Cricket 1886

DEO. 30,1886. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 47ft ments suggested were really in order. It was stated that Captain Holden’s motion was not anthorised by the Notts County Club. The Sussex motion having only been sent to the nine Counties called first-class, was also voted informal, and Mr. Horner having explained that his resolution was only meant as an alter­ native motion, it was arranged thatthedecision of the meeting should be taken on Lord Harris’s proposal. In introducing his motion— That the Committee of the M.C.C. be requested to consider whether it is necessary any longer to impose a residence of two years before a county qualification can be established, anti whether the probationary period might not safely be reduced to twelve months — Lord Harris advocated the proposed alteration in an able speech. He pointed out that the main object in the institution of a code of rules for county cricket in 1873 was to prevent a cricketer playing for two counties in the same year. There was no question of buying men from another county, such a possibility had not been thought of. He claimed that the alteration he proposed would not be to the detriment of cricket as apprehended in some quarters, but to its benefit. According to his view a cricketer must reside continuously in the county of his adoption for one year, in­ deed, the only difference in the rules as they were was * reduction of the period of con­ tinuous residence from twenty-four to twelve months. He pointed to the cases of Messrs. E. F. S. Tylecote and H. W. Bainbridge, last year’s Cambridge captain, who, after representing Kent and Surrey respectively, were prevented by their removal from play­ ing for other counties until they had fulfilled a new residential qualification of two years, as instances where the existing rules had operated injuriously. A good deal of senti­ ment was expressed as to the superior claim of a birth qualification, but he was of opinion that where a cricketer setted in a county and had family, residential, or business ties, they were quite as strong, if not stronger. He proposed his resolution in the interests of amateurs, not to restrict their cricket, but still more for professionals, so as to enable them to make the best use of the short career they had. As long as a cricketer resided con­ tinuously he could not see why the period should not be twelve months instead of two years. County cricket was the great aim of all players, and he did not see why profes­ sionals should be prevented from reaching the highebt ranks by unnecessary restrictions. He did not believe in the argument that professionals would be bought by the richest counties. They could be bought now, but he did not think many, even in Notts or York- shirt, were good enough to buy, and even if it were so they could be bought with two years qualification as at present; the difference of a year would only mean an extra expenditure of a few pounds. He had been called a cricket socialist. He did not know what a cricket socialist was, but if it meant that he had the interest of professional cricketers thoroughly at heart, then he was one. He did not expect to carry his point at the first attempt, as most of those present had come with definite instructions from their Committees how to vote, and any argument would not affect them. Mr. Horner, the hon. sec of the Cheshire County Club, seconded the resolution, though he did not think it went far enough. Mr. I. D. Walker, while expressing the unanimous feeling of all interested that Lord Harris’s only object in bringing forward his motion was the interest of county cricket, was of opinion, in which the Middlesex committee thoroughly concurred, that the proposal was a very mischievous one. He urged that were it carried it would destroy the esprit de corps existing in county elevens, and matches would degenerate into mere meetings between scratch elevens. He would point out that any good player could get an engagement at lord ’s, and get a full chance if competent in the best matches. Mr. M. J. Ellison, the president of the Yorkshire County, mentioned that his com­ mittee were thoroughly against the proposed alteration, and he was authorised to oppose it on their behalf. On a division it was found that three were for, and fourteen against, the motion. The representatives of Lancashire, Cheshire, and Hampshire voted for, and those of Surrey, Sussex, Notts, Yorkshire, Middlesex, Glouces­ tershire, Derbyshire, Essex, Warwickshire, Northamptonshire, Staffordshire, Leicester­ shire, Somersetshire, and Norfolk against. Kent did not vote, as Mr. Marsham, the president, held different views to Lord Harris. After lunch, Lord Harris proposed That a provisional committee, consisting of repre­ sentatives of the nine leading counties, be appointed to consider the rules of county cricket generally, with a view to any altera­ tions, and the desirability of forming a council for the future regulation of matters relating to county cricket—always accepting the Marylebone Club as the court of appeal— aud report to a meeting consisting of delegates of all the counties on the second morning of the match between Gentlemen and Players at Lord’s, next season.” After some discussion an amendment, pro- osed by Mr. Ellison (Yorkshire) and seconded y Mr. J. Horner (Cheshire), was carried that the provisional committee consist of the repre­ sentatives of the five southern counties—Mid­ dlesex, Surrey, Kent, Gloucestershire, and Sussex. The arrangement of the programme for the season of 1887 was next undertaken. The fol­ lowing is alist of the chief matches for the year. Several alterations, we may add, have been made since the meeting at Lord’s. M A Y . 4—L o rd ’s, M .C.C. A nniversary M eeting and D inner. 5—L o rd ’s, M .C.C. and G. v. M iddlesex C olts. 9—L o rd ’s, C olts of N orth v. C olts o f S outh. 12—L o rd ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. D erbyshire. 1G—L ord ’s, M.C.C. and G rou n d v. K ent. 1G—K ennin gton Oval, S urrey v. H am pshire. 1G—Sheffield, Y orkshire E leven v. C olts o f C ounty. 19—L ord ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. Sussex. 19—O xford, M.C.C. and G round v. O xford U niv. 19—K ennington Oval, Surrey v. W arw ickshire. 20—L eicester, L eicestersh ire v. Cheshire. 23—L ord ’s, M .C.C. and G round v. Y orkshire. 23—M anchester, L ancashire v . Sussex. 2G—L o rd ’s, M iddlesex v. Surrey. 26—B lackheath, K ent v. G loucestershire. 26—O xford, O xford U n iversity v. L ancashire. 27—H uddersfield, Y orkshire v. W arw ickshire. 30—(W hit-M onday.) L o rd ’s, N orth v. South. 30—B righton, Sussex v. G loucestershire. 30—Sheffield, Y orkshire v. K ent. 30—D erby, D erbyshire v. Essex. 3')—B irm ingham , W arw ickshire v. L eicestersh ire. 30—N ottingham , N otts v. Surrey. 30—Southam pton, H am pshire v. N orfolk. 30—N ortham pton, N orth an ts v. Staffordshire JU N E . 2—L o rd ’s, M iddlesex v. G loucestershire. 2 —M anchester, L ancashire v. K ent. 2 —Birm ingham , W arw ickshire v. Surrey. 2 —Cam bridge, C am bridge U niv. v. Y orkshire. 3 —N ottingham , N otts C olts v. Y orkshire C olts. 6—L o rd ’s, M iddlesex v. Yorkshire. G—Cam bridge, C am bridge U niv. v. M .C.C. and G. 6—D erby, D erbyshire v. K ent. 6—L eicester. L eicestersh ire v. Surrey. G—S ou th am pton , H am pshire v. Sussex. 9—L o rd ’s, M iddlesex v. N otts. 9 —M anchester, L an cash ire v. D erbyshire. 9—O xford, O xford U niv. v. Surrey. 10—D ew sbury, Y orkshire v. L eicestersh ire. 10—B edford, B edfordshire v. N ortham ptonshire. 13—(Jubilee W eek at L o rd ’s) M.C.C. and G. v. England. 13—Stoke, Staffordshire v. Cheshire. 16—L o rd ’s, E leven A m ateurs v. E ighteen Veterans. 1G—B righ ton , Sussex v. C am bridge U niversity, 1G - N ottingham , N otts v. Yorkshire. 1G—M anchester, L ancashire v. Surrey. 17—S tock port, Cheshire v. L eicestershire. 17—N ortham pton, N orthants v. W arw ickshire 2Q—L ord ’s, M iddlesex v. K ent. 2Q -K en n in gton Oval, Surrey v. C am bridge U niv. 20—M anchester, L ancashire v. O xford U niv. 20—B radford, Yorkshire v. Sussex. 23—L o rd ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. N otts. 23—M oreton-in-the-M arsh, G loucestershire v. Surrey. 21—Southam pton, H am pshire v. Essex. 24—St. A lbans,H ertfordshire v. N ortham ptonshire. 24—S tock port, Cheshire v. L ancashire. 27—L ord 's, M.C.C. and G . v. C am bridge U niv. 27—K ennin gton Oval, Surrey v. O xf«#d U niv. 27— Southam pton, H am pshire v. M .C.C. and G. 27— In K ent, K ent v. L ancashire. 27—D erby, D erbyshire v. Y orkshire. 27— Stoke, S taffordshire v. W arw ickshire. 30—L o rd ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. O xford U niv. 3 —B righ ton , Sussex v. K ent. 30— N ottingham , N otts v. L ancashire. 30—K ennin gton O val, Surrey v. M iddlesex. 30—G loucester, G loucestershire v. Y orkshire. J U L Y . 1— S tock port, Cheshire v. Staffordshire. 1—N ortham pton, N ortham ptonshire v. N orfolk. 4— L o rd ’s, O xford v. C am bridge. 4— Sheffield. Y orkshire v. Surrey. G— L eyton , E ssex v. N orfolk. 7—B eckenham , Players of the N orth v. P layers of the South. 7—L on g E aton, D erbyshire v. L ancashire. 8—L o rd ’s, E ton v. H arrow . 8—H alifax, Y orksh ire v. Cheshire. 11—L o rd ’s, G entlem en v. P layers. 11— T onbridge, K ent v. Sussex. 11—B irm ingham , W arw ickshire v. Y orkshire. 13—Y ork, G entlem en v. P layers o f Y orkshire. 14—L ord ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. L eicestersh ire. 14—K ennington O val, G entlem en v. P layers. 14—B righton, Sussex v. H am pshire. 15—S tock port, Cheshire v. Y orkshire. 18—L o rd ’s, M .C.C. and G round v. L ancashire. 18—N ottingham , N otts v. K ent. 18—Oval. E ssex v. Surrey. 18—Sheffield, Y orkshire v. D erbyshire. 21—B eckenham , K en t v. Surrey. 21—B righton, Sussex v. N otts. 21—M anchester, L ancashire v. G loucestershire. 22—Stoke, Staffordshire v. N ortham ptonshire. 22—L eyton , E ssex v. H ants. 25—D ew sbury, Y orkshire v. G loucestershire. 25—L o rd ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. N orfolk. 25—K ennin gton O val, Surrey v. L eicestershire. 27—L o rd ’s, B ugby v. M arlborough. 28—N ottingham , N otts v. G loucestershire. 28—D erby, D erbyshire v. Surrey. 21—B irm ingham , W arw ickshire v. Som ersetshire. 28—L o rd ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. R ugby School. 29—N ortham pton, N ortham ptonshire v. B edford­ shire. A U G U S T . 1—B ank H oliday. C anterbury W eek com m ences. K ent v. Y orkshire. 1—L o rd ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. Staffordshire. 1—L eyton , E ssex v. M .C.C. and G round. 1—S outham pton, H am pshire v. Som ersetshire. 1—C lifton, G loucestershire v. Sussex. 1—K ennin gton O val, Surrey v. Notts. 1—M anchester, L an cash ire v. Cheshire. 1—N orw ich, N orfolk v. N ortham ptonshire. 3—N orw ich, N orfolk v. Essex. 4—Canterbury, K ent v. M iddlesex, 4—K ennington O val, Surrey v. G loucestershire. 5—N orw ich, N orfolk v. H am pshire. 5—L eicester, L eicestersh ire v. Y orkshire. # 8—L o rd ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. Som ersetshire. 8—B righton, Sussex v. Surrey. 8—C lifton , G loucestershire v. N otts. 8 —B radford, Y orkshire v. L ancashire. 8—L eicester, L eicestersh ire v. Essex. 10—L o rd ’s, M.C.C. and G round v. Cheshire. 11—K ennington O val, Surrey v. L ancashire. 11—L eyton , E ssex v. Som ersetshire. 11—H uddersfield, Y orkshire v. M iddlesex. 11—B irm ingham . W arw ickshire v. N otts. 12—Stoke, Staffordshire v. M.C.C. and G round. 15—K ennington O val, Surrey v. D erbyshire. 15— Cheltenham W eek com m ences, G loucester­ shire v. L ancashire. 15—B righton, Sussex v. Y orkshire. 15—L eicester, L eicestersh ire v. W arw ickshire. 15—N ottingham , N otts v. M iddlesex. 18—K ennington O val, Surrey v. Y orkshire. 18—T onbridge, K ent v. D erbyshire. 18—M anchester, L an cash ire v. N otts. 16—C heltenham , G loucestershire v. Som ersetshire. 19—Rath, Som ersetshire v. M.C.C. and G round. 19—N ortham pton, N ortham ptonshire v. H ereford shire. 22—L eyton , E ssex v. D erbyshire. 22—L ord 's, M .C.C. and G round v. N orth am p ton ­ shire. 22—B righton, Sussex v. L ancashire. 22—K ennington Oval, Surrey v. K ent 22—T aunton, S om ersetshire v. H am pshire. 22—C lifton, G loucestershire v. M iddlesex. 22—Sheffield, Y orkshire v. N otts. 25—C lifton , G loucestershire v. Kent. 25—M anchester, L an cash ire v. Y orkshire. 25—Southam pton, H a m p sh b o v. Surrey. 25—N ottin gh am , N otts v. Sussex. 25—T aunton, S om ersetshire v. W arw ickshire. 29—M aidstone, K en t v. N otts. 29—(T he S carborough F estival com m en ces I Zingari v. G entlem en of E ngland. 29—K ennin gton O val, Surrey v. Sussex. 29—L eyton , Essex v. L eicestershire. SE P T E M B E R . 1—L eyto , Surrey v. Essex. 1— S carborough, N orth v. South. 2—B irm ingham , W arw ickshire V. N orth am p ton ­ shire. 5—S carborough, M.C.C. and G round v.Y orkshire Next Issue Janaary 27