Cricket 1882

38 CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. JUNE 8, 1882. C R I C K E T ! L A W N T E IV IV IS ! ! F O O T B A L L ! ! ! First Prize Medal at Melbourne Exhibition, 1880. AMES LILLYWHITE, FROWD d CO., anufacturers of all articles used in the above and other ihletic Sports. Sp6cialit6 for the highest class Goods. Bats ecially seasoned for hot climates. Price Lists and all parti- lars may be had post free. Shippers supplied at wholesale prices. J. L., F. aud Co. are the sole Manufacturers of Frowd’s new itent “ Special Driver” Bat, which drives better, jars less, and erages 1£ ounces lighter than any other Bat; universally lowed to be the greatest improvement made in Bats since cane indies were introduced. Publishers of JAMES LILLY- HITE’8 CRICKETER’S ANNUAL. Manufactory and Ware- > u s e 4and 6, Newington Causeway and 73 and 7i, Borough Dad, London. C R I C K E T . L W e e k l y K e c o r d o f t l i e G r a -m e . THURSDAY, JUNE 8, 1882. Mr. H. Perkins, the Secretary of Marylebone [ub, writes to the Editor— I think it highly desirable that a Cricket paptr should, be published weekly under responsible authority. I consider no one more qualified than yourself, and you shall have my hearty support." “ C ricket ” can be had at W. H. Smith & Son’s jok Stalls. The first number is out of print. J ricket ” will be forwarded to any address in Oreat Britain, for the Season of 18 weeks, by firstpost on Thursday Morning, including piesent issue, for .3/6. It is requested that Postal Orders (not Stamps ) be sent for Sub­ scriptions and Scores. They n/i be made payable to W . R. W r ig h t , at the Office, 17, Paternoster Square. London, E.C., and crossed London and County, Holborn. C r ic k e t ” is r e g is te r e d f o r tr a n s m is s io n a b r o a d , a n d c a n be s e n t, p o s t f r e e , a t th e r e g u la r n e w s p a p e r r a te s o f p o s t a g e to a n y p a r t o f th e w o r ld . TO ADVERTISERS. ricket ” presents an unequalled mediumfo r announcements connection with the game. The scores o f most o f ths ncipal Clubs will appear exclusively in its columns, and re is already a large number of subscribers, including most the leading players of the day. “ C r ic k e t ” will be filed for reference in the Pavilions o f all the principal Clubst i it will thus appeal directly to every class o f cricketer, i limited number of Advertisements will be taken on the lowing terms— £ s. d. For entire Page .. .. 3 3 0 „ Half p a g e ...........................1 15 O „ Quarter page .. .. 0 18 6 Narrow column, per inch . . 0 2 0 A reduction will be made for the season. THE OXFOBD AND CAMBRIDGE MATCH. f e w weeks ago, and it would have been fficult to find anyone other than an enthu- istic partizan of his University to express an opinion in favour of Cambridge for the great fixture of the Loudon season. To judge from the unanimous vote of the critics who profess to be judges of all mat­ ters connected with the game, the match was really as good as over. According to these gentlemen, the Cantabs were weakness itself when compared with the elevens of recent years, and Oxford was sure to have the easiest of wins. To a certain extent the preponderance in favour of Oxford dur­ ing what may be termed the overture to the season proper was fully justified. In the matter of old choices Oxford had de­ cidedly the advantage. It is true that they lost the three most valuable members of the victorious eleven of 1881 in W . H. Patter­ son, A. H. Trevor, and A. H. Evans. It was to this trio that the Oxonians mainly owed their success last season. But these were their only losses, and besides the eight old players left, there was another reserve of undoubted capacity who would have figured in the eleven of 1881 but for illness. On the other hand, with the exception of the three brothers Studd, there was only one other left of the Cambridge eleven which figured at Lord’s last year, and that one a player who could hardly be called first-rate. University cricket has always been such a delicate subject to handle, that one might have expected the analysts whose business it is to test every particle of its composition to have been more than usually cautious in giving a definite opinion at such an early stage of the proceedings. It is needless lor us to recal the surprise which marked the contest of 1881, and it is quite within the bounds of probability that another may be in store for those who still adhere to the belief that Oxford will have an easy victory. It is not our intention to enter here into any comparison of the merits of the twenty-two players who are to form the two elevens. A critical article of this kind from the pen of a gentleman who has had the opportu­ nity of practically testing the bowling, at least, both at Oxford and Cambridge will appear in due course. As far as can be seen at present, the match presents a much more open appearance than was generally imagined a few weeks ago. The very cre­ ditable victory of Cambridge over the Aus­ tralians, following, as it did, so quickly on another success over the champion county of 1881, will have, no doubt, caused a con­ siderable reaction in public opinion. Un­ stinted praise is justly the due of the Cantabs for their brilliant performance, but a comparison derived from one match has always been fallacious. At Cambridge there are no three better amateur batsmen than the brothers Studd; but one of them was last year altogether unsuccessful in London, and the last few wickets do not give one the impression of being very difficult to get. In C. F. Leslie Oxford has a bat to pit against C. T. Studd, and, if anything, taking the eleven throughout, in batting Oxford would appear to have a slight advantage. In bowling Cambridge has beyond a doubt two slow bowlers much above the average in Messrs. C. T. Studd and B. C. Bamsay, and the latter has proved so successful as to warrant a feeling of surprise that he was not tried in previous years. Home form, though, has often proved most unreliable in connection with these inter - University matches, and it will be well to await the appearance of the two elevens in London before a satisfactory estimate can be given of then- respective chances for the meeting at Lord’s on the 26tli of this month. ^ i c P / I Y I M 0 N v G 0 3 3 I P ^ They are the abstracts and brief chronicles of our time.— Hamlet. W hat a week for scoring that ending on Saturday last was to be sure ! To say that the run-getting in the more important matches was far in excess of anything ever recorded within tsix days is but feebly to express the sensational character of the batting. In the first three days there were a? many as six innings of three figures, and in two matches there was what is vulgarly termed a “ century ” on each side. T hese were all given in the last number of “ C bicket ,” but the best of them pales before the brilliance of such a performance as that of Barnes and Midwinter at Lord’s on Thursday aud Friday last. W h en Messrs. B. B . Cooper and W . G. Grace, thirteen years ago, made 283 runs while they were together for the Gentlemen against the Players of the South at the Oval it was a performance without a parallel. Since that time such a feat has been regarded as almost outside the bounds of probability; but on Friday last, when Barnes was at last dismissed by the Leicestershire bowlers, it was found that Midwinter and he had raised the score of Marylebone Club and Ground from 19 fo r two to 473 for three wickets. So that the two batsmen had actually, daring their stay, added as many as 454 runs. M uch has been written on this extra­ ordinary achievement, and many conflicting statements have been made with regard to the best performance of the same kind previously. A correspondent in the Echo accredits the late G. F. Grace and I. D. Walker with having contributed 3G8 for the Gentlemen of the South against the Gentle­ men of the North at Beeston in 1870. There are many who will still remember that memorable match, when 1,114 runs were got for 31 wickets. It is correct that 368 runs were made by Messrs. G. F. Grace (189) and Walker (179), but, as a matter of fact, they were only together while 288 runs were got. “ Mr. I. D. Walker (I quote from