Cricket 1887

446 C R IC K E T : A W E E K L Y RECORD OF THE GAME . OCT. 27,1887. NOTCHING ON A STICK. T h e sketch accompanying this is that of a “ hop tally ” of to-day (bought at Canterbury last September), which, ac­ cording to the memory of the “ oldest inhabitant” (the semper testis of history), has never varied in principle. It is used for counting the basketsfull of hops as they are emptied into a common stock ready for packing and carrying away. It simply consists of two pieces of lath of the same size which are placed together face to face, so that any one cutting a notch on the edge cut through both laths. This was the mode of scoring in the early days of cricket, as may be seen in the picture of Cricket of 1743 at Lord’s (copies of which are world-known), in which the notcher is sitting where point would be in these days. As all early cricket almost came from the hop districts of Surrey, Sussex, Kent, and Hants, it was natural enough that all parties readily agreed to keep a tally of the runs in a manner which they all understood and trusted to in their ordinary hop business, and the mode of reckoning hop baskets was applied to cricket, and doubtless one tally was enough for each innings when small scores only were made. In count­ ing hop-baskets employer and employed each produced his half of the tally, and the two halves being put together a notch was, and is to this day, cut for each basket as delivered. A Old John Bowyer commenced his cricket in 1805, in the days of scorers with pen or pencil, but he played many matches with Beldham, Fennex, and Lambert of the old Hambledon men, and he learnt from them that the principle in grand matches was to have the two laths tied together with strings, and the strings were sealed at the side, and the notcher cut the notches—one from each party watching him to see fair play—and the moment the last wicket fell the notcher ran a knife across the strings and gave each side half, so there could not be any dispute. A larger notch was cut at every tenth run, so that the total could be counted instantly. Either side produced their half at the finish, and, in default of the other side producing theirs, the half produced was evidence of the total, as when delivered to each side they must have been duplicates. The same rule applies to hop-picking, which is paid for by counting the tallies at the finish. If any one dishonestly was to cut an extra notch or two he would instantly stand convicted of fraud. There is in the modern pattern a kind of butt with two holes, as shown in sketch, but that is only a novelty in detail, and has nothing to do with the old principle, and requires no explanation. At my first school—Old John Buckland’s at Laleham, formerly Arnold’s School— where, when William IV. was king, there was a little cricket at rare intervals after the hay was carried, we notched on a common piece of stick and knew no better, and I have no doubt on many a village green little boys do so still. I should not cry if the score-books were burnt, and we took to notching on a stick again, and if all the glory of winning was divided amongst the winning side, and hero worship was abolished. F. G. UNIVERSITY NOMADS v. EASTBOURNE. Played at Eastbourne on August 5 and 6. E a s t b o u r n e . First Innings. Second Innings. W. A. Cardwell,b G odfrey 2 b K e r ................... 2 J. F. Leese, c Godfrey, b F is h e r ..............................18 b G od frey ............10 A M Wilkinson, b Ker ... 3J b G od frey............ 4 J. Hide, b Fisher................ 1 c Burge, oFisher 10 V. P. Leese, b Godfrey ... 5 b Burge ............ 30 W. H. Leese, lbw, b Fisher 1 b M arriott............65 H. Gibson, b Burge ........... 8 b G resson ............20 W . E. Baines, c Fisher, b B u rg e ............................... 0 b Burge ............ 5 Hart, not out ................20 b K e r .................... 7 A. Hide, b Godfrey ........... 7 b G odfrey.............70 A. Edwards, run o u t ......... 2 not out ............. 4 Extras ..........................21 Extras.............32 Total Total ... 259 ................115 U n iv . N omads . First Innings. Second Innings. F. H. G resson,c Hurt, b J. Hide ........... ................... 0 run out ... ... 17 A. Foster, c and b Bide 0 lbw, b J. Hido ... 11 H. M. Burge, bJ. H ide ... 0 lbw, b A. Hide... 0 C. J. M. Godfrey, b J. Hide 8 run out ...........23 B. Ellis, c Baines, b J. Hide .................................. 5 b A. H id e ...........17 E. Bryans, st Hart, b A. Hide ..................................14 c Wilkinson, b A. Hide ...........2) E. Fisher, b J . H id e.......... 14 b A. Hide ............ 4 H. J. Price, b A. Hide ... 4 not out ............10 A. W. Osborne, b J. Hide... 1 b J . Hide ............ 7 R. W. Ker, not out ........... 2 b J. Hide ............ 0 C. M arriott, b J. Hide ... 1 b A. H id e ............ 3 Extras .......................... 3 B .................. 6 Total , 52 Total ...123 CRYSTAL PALACE CLUB. Matches nlayed 56—won 17, lost 21, drawn 18. ‘ RESULTS OF MATCHES. W o n (17). May 14- a t Crystal Palace, v. Guy’s Hospital. W on by 39 runs. Crystal Palace, 136; Guy’s Hospital, 97 and 113 for 5 wickets. May 23—at Crystal Palace, v. St. Thom as’ Hosp. Won by 2 JOruns. Crystal Palace, 256 for 7 wickets; St. Thom is’ Hospital, 55. June 27, 23 - at Crystal Palace, v. Incogni i. Won by an innings. Crystal Palace, 23J; Incog­ niti, 179 and 50 July 1—at Crystal Palace, v. Gypsies Won by 119 runs. Crystal Palace, 221; Gypsies, li>2. July 5—at Littlebury, v. Burrell’s XI. W on by 33 J runs. Crystal Palace, 423; Burrell’s XL, 92. July 8—at Crystal Palace, v. Authentics. W on by 39 runs. Crystal Palace, 176; Authentics , 137. July 16—at Highgate, v. Highgate School. W on by 1 run. Crystal Palace, 103; Highgate School, 102. July 19—at Crystal Palace, v. Thespians. W on by 87 runs. Crystal Palace, 216; Thespians, 129 and 81 for 6 wickets. July 23—at Crystal Palace, v. Kensington Park. W on by 121 runs. Crystal Palace, 193 Kensington Park, 75 and 63 for 4 wickets. August 1—at Beckenham , v. Beckenham . W on by 16 runs. Crystal Palace, 101 ; Becken­ ham, 85 an 1 291 for 6 wickets. August 6—at Crystal Palace, v. Tonbridge Rovers. W on by 20 runs. Crystal Palace, 164; Tonbridge Rovers, 144. August 10,11—at Newton Abbott, v. South Devon. Won by an innings and 143 runs. Crystal Palace, 829 ; South Devon, 105 and 76. August 12,13—at Exmouth, v. Exmouth. W on by 8 wickets. Crystal Palace, 209 and 53 for 2 w ickets; Exm outh, 120 and 141. August 20—at Crystal Palace, v. W est W ickham . Won by 5*wickets Crystal Palace, 176 for 5 w ickets; W est W ickham, 174. August 22, 23—at Southampton, v. South Hants. W on by an innings and 192 runs. Crystal Palace, 314; South Hants, 53 and fi9. August 19, 20—at Salisbury, v. South W ilts. W on by 9 wickets. Crystal Palace, 177 and 32 for 1 w icket; South Wilts, 145 and 61. Sept. 3—at Crystal Palace, v. Stygians. W on by 7 wickets. Crystal Palace,176for 3 w ickets; Stygians, 168. L ost (21). May 12—at Crystal Palace, v. Chatham House Wanderers. Lost by 14 runs. Crystal Palace, 117; C.H.W., 131. May 21—at Blackheath, v. Blackheath. Lost by 47 runs. Crystal Palace. 48; Blackheath,95. May 25—at W orm w ood Scrubs, v. Kensington Park. Loso by 82 runs and 4 wickets. Crystal Palace, 135; Kensington Park, 217 for 6 wickets. May 3D—at Bickley, v. Bickley. L ost by 35 runs. Crystal Palace, 95 and 63; Bickley, 130 and 28 for 3 wickets. June 9—at Crystal Palace, v. Richm ond. Lost by 131 runs. Crystal Palace, 111; Richm ond, 213. June 11—at Crystal Palace, v. M.C.C. and G. Lost by 133 rnns and 8 wickets. Crystal Palace, 130; M.C.C. and G., 233 for 2 wickets. June 15—at Streatham, v. Streatham. Lo3t by 63 runs and 3 wickets. Crystal Pa’ace, 221; Streatham, 281 for 7 wickets. June 18—at Crystal Palace, v. Beckenham. Lost by 198 runs. Crystal Palace, 60 and 50; Beckenham, 258. June 25—at Crystal Palace, v. Reiga'e. L ost by 53 runs. Crystal Palace, 208; Reigate, 261. June 25—at Clapton, v. Clapton. L ost by 23 runs and 2 wickets. Crystal Palace, 105; Clap­ ton. 123 for 8 wickets. July 2—at Hornsey, v. Hornsey. L ost by 89 runs and 2 wickets. Crystal Palace, 78; H orn­ sey, 167 for 8 wickets. July 14-a t Reigate, v. Reigate Priory. Lost by 130 runs and 3 wickets. Crystal Palace, 188; Keigate Priory, 318 for 7 wickets. July 16—at Crystal Palace, v. Broadwater. Lost by 295 runs Crystal Palace, 69 and 23 for 2 wickets; Broadwater, 361. July 23—at Hampstead, v. Hampstead. Lost by 46 runs. Crystal Palace, 141; Hampstead, 157. July 26—at Chiswick, v. Chiswick Park. Lost by 124 runs. Crystal Palace, 77 and 134 for 2 w ickets; Chiswick Park, 2)1. July 28—at Crystal Palace, v. Blackheath. Lost by 61 runs. Crystal Palace, 115 and 66 for 2 w ickets; Blackheath, 170 August 1—at Catford, v. Private Banks. Lost by 513 runs. Crystal Palace, 56; Private Banks, 599. August 27—at Crystal Palace, v. Streatham. Lost by 160 runs. Crystal Palace, 64; Streat­ ham, 224. August 8, 9- a t Torquay, v. Torquay. Lost by 62 run3. Crystal ralace, 86 and 65; Torquay, 99 and 114. August 15, 16-a t Sidmouth, v Sidm outh. Lost by 10 wickets. Crystal Palace, 97 and 92; Sidmouth, 163 and 22 for no wicket. August 24, 25—at Chichester, v. Priory Park. Lost by 8 wickets. Crystal Palace. 65 and 134 ; Priory Park, 163 and 32 for 2 wickets, D r a w n (18) May 7—at Addiscom be, v. Addiscombe. Crystal Palace. 7i for 8 w ickets; Addiscom be, 107. May 14—at W est Aickham, v. W est Wickham. Crystal Palace, 294, May 19—at Crystal Palace, v. Clapton. Crystal Palace. 257. May 21—at Crystal Palace, v. St. Bartholom ew ’s Hospital. Crystal Palace, 58 for 3 wickets. June 4—at Lee, v. Granville Crystal Palace, 25 for 2 wickets ; Granville, 210. N E X T IS SU E , NOVEMBER 24,