Cricket 1884

d e c . 23,1584, CRICKET; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 491 TH E F IR S T C LA SS COUN T IE S . B y T homas K eyw orth . I t was in June, 1873, that the rules which regulate the qualification of players in county matches were finally adopted. Before that time some players had represented two or more counties during the same season, and in many respects there was looseness about the constitution of county teams. During the twelve seasons which have passed since June, 1873, county cricket has devaloped in importance and interest. Nine counties were considered first class at that time, and they have continued since in the same cate­ gory. In the report of a preliminary meeting held the previous December they are placed in the following order—Yorkshire, Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, Middlesex, Gloucestershire, Sussex, Surrey and Kent. It is difficult to see what order was observed in naming them ; perhaps there was no order, but the first to mind was first to hand. During the last twelve seasons those nine counties have played among themselves 520 matches. They have also played with other counties, tut it is not intended now to refer to any except those which have all the time ranked as first class. As regards the number of matches played, Yorkshire heads the list, having taken part in 160. Derbyshire is at the other extreme, having taken part in 76. The other counties are as follows—Surrey, 154; Notts, 129 ; Lancashire, 119 ; Gloucestershire, 108 ; Kent, 104 ; Sussex, 100 ; Middlesex, 90. Speaking of the several years and the claims which might advanced by the respec­ tive counties to championship honours, if we compare wins with losses, we must arrange them thus;— In 1873, Gloucestershire won 4, lost 0, and drew 2 ; Middlesex won 3, lost 0, drew 0. In 1874, Derbyshire won 3, lost 0, and drew 1. In 1875, Notts won 6, lost 1, and drew 3. In 1876, Gloucestershire won 5, lost 0, and drew 3. In 1877, the same county won 7, lost 0, and drew 1. In 1878. Middlesex won 3, lost 0, and drew 3. In 1879, Notts won 5, lost 1, and drew 6. In 1880, the same county won 6, lost 1, and drew 3. In 1881, Lanca­ shire won 10, lost 0, and drew 3. In 1882, the same county won 10, lost 1, and drew 3; Notts won 8, lost 1, and drew 3. In 1883, Yorkshire won 9, lost 2, and drew 5 ; Notts won 4, lost 1, and drew 7. In 1884, Notts won 9, lost 0, and drew 1. Thus, in the twelve years, Notts has been either first, or “ as good as any,” six times ; Gloucester­ shire three times, Lancashire and Middlesex twice each, Yorkshire and Derbyshire once each. Four counties have won more matches than they have lost, these are, Notts, Lan­ cashire, Yorkshire, and Gloucestershire. The proportions of wins to losses are implied by the order in which they are placed, the particulars are given below. Middlesex, [Surrey, Kent, Sussex, and Derbyshire hare lost more matches than they have won. Notts stands at the head of the counties. The county club was formed in 1859. During the twelve seasons in which the county qualifications have been in operation it has taken part in 129 matches with first- class counties; of these 68 were won, 24 lost, and 37 drawn. The highest innings was 501, against Surrey, in 1882. The lowest was 42, against Lancashire, in the same year. The highest innings made against Notts was 419, by Yorkshire, in 1878. The lowest innings were 16, made by Derby­ shire, in 1879, and by Surrey, in 1880. The total runs made by Notts in these matches are 33,313, for 1,958 wickets. This gives an average of 17 runs a wicket, counting extras in. The Lancashire county club was formed in 1864. It has taken part in 119 of these matches, winning 67, losing 32, and drawing 20. Highest score, 439, against Middlesex, in 1882. Lowest, 38, against Derbyshire, in 1374. Highest score against it, 353, by Yorkshire, in 1879; lowest, 33, by Surrey, in 1873. Total runs, 28,528, for 1,817 wickets ; average 15 and two thirds. The Yorkshire county club was formed in 1863. It has taken part in 160 of these matches, winning 81, losing 45, and drawing 34. The highest innings was 419, against Notts, in 1878; the lowest was 32, against the same county, in 1876. The highest in­ nings against it was 528, by Gloucestershire, in 1876; the lowest was 24, by Sussex, in 1878. Total runs, 41,827, for 2,521 wickets; average 16 and a half. The Gloucestershire county club was formed in 1870. It has taken part in 108 of these matches, winning 40, losing 33, and drawing 35. Highest innings, 528, against Yorkshire, in 1876; lowest, 34, against Lancashire, in 1883. Highest innings against it, 537, by Middlesex, in 1883 ; lowest, 27, by Surrey, in 1874, Total runs, 31,023, for 1,628 wickets ; average 19. The other counties have lost more matches than they have won. The present Middlesex county club was formed in 1868. It has taken part in 90 of these matches, winning 28, losing 32, and drawing 29 ; one match was a tie. Highest innings, 537, against Gloucestershire, in 1883; lowest, 32, against Notts, in 1882. Highest against it, 439, by Lancashire, in 1882 ; lowest, 59. by Notts, in 1875. Total runs, 27,531, for 1,417 wickets; average 19 and nearly a half. The Surrey county club was formed in 1844. It has taken part in 154 of these matches, winning 46, losing 74, and drawing 33 ; one match was a tie. Highest innings, 388, against Gloucestershire, in 1884; lowest, 16, against Notts, in 1880. Highest against it, 501, by Notts, in 1882; lowest, 38, by Kent, in 1879. Total runs, 46,619, for 2,671 wickets ; average almost 16. The Kent county club was formed in 1859, and re-formed in 1879. It has taken part in 104 of these matches, winning 35, losing 57, and drawing 12. Highest innings, 521, against Sussex, in 1882; lowest, 25, against Derbyshire, in 1874. Highest against it, 392, by Yorkshire, in 1883; lowest, 36, by Derbyshire, in 1874. Hampshire scored a higher innings against Kent in 1884, but this does not reckon. Total runs, 27,792, for 1,842 wickets; average 15. The Sussex county club was formed in 1857, though there was a kind of county committee in 1842. Sussex took part in 100 of these matches, winning 24, losing 62, and drawing 14. The highest innings was 464, against Kent, in 1884 ; the lowest, 19, against Notts, in 1873. Highest against it, 521, by Kent, in 1882; lowest, 59, by Kent, in 1875. Total runs, 27,787, for 1,799 wickets ; average 15 and a half. The Derbyshire county club was formed in 1870. It has taken part in 76 of these matches, winning 20, losing 50, and drawing 6. The highest innings was 307, against Kent, in 1875 ; the lowest 16, against Notts, in 1879. Highest against it, 369, by Surrey, in 1884; lowest, 25, by Kent, in 1874. Total runs, 17,152, for 1,430 wickets; average nearly 12, Dividing the counties into North and South, we find the Northern counties have taken part in 484 matches, winning 236, losing 151, and drawing 97. The Southern counties have taken part in 554 matches, winning 173, losing 258, and drawing 123. This does not mean matches played between Northern and Southern counties, but matches in which the various first-class counties have played with first-class counties. The four in the Ndith have been engaged 484 times, and the five in the South 554 times. None of these counties ever succeeded in winning all its matches during any of the twelve seasons under review. When matches have not been lost, one or more have been drawn. But some of the counties have failed to win any matches during a season This was the ease with Middlesex, in 1875 and 1877; and with Sussex in 1877 and 1880. During those years the matches ot these two counties were either lost or drawn. But Kent and Derbyshire have had still worse fortune, for in 1875, the former, and in 1884, the latter, lost every match with the first class counties. THE STYGIANS. To the E dito r or “ C r ic k e t .” S ir , —In the kind paragraph relating to myself in the last number of C e ic k e t , it is stated that I was “ for many years Hon. Sec.” of the Stygians. May I say, in justice to my friend, Mr. C. S. Hunter, that I have never been Hon. Sec, of the Stygians, and that whatever measure of success that club has achieved is mainly due to the indefatigable services of Mr. Hunter in that capacity.—Yours, &c., W. S. S h ir le y . The Temple, Dec. 16. A COUNTY CLUB FOR CAMBRIDGE­ SHIRE. To th e E ditor of “ C r ic k e t .” S ir , —With your permission I should like to say a few words upon Cambridgeshire cricket. 'Why can’t we re-establish the county club, and so bring back to memory the good deeds that John Smith, Hayward, Carpenter, and others did for us long ago? I am sure there are quite as good men in the county now (in a cricketing point of view) as in the old days, if they had but the coaching of some good cricketer. Why can’t one good leading club take it np, send out circulars to all the local clubs to the effect, “ That a meeting will be held on such a day at Cambridge (or else­ where) to see if it is not possible to raise county cricket cnce again ? ” Each club could then send a representa­ tive to discuss the subject. I suppose Fenner’s Ground could be used for matches, etc., by arranging with the C. U. C. C. authorities. We could then have Colts’ matches and test the merits of the players. Hoping something may be done.—I am, Yours etc., A C am bridgesh ire C ricketer . R eading C ases —(cloth boards) for holding four numbers of C r icket , 2s., can be had at the office, 41, St. Andrew’s-hill, Doctors’ Commons, E.C. Next issue o f Cricket Jan.. 29-