Cricket 1883

MAY 10, 1883. CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 9 3 EADLEY COLLEGE. May 12, at Radley, v. Hichen’s Team „ 19, at Radley. v. University College, Oxford „ 23, at Radley, v. Old Radleians „ 26, at Radley, v. Magdalen College, Oxford 30, at Radley, v. St. Catherine’s June 6, at Radley, v. Corpus ,, 11, at Radley, v. Rradfield „ 23, at Radley, v. Deddington July 14, at Radley, v. Reading ROSSALL SCHOOL. May 14, «t Rossall, v. Stonyhurst Philosophers „ 23, at Rossall, v. St. Helens „ 25 and 26, at Rossall, v. Common Room „ 30, at Rossall, v. J. Stanning’s Eleven June 2, at Rossall, v. Liverpool „ 6, at Rossall, v. West Lancashire „ 12 and 13, at Rossall, v. Revellers ,, 22 and 23, at Pinkie Mains, v. Loretto „ 27, at Rossall, v. G. Walsh’s Eleven July 3 and 4, at Rossall, v. Chester ., 30 and 31, at Rossall, v. Past Rossallians Aug. 1 and 2, at Leylands, v. J. Stanning’s Eleven „ 3 and 4, at Chester, v. Chester „ 6 and 7, at Denbigh, v. Yale of Clywd 2 nd E leven . May 16, at Rossall,v. Kirkham June.9, at Roesall,v. East Lancashire 2nd Eleven BRIGHTON COLLEGE. May 23, Rrighton, Officers of 4th Dragoon Guards June 9, at Rrighton, v. Tunbridge College „ 11, at Rrighton, v. Lancing College „ 14, at Rrighton, v. M.C.C. ,, 16, at Rrighton, v. Rurgess Hill Club „ 19, at Brighton, v. C. B. Woolcomb’s XI „ 23, at Brighton, v. Rev. T. H. Relcher’s X I „ 28, at Eastbourne, v. Eastbourne Club „ 30, at Dulwich, v. Dulwich College July 5, at Rrighton, v. Rrighton Club „ 7, at Brighton, v. Brighton Teachers „ 14, at Lancing, v. Lancing College „ 21, at Brighton, v. Croydon ,, 30 and 31, at Brighton, v. Old Brightonians LORETTO SCHOOL. P rincipal M atches . May 26, at Loretto v. Edinburgh Garrison June 9, at Uppingham, v. Uppingham School „ 22 and 23, at Loretto, v. Rossall School July 18 and 14, at Fettes, v. Fettes College „ 21, at Loretto, v. Lasswade & G. ,, 24 and 25, at Loretto, v. Edinburgh University HAILEYBURY COLLEGE. May 19, at Haileybury, v. Incogniti „ at Haileybury, v. Gent, of Herts June 2, at Haileybury, v. Marlborough Blues „ 16, at Haileybury, v. Old Boys „ 20,21, at Wellington, v. Wellington College July 7, at Haileybury, M.C.C. and Ground „ 14, at Haileybury, v. Kensington Park CHELTENHAM COLLEGE. May 18 and 19, at Cheltenham, v. Liverpool „ 24, at Cheltenham, v. St John’s Coll. (Oxon.) ,, 31, at Cheltenham, v. Keble Coll. (Oxon.) June 9, at Cheltenham, v. “ The Lost Tribe ” „ 12 and 14. at Cheltenham, v. East Gloucestershire Club „ 22 and 23, at Cheltenham, v. Clifton Coll. ,, ?5 and 2(5, at Cheltenham, v. Emeriti „ 28, at Cheltenham, v. Clifton Club „ 29 and 30, at Cheltenham, v. Old Cheltonians July 3, at Cheltenham, v. Old Malvemians ,, 6 and 7, at Marlborough, v. Marlborough Cjll. „ 14, at Cheltenham, v. R.A.C. Cirencester] “ T h e hat trick.” Palmer for Victoria, in the first innings of South Australia, Melbourne, Marce 24th. I n a match between Huddersfield and Tod­ morden, at Todmorden, on Saturday last, five wickets of Todmorden did not add a run before falling in six balls. A. C. Sharpe got three in succession. C r ic k e t C a le n d a r f o e 1838, just pub­ lished, 6Vd., post free. C k ick e t, price 2d., a weekly rscord of the game, every Thursday morning. — Published by Wright aud Co. (Cricket Pres1*), 17, Faternoster-square, E. C. * S - C 0 I W g P 0 P E N C E i * We are not responsible for the opinions expressed by our correspondents. No communieations can be inserted un­ less they bear the name and address of the writer, as a proof of good faith, not necessarily for publication. THROWING. To t h e E d it o r o f “ C e ic k e t .” S ir , —I think perhaps that you may like to know the account I gave the M.C.C. of an addition made to Law X ., many years ago by which the Umpire was required to call no-ball not only if the ball was thrown or jerked, or if the hand was raised over the shoulder in deliveiy, but also if a bowler should so nearly infringe on the law in any of those particulars as to make the umpire doubtful as to the fair­ ness of the ball. Those are not the exact words, aud I do not remember the exact date. But I recollect clearly that 30 years ago or more, I made the proposal that the doubtin an umpire’s mind as to the fairness or unfairness of a bowler should cause him to call no ball. The words of the law were drawn by the late Sir John Bayley, and were proposed %nd seconded by him and me and passed. The result was good for a short time. Bow­ lers tried to keep down the band, and there were a few cases of calling no ball in clear and in doubtful cases. But the duty of doing so was very disagreeable to umpires, and gradually it was found that umpires who acted in accord­ ance with the law were not employed in many cases. This led to a gradual relaxation, and in spite of warnings by the M.C C. Committee to the Lord’s umpires, that they were bound to observe the law, it may be said to have been almost forgotten. It is a fact that in printing copies of the laws for M.C.C., these words were for a long time omitted. When the law against high bowling was altered by the omission of all reference to the height of the hand, those words as to the doubt being against the bowler were omitted. The ground of doing so was, I remember, that every­ one knew what a throw was, so they were un­ necessary. At the time the laws were being discussed lately with a view to revision, I found the minute of the law as altered in the M.C.C book, and the whole course of procetding about the high bowling question, and it was just such as is now going on about the throwing. I suggested to the meeting the appointment of a standing committee of the best umpires of the day, to whom any objected bowler might be referred—who should watch him in practice, and also in some matches, and should decide (i.e. majority of them) whether the bowler should be allowed to bowl or no. There would be difficulties in such a course, but I think not insuperable, and I do not see why it should not be tried for a year or so, and if it should fail then, the other plan of giving the doubt against the bowler might be tried again.—Yours, etc., B e s s b o r o c g h . To t h e E d it o r o f “ C r ic k e t .” S ir , —I shall be obliged if you will give me the opportunity of making public my intention, at the general meeting of the M.C.C. which must be summoned to consider the laws of cricket as amended by a committee of that club, of moving to amend Law X. by the addition of words to this effect, “ If in the opinion of the umpire there is any doubt as to the fairness of the delivery he shall call ‘ no-ball.’ ”—Faithfully yours, H a r r is . O n Saturday, at Woolwich, F. E. Allsopp scored 137 out of 298 for the Boyal Horse Artil­ lery, against the Garrison. W IL L O W TH E KING . From the Harrow School Songs. Willow the King is a monarch grand, Three in a row his courtiers stand ; Every day when the sun shines bright, The doors of his palace are painted white, And all the company bow their backs To the king with his collar of cobbler’s wax. So ho 1 so h o ! may the courtiers sing. Honour and life to Willow the King! Willow, King Willow, thy guard hold tight; Trouble is coming before the night: Hopping and galloping short and strong, Comes the Leathery Duke along: And down the palaces tumble fast When once the Leathery Duke gets past. So h o ! &c. “ Who is this,” King Willow he swore, “ Hops like that to a gentleman’s door ? 1 ‘ Who’s afraid of a Duke like him ? “ Fiddlededee! ” says the monarch slim : “ What do you say, my courtiers three? ” And the courtiers all said “ Fiddlededee ! ” So h o ! &c. Willow the King stepped forward bold Three good feet from his castle hold; Willow the King stepped back so light, Skirmished gay to the left and right: B.ut the Duke rushed by with a leap and a fling. “ Bless my soul! ” says Willow the King. So ho 1 &c. Crash the palaces, sad to see ; Crash and tumble the courtiers three ! Each one lays, in his fear and dread, Down on the grass his respected head; Each one kicks, as he downward goes, Up in the air his respected toes. So ho I &c. But the Leathery Duke he jumped so high, Jumped till he almost touched the sky, “ A fig for King Willow,” he boasting said, “ Carry this gentleman off to bed ! ” So they carried him off with the courtiers three, And put him to bed in the green baize tree. So h o ! &c. What of the Duke ? ” you ask anon, “ Where has his Leathery Highness gone ? ” O he is filled with air inside— Either it’s air, or else it’s pride—- And he swells and swells as tight as a drum, And they kick him about till Christmas come. So h o ! ho ! h o! may his courtiers sing. Honour and Life to Willow the King. S mall S coring .—At a match played last Saturday, at Desborough, Northamptonshire, between Desboro’ C.C. and Kettering Church Institute C.C., the latter, who went to the wickets first, were all disposed of for the small total of 18, although the first wicket did not fall until 16 runs had been made. There were seven 0’s in the Kettering score. The wickets fell as follows:—1 for 16,2 for 17, 3 for 17, 4 and rest for 18. There were no analyses. The Desborough bow­ ling was as follows:—Kilborn, overs (of 6 balls), 8; maidens, 1; runs, 8; wickets, 3 ; Panter, overs (of 6 balls), 7; maidens, 2 ; runs, 10; wickets, 5. Two batsmen were run out. Desboro’ scored 78. A b n e y v. B r o c k le y . —Played at Blackheath on Saturday. Abney 65 (A. Ive !25) ; Brockley 43 (Gabbott 15.)