Studd ................................16 Crossland, c G. B. Studd, b C. T. Studd................................ 18 Pilling, c Bather, b C. T. Studd.. 21 Nash, not out................................13 8 b Barlow ......................0 4 not out..............................5 21 c and b Briggs .. .. 4 0 1-b-w, b Briggs .. .. 0 5 B 5 ,1-b 2 .. . . 7 • Total .. 130 Second Innings. c C. T. Studd,b Smith 17 c C. T. Studd, b Ram­ say..........................24 0 Maynard,b Ramsay.. 8 c and b Ramsay.. .. 0 1b w ,b Spenccr.. .. 19 c and b C. T. Studd .. 25 c Spencer,bC. T.Studd 47 c Ramsay, b C. T. Studd ..................0 1-b-w, b Ramsay not out .. c Ramsay, b C. Studd .. L-b.................. Total. Total. .133 BOWLING ANALYSIS. U niversity . First innings. Second innings. O.M. R.W. o . M. WatBon .. .. 52 27 61 2 ....................... 19 10 Barlow .. .. 43.1 17 65 6 ....................... 27 13 Crossland.. .. 10 8 34 2 ........................ .9 2 Nash.................. 12 4 Briggs . . . . 5.2 0 L ancashire . First Innings. Second Innings. O. M. R.W. o M C. T. Studd .. 81.3 13 50 4 ........................ 33 1 lfi C.H. Luxton..17 8 24 1 .................................. 4 V R. C. Ramsay.. 27 9 45 4 .. .. . 37 is C. A. Smith .. 3 1 9 1 ............................! 14 3 R. Spencer ..6 0 11 0 ................................... n 2 R.W. 25 0 40 2 22 i 25 0 11 4 CLARE COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, v. EMANUEL COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. This match was played on Clare ground, on May 20, and owing to want of time, resulted in a draw. Salmon’s score comprised a five, 11 fours, and 14 threes. C lare C ollege . E. B. Hill, b Roach .. .. 21 ,T.M.A.Thomson,b Wickens 5 W. B. Salmon, b Scott . .116 H. T. Tliursby, b Wickens . 3 G. L. King, b Wickens .. 3 H. G. C. Hardwicke, c Smith, b Scott..................29 C. Jones-Bateman,c Roach, b Scott ..........................13 E manuel C ollege . G. F. Grace, b Piggott .. 11 A. G. Wilcox, c Scott, b Austen ..........................18 A. L. Lowe, b Austen T. L. Graham, not out B 31,1-b 1, w 5 .. Total 11 .. 8 .. 37 . .272 A. Hewetson, b Hard­ wicke ................................. 0 J. S. Austen, run out .. 5 J. A. Scott, c Thomson, b Hardwicke ..................3 A. G. Brownrigg, runout.. 62 W. Roach, 1 b w, b Hard­ wicke ..........................8 E. A. Atkinson, not out .. 35 H. Summerhayes, c Lowe, b Graham .................. W. Wickens, run out G. F. Smith, not out J. Piggott and F. N. Wills did not bat. B .................................. 3 T o t a l..................125 Em anuel v. C h rist's, May 15.—Emanuel 234 (J. A. Scott 105 not out), Christ’s 25. For Emanuel, J. Wickens took seven wickets in 48 balls for eight runs. ^ C ^ I C K E T > / I T : O £ F 0 I p I ^ AUSTRALIANS v. OXFORD UNIVERSITY. This, the first match of the Australians1 in England, was finished on Wednesday, the 17th. Oxford made a good fight, but the Australians had too much in hand, and won hy nine wickets. A ustralians . H. II. Massie, c Hamilton, b Peake ....................206 A. C. Bannerman,b Robin­ son .............................14 W. L. Murdoch, b Robin­ son ................................0 P. S. McDonnell, b Harri­ son ............................... 0 G. Giffen, b Peake .. .. 19 A u stra lia n s (second innings).- Bannerraan, b Robinson, 0; Murdoch wide, 1; total, 64. O xford . First Innings. E. Peake, c Bannerman, b Palmer 2 E. D. Shaw, not o u t ..................78 M. C. Kemp, b Boyle..................23 A. O. Whiting, b Palmer .. .. 0 C. F. H. Leslie, c Murdoch, b Boyle ..................................18 J. G. Walker, c Blackham, b G a rre tt..................................17 W. A. Thornton, b Garrett .. 2 W. D. Hamilton, c Giffen, b Spofforth ..........................5 G. Harrison, c Giffen, b Spofforth 7 C. J. Godfrey, run out .. .. 2 G. E. Robinson, b Jones .. . . 2 8 ExtraB ................................. 12 Total ..........................189 J. McC. Blackham, c God­ frey, b Shaw .. .. 7 S. Jones, c Whiting, b Hanison ..................39 T. W. Garrett, b Godfrey 41 G. E. Palmer, b Peake .. 18 H. F. Boyle, b Godfrey .. 0 F. R. Spofforth, not out .. 14 B 2 ,1-b 2 ..................4 Total .. ..362 ,—Massie (not out), 46 (not out), 15; leg-byes, 2 Second Innings. b Giffen ..................28 c Jones, b Palmer .. 9 b Giffen .................0 b Boyle.......................55 c and b Giffen .. .. 56 b Giffen ................1 c Jones, b Giffcn .. 13 c Jones, b Giffen .. 37 b Palmer .............. 2”> b Giffen ................. 1 B 2, 1-b 7 .. .. 9 Total .. 234 ANALYSIS OF THE BOWLING. First Robinson Hanison Godfrey .. Peake Shaw Thornton First Spofforth.. Palmer .. Boyle Garrett .. Jones Innings. O. M. R.W. 18 78 2 11 98 2 3 65 2 14 82 3 6 26 1 4 9 0 A ustralians . 34 40 , 21 . 40 13 9 Robinson Harrison Godfrey .. Peako Second Innings. O. M. 11 9 4.2 O xford . Innings. O. M. R.W 10 39 ! 9 36 I 5 66 i 4 35 i 0 1 ( . 29 . 25.3 25 20 1 Second Innings. O. M. Spofforth .. 17 Palmer .. .. 27.3 12 Boyle .. . . 2 3 8 Garrett .. .. 11 1 Jones .. .. 10 3 I Giffen .. . . 2 6 14 Spofforth bowled one no ball. R.W. 18 1 17 0 7 0 19 0 R.W. 28 0 42 2 30 1 27 0 20 0 78 7 A very promising literary venture has just been made in the form of a weekly journal devoted to “ Cricket.” The popular game gives the title. Its success seems to be assured, for it is the only jour­ nal, we believe, which d.evotes its space wholly to a recc rd of matches past, present, and future, to well-written articles on play and players, and to incidents and suggestions which arise from week to week. The arrangement is good .—Leeds Mercury , May 17.