Cricket 1886

JAN. 28, 1886. CBICKET: A WEEKLY RECOBD OF THE GAME. 3 JULY. 1—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Oxford University 1—Gloucester, Gloucestershire v. Sussex 1—Nottingham, Notts v. Yorkshire 1—Liverpool, Surrey v. Lancashire 1—Northampton, Northamptonshire v. Stafford­ shire 1—Leyton, Essex v. Norfolk 1—Lord’s, M.C.C. v. Oxford University 2—Southampton, Hampshire v. Hertfordshire 6—Lord’s, Oxford v. Cambridge 6—Derby, Derbyshire v. Surrey 5—Manchester, England v. Australia 8—Manchester,Lancashire v. Yorkshire 8—Brighton, Sussex v. Kent 8—Leicester, Leicestershire v. Surrey 8—Nottingham, Australians v. Notts 9—Lord’s, Eton v. Harrow 9—Stockport, Cheshire v. Warwickshire 12—Lord’s, Gentlemen v. Players 12—Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Leicestershire 12—Derby, Derbyshire v. Essex 12—Sheffield, Australians v. Yorkshire 15—Kennington Oval, Gentlemen v. Players 15—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Northampton­ shire 15—Manchester, Lancashire v. Essex 15—Tonbridge, Kent v. Sussex 15—Halifax, Yorkshire v. Cheshire 19—Nottingham, Notts v. Lancashire 19—Tonbridge, Kent v. Derbyshire 19—Southampton, Hampshire v. Surrey 19—Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Staffordshire 19—Lord’s, England v. Australia 22—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Norfolk 22—Brighton, Sussex v. Notts 22—Beckenham, Kent v. Surrey 22—Manchester, Lancashire v. Gloucestershire 22—Huddersfield, Australians v. Yorkshire. 26—Kennington Oval, Surrey v. Sussex. 26—Sheffield, Yorkshire v. Gloucestershire. 26—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. South WalesClub 26—Stoke, Australians v. An England Eleven. 28—Lord’s, Rugby v. Marlborough 28—Norwich, Norfolk v. Essex. 29—Kennington Oval, Australians v. Surrey. 29—Nottingham, Notts v. Gloucestershire. 29—Dewsbury, Yorkshire v. Lancashire 29—Southampton, Hampshire v. Somersetshire 30—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Rugby School AUGUST. 2—Kennington Oval, Surrey v. Notts. 2—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Clifton College 2—Southampton, Hampshire v. Sussex. 2—Leyton, Essex v. M.C.C. and Ground 2—Manchester, Lancashire v. Cheshire 2—Derby, Derbyshire v. Gloucestershire 2—Canterbury, Australians v. Kent 4—Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Northampton­ shire 5—Clifton, Australians v. Gloucestershire 5—Canterbury, Kent v. Yorkshire 5—Kennington Oval, Surrey v. Derbvshire 5—Manchester, Lancashire v. Notts (Barlow’s benefit) G—Norwich, Norfolk v. M.C.C. and Ground •9—Gloucester, Gloucestershire v. Middlesex 9—Sheffield, Yorkshire v. Notts 9—Brighton. Sussex v. Lancashire 9—Leyton, Essex v. Derbyshire 9—Hitchin, Hertfordshire v. M.C.C. and Ground 12—Gravesend, Sent v. Middlesex 12—Holbeck, Yorkshire v. Derbyshire 12—Kennington Oval, England v. Australia 13—Bishop’s Stortford, Hertfordshire v. Essex 13—Stockport, Cheshire v. Leicestershire 16—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Somersetshire 16—Brighton, Sussex v. Surrey 16—Bradford, Yorkshire v. Middlesex 16—Manchester,Gentlemenv.Players of Lancasshr 16—Cheltenham, Australians v. Gloucestershire 16—Derby, Derbyshire v. Lancashire 19—Kennington Oval, Surrey v. Kent 19—Nottingham, Notts v. Middlesex 19—Cheltenham, Gloucestershire v. Yorkshire 19—Taunton, Somersetshire v. Hampshire 19—Northampton, Northamptonshire v. Norfolk 19—Portsmouth, Australians v. United Services. 20—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Hertfordshire 23—Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Leicestershire 23—Maidstone. Kent v. Lancashire 23—Brighton, Sussex v. Yorkshire 23—Clifton, Gloucestershire v. Surrey 23—Leyton, Australians v. Past and Present of Cambridge University 25—Hertford, Hertfordshire v. Hampshire 26—Kennington Oval, Surrey v. Yorkshire 26—Nottingham, Notts v. Kent 26—Clifton, Gloucestershire v. Lancashire 26—Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Somersetshire 26—Brighton. Australians v. Sussex 30—Leyton, Essex v. Lancashire 30—Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Cheshire 30—Scarborough, Gentlemen v. Players (Scar­ borough Festival commences) 30 —Gravesend, Australians v. South of England SEPTEMBER. .orough, Australians v. Gentlemen of •Tngland. C R IC K E T IN A U S T R A L IA . H ig h S corin g at A d e l a id b . The annual match between the St. Peter’: and Prince Alfred Colleges in South Australia was played on the Adelaide Oval, on Thursday and Friday, Nov. 19 and 20. This is the cricket event of the year and is as much looked forward to here as the Harrow and Eton con­ tests are in England. Both teams undergo a course of “ coaching ” for weeks prior to the event. Last year, C. W. Hayward, who is now studying at Oxford, was the hero of the occasion with a well made score of 126 run out, and it was not anticipated that his brilliant performance was so soon to be eclipsed by one who was his opponent then. The scoring in this year’s game far exceeded anything that has yet been made in South Australia. Both the total for the innings, and the individual score of Joseph Darling are the highest ever recorded in the Colony, and will no doubt stand as a record for many a day. The next best innings is George Giffen’s 209 not out. The wicket was perfect, and the bowlers found it impossible to make the ball do anything “ wrong.” The contests between the colleges have come to be regarded as the fashionable cricket matches of the year, and consequently the ladies muster in numbers in carefully chosen costumes with the colors oi their favourite team conspicuously displayed. The wearing of partisan badges is almost universal on this occasion, and the successful player is rewarded with more cheers than ever fall to the lot of even an intercolonial batsman. Darling, who is only fourteen years old, took a little over t>ix hours in compiling his score. He only gave two chances, one at 109 and the other at 230. His hitting on the off side was as good as one could wish to see, but on the on side he did not appear to be at home. He is a left-handed batsman, rather big for his age. He went in first and his was the seventh wicket to fall with the score at 470. Between the^first and second wickets 278 runs were put on. ' The St. Peter’s deserve every praise for their plucky fielding under a broiling sun. The game was drawn. Had it been played to the finish no doubt a most interesting match would have resulted. P rince A l fr e d . J. Darling, c Scarfe, b Lander.................252 R.Hill, b W ood......... 0 A. S. J. Fry, c Ross, b Wood .................125 P. Hill, runout.,. ...17 P. Heath, b Scarfe ... 14 F.Wilkinson,b Downer 1 H. Rishbeith, c Rou- caut, b Cox ......... 20 G. Braund, b Scarfe 36 Fawcett, b Lander... 1 E.W.Castine,bLanderl5 A. E. Cook, not out 9 H. Lander, c and b Fry ........................ 7 P. Scott, 1b w, b Fry 41 A. P. Cox, not out ... 62 S t . P eters . Extras Total 10 ...500 A. Scarfe, not out Extras .......... Total . ...132 BOWLING ANALYSIS. P rince A l fr e d . A. Miller... 138 S. Wood... 138 A. Scarfe 234 C. Downer 114 A. Cox ... 102 B. E.W.CastineGO A.S.J.Fry 120 A. E. C.ook 48 B. R. M. W. 2 0 4 9 5 0 H. Lander 162 R. Scott... 96 Roucaut 12 P. Scott... 12 B. R. M.W. E ast M elbourne . S t . P eters . R, M. W. B. R. M. W. 17 2 0 I P. Heath... 30 17 0 0 GO 4 2 F.Wilkinson54 20 2 0 _____ _ __ 12 2 0 I Umpires—Messrs. D. G. Evan and H. D. O’Halloran. MELBOURNE v. EAST MELBOURNE. A wonderful stand by George Palmer, well known to English cricketers, and M‘Ilwraith was the chief feature of the match between these crack clubs, played on the East Mel­ bourne ground on Nov. 14,21 and 28. The pair became partners on the fall of the third wicket at 35, and were not separated till the total had been raised to 249, when M‘Ilwraith was caught at the wicket. Palmer was ultimately caught for 192. All the East Melbourne Eleven bowled. The match was drawn, as the follow­ ing score will s h o w 1- Watsford, b Bruce... Lewis, b Spofforth ... Horan, c Blackham, b Palmer................ Groube, c Moule, b Palmer ................. M‘Shane, b Bruce ... Kobertson, b Bruce... Worrall, hw, b Bruce Boyle, c Dickson, b Spofforth ..........22 Allee,candbSpofforth 9 Trapp, not ou t..........11 Brown, b Bruce ... 0 B 2,lb 3, n b 5, w 1 11 Total M elbourne . Bruce, b Robertson 19 Blackham, run out... 0 Swift, b Worrall ... 13 MTlwraith, c Lewis, b R obertson......... 143 Palmer, c Allee, b Lewis ................ 192 Moule, c Robertson, b Boyle .................34 Spofforth, 1 b w, Watsford.......... Dickson, c Groube. Boyle................. Herring, not out Cohen, not out... B 12, lb 4, nb 2 Total ... ..144 b . .. 0 b .. . 6 ... 34 ... 13 ... 18 ...472 BOWLING ANALYSIS. E ast M elbourne . B. M. R. W .( B. M. R. W. Spofforth... 120 5 43 3 Bruce ... 82 6 39 5 Palmer ... 78 4 51 2 . Spofforth bowled 3, and Palmer 2 no-balls, and Bruce bowled 1 wide. M elbourne . B. M. R. W. B. M. R. W. M'Shane... 78 5 19 0 Horan ... 78 0 48 0 Watsford 84 3 28 1 Worrall... 180 6 90 1 Trapp ... 66 2 33 0 Robertson 224 10 95 2 Groube ... 12 0 11 0 Boyle Brown. Allee .. Lewis . 60 2 27 2 54 3 34 0 12 0 19 0 GO 1 50 1 Trapp and Lewis each bowled a no-ball. The comments of “ Felix,” the cricket con­ tributor to the Australasian , on Palmer’s innings will show what a really good display it was:— Palmer’s exhibition was absolutely faultless. He started with 52 made on the previous Saturday, and in composing that number he gave three chances, two of them very hot. But on Saturday, in adding 140 to the 52, the most captious critic could not find a flaw in his performance. His play throughout was vigorous, clean, correct, and true. No flukes of any kind. The bat met the ball full face every time as if the batsman had gauged each stroke with mathematical nicety. And besides, there was an elegance, freedom, and neatness of execution that could hardly be surpassed. I often saw Palmer play excellent cricket, but he never before played as well as he did on Saturday. It was a thoroughly artistic and graceful display, and, so far as concerns Saturday’s play, was utterly free from the faintest shadow of a. blemish. It is a pity he didn’t get eight more, so as to make his 192 exactly 200. One hundred and ninety-two is splendid; but you can’t beat 200 for a full, round, solid, substantial, satisfactory-looking score. Palmer received quite an ovation on retiring, and the Jolimoners joined heartily in the loud and well-merited applause. He made two 5’s, one on the first day of his innings and one on Saturday, the latter a superb stroke off Percy Lewis, right over the bowler’s head. Io struck the railway fence a foot from the top with a tremendous force; but Percy Lewis had his revenge, for Palmer was eventually caught off him at point by Allee, off what Percy him­ self termed “ a multy twibbly wobbler.” What sort of a ball this is I know not, but it seemed to me to be a slow ball, which was very loo; e to the off, and if let alone, would have beei l very nearly a wide. In addition to the two fivers, Palmer made 19 fours, each hard, clean, and well-timed. His defence was admirable from start to finish, and he lost no chance of putting on the wood. The season will pass, I think, without a more thoroughly sound, scientific, and high-class exhibition of batting being witnessed or recorded. It must not be supposed either that the bowling was weak. Robertson’s bowling on Saturday was first-rate. He sent down several capital overs, and varied his pace and break, but all to no purpose when Palmer opposed him. Palmer couldn’t make a mistake on Saturday, either to leg, to the off, straight ahead, or any other direction in which he chose to send a ball. Next Issae February 25