Cricket 1887

JUtfE 28, 1687. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 217 A c o b r e s p o n d e n t , who signs liim- self “ Subscriber,” mentions a some­ what curious coincidence in a match between Bexley and West Kent, played at Chislehurst on June 15th. Mr. J. Shuter (the Surrey captain) and Mr. P. W. G. Stuart, who opened the batting first for Bexley, each made 62. Mr. W. H. Spot- tiswoode, who went in first for West Kent, was also out when he had reached 62. These were the only scores over 50. In the same match Mr. Goode, bowling for West Kent, performed “ the hat trick.” A n Old Harrovian, well-known as the historian of cricket, writes as follows :— The name of Annett is found in the Hamp­ shire Eleven against Norfolk on May 30,1887. The same name is also found in the Hamp­ shire Eleven in 1788, or 99 years baok! No doubt the former is some relation, connection, or descendant. T hk same correspondent also writes me that the only cricketer alive now, who participated in the Jubilee match of the Marylebone Club at Lord’s on July 10, 1837, to the best of his belief is Thomas Adams. Mr. G. Bothera he believes to be dead, but is not sure. The following are the results of the various matches played by the nine leading counties up to Saturday last:— W on . L ost. D raw n. S urrey.................... 3 0 0 L an cash ire ....... 3 1 0 Y o r k s h ire ............ I l l N otts ..................... I l l S ussex.................... 1 1 0 D erbyshire ........ 1 1 0 M id d le se x ............ 1 2 1 G lou cester............ 0 1 2 K e n t......................... 0 2 1 WHY? T e l l me where the mystery lies, ’Neath two days of cloudless skies, That the scores at Lord’s should be Seven hundred and seventy-three ? The Lancashire and the Surrey Eleven Scored seven hundred and twenty-seven; And the runs at Brighton, too, In these two days are eight—one—two; But at Nottingham, I see— (And here begins the mystery)— The runs there, scored up to this date, Amount to only four—three —eight. Tell me where the mystery lies, ’Neath two days of cloudless skies ? H. S. M r. A. N. H ornby is no doubt of opinion that it would have been possible to spend the Jubilee Week at Lord’s in a more agreeable style. At least it is no't, as far as I know, the highest idea of pleasure for a cricketer to field out for two successive innings of over 500. Yet this was the fate of the Lancashire captain. At Lord’s early in the week he was out for M.O.C. while England made 514, and at Manchester later on while Surrey were getting 537, so that altogether he fielded out for 1,051 runs in the week. And, worst luck of all, after slightly straining himself at Lord’s he made it worse at Manchester, and had to retire hurt just as the game was hanging in the balance and when his help might easily have saved his side. All cricketers will hope to see him very soon again in the field, and with better results than marked his Jubilee Week. I h a v e to thank Major Wardill, the Secretary of the Melbourne Club, for the following figures giving the averages of the chief batsmen and bowlers of the Melbourne Club in first-class matches last season. It will be seen that Mr. W. Bruce, of the last Australian team, has an excellent batting average of 40, and is also at the head of the bowling tables. B ATTIN G A V E R A G E S . T im es M ost in Inns, n ot o u t/a n Inns. R uns. Aver. P h illips (p rof.) 5 ... 4 ... 3 1 * ... 9 * ... 90 F. W alters ... 13 ... 2 ... 125 ... 566 ... 51.45 W. B ruce ... 8 ... 0 ... 136 ... 331 ... 40.12 J. M ‘IIw raith 8 ... 1 ... 86* ... 243 ... 31.71 J. S. Sw ift ... 12 ... 4 ... l 'l* ... 243 ... 30.37 R . T. D ick son 7 ... 1 ... 84 ... 161 ... 27.33 E . G . P o w e r ... 3 ... 0 ... 59 ... 74 ... 24.66 C otter (prof.) 8 ... 0 ... 51 ... 152 ... 19 J. L em priere 4 ... 2 ... 25* ... 36 ... 18 J. D u ffy ............. 14 ... 1 ... 41 ... 210 ... 16.15 C. H. L. Ross 3 ... 0 ... 25 ... 39 ... 13 W. R ya ll ... 4 ... 0 ... 17 ... 47 ... 11.75 D . C la rk ............. 5 ... 0 ... 31 ... 58 ... 11.6 * Signifies n ot out. B O W L IN G A V E R A G E S . B alls. R uns. M dns. W kts. Aver. W . B ru ce ... 697 ... 269 ... 36 ...3 8 ... 7.7 A. A itken ... R84 ... 100 ... 24 ... 14 ... 7.14 P h illips (prof.) 872 ... 282 ... 60 ... 52 ... 8.5 J. D u ffy ......l r40 ... 363 ... 5 ) ... 27 ... 13.44 A . Shee .......... 678 ... 304 ... 23 ... 21 ... 14.47 T he following are the averages of over 20 for not less than six completed innings in the nine principal county and other first-class matches up to last Saturday:— H ighest N am e. Innings. R uns. S core. Aver. W . W. R ead ... 6 539 247 89.5 W. G. G race ... 9 450 113 5 ) J. B ide ................ 7 286 115 40.6 M. R ead ................ 6 2-21 48 35.5 Q uaife ................ 7 256 60 36.4 •■turn ................ 7 236 72 33.5 F low ers ................ 7 219 63* 31.2 J. E ccles ................ 6 182 79* 30.2 G . F . V ernon ... 8 234 95 29 2 P e e l............................. 8 228 54* 28.4 w . R ashleigh ... 7 198 105 28.2 G . G. H earne ... 15 413 91 27.8 F. H. G resson ... 8 221 64 27.5 H um phries ... 8 210 117 26.2 A. N. H ornby ... 14 365 105 26.1 A . E . S todd art ... 9 230 151 25.5 R aw lin ................. 8 197 8 4 21.5 F. G . F o r d ................ 8 192 79 24 H on . M . B. Haw ke 10 230 78* 23 K . J . K e y ................ 9 201 54* 22 3 U lyett ................ 11 243 65 22.1 A. J. W eb be ... 14 306 51 21.12 C hatterton ... 8 175 39 217 T ester ................ 8 167 70 20.7 F . M eyrick -Jores 8 166 67 20 6 A lso n ot in clu ded in the above— bhrew sbury has an average for five innings o f 74.4 and W . E. R oller 59.1, b o th having obtained tw o centuries am ong their five innings. M r. W . W . Read’s performances with the bat this season have been so extra­ ordinary, that I think it will be of general interest if I give all the scores he has made in Inter-County Fixtures as well as in the one representative match in which he has taken part at Lord’s this season. The following figures will show that he has batted in thirteen innings for an aggregate of 1,064 runs, and an average of 106.4. His average for Surrey in all matches, so far, is 110. 1st 2nd Ins. Ins. T otal. Surrey v. Hampshire .. .. 65 48* 113 ,, v. Warwickshire .. .. 59* — 59 ,, v. Middlesex.................. 1 — I ,, v. N otts.......................... 7 92 99 ,, v. Warwickshire . . . . 3 — b ,, v. Leicestershire .. .. 74 32 106 ,, v. Oxford University .. 118 — 118 England v. M.C.C.....................74 — 74 Surrey v. Lancashire .. .. 247 — 217 „ v. Cambridge Univ. .. 244 — 244 This makes a total of 1,064 runs in 13 inn­ ings (3 not outs)—Average 106.4. It has been pointed out that, remarkable as has been his batting during the last week, it can hardly be placed on qnite the same standard as Mr. W. G. Grace’s unrivalled achievement in August of 1870, when he scored 344, 177 and 318 not out, or in all, 839 for twice out. On the other hand, though, Mr. W. W. Bead can, I fancy, claim a unique record in making over 200 runs in two successive innings. And everyone who can appreciate the services so keen and conscientious a cricketer has done to the game will be heartily pleased at Mr. Bead’s remarkable success during the last few days. An innings such as he played at the Oval this week was surely the most fitting way in which a cricketer could celebrate Jubilee Day. The reply of Mr. Ansell, the Hon. See. Qf the Warwickshire County Club, to my remarks anent the action of the executive of that.body in playing Mr. H. W. Bainbridge, contrary to the rules of County cricket, arrived late last Wednesday night, and I had then no opportunity of commenting on his remarks. Mr. Ansell defends the action of the Warwickshire Club on the peculiar ground that his Committee fu lly believes Mr. Bainbridge to be entitled to play under Buie 3. To this I would reply that the Warwickshire Committee have never to my knowledge been appointed the interpreters of the laws of County cricket. On the contrary, Buie 4 reads thus: That should any question arise as to the residential qualification, the same should be left to the decision of the Committee of the Marylebone Club. I h a rd ly think that Mr. Ansell will pretend that the question of Mr. Bain- bridge's qualification has not been raised. Of my own knowledge I can say distinctly that Surrey raised it, though Mr. Shutcr thought it might be ungracious to make a formal objection against a County in War­ wickshire’s position. I have also the authority of the Leicestershire Secretary that they protested, as well as the reply of the Secretary of the Marylebone Club that he ruled against Mr. Bain- bridge’s qualifications on the facts, which are quite plain. The question was raised by Surrey more than a month ago, and I argue most emphatically that it was the business ofthe Warwickshire Club to refer the case to the proper tribunal, the M.C.C., rather than trust to the forbear­ ance of their opponents in not objecting. The facts, as I have already said, are plain. Mr. Bainbridge was playing for Surrey afid residingin that county in August,1885,and the Marylebone club has ruled that a period of two years is necessary for the family home, as well as the residential qualifica­ tion, so that he cannot be qualified by any arguments the Warwickshire Club can adduce. I can only, in the interests of the game, repeat my regret that the War­ wickshire Committee have refused to comply with the rules which govern County cricket. And I see no reason whatever to alter my opinion that in taking the position they have in this matter they have acted unwisely.