Cricket 1888

MAR. 29, 1888. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OP THE GAME. 85 position to judge as to this point than the umpire; but how often doesone see the wicket­ keeper throw up his hands, let the ball pass, and excuse himself by saying he “ thought it must have hit the wicket.” I mention this because I have frequently seen it stated that the real difficulty in lbw decisions is in deter­ mining whether the ball pitches straight. I do not believe this to be the opinion of good umpires. I believe it is much more difficult to decide whether the ball would have hit the wicket. And if this be true, and if the pro- S osed new rule will considerably increase the ifficulty, we have an almost conclusive argu­ ment against the rule. In order to form a perfectly accurate judgment as to whether the ball would have hit the wicket, one of the desiderata is that the nmpire should be in a straight line behind the direction which the ball takes after it pitches. This is not gene­ rally possible even under the old rule, but the difficulty will be greatly increased under the new. Under the old rule the ball has to be f itched within the rectangular space to which have alluded; and no matter where the ball comes from, the umpire is, whenever the ball pitches within that space, in a fairly straight line with the direction the ball takes after pitching. At all events, this is true so far as to enable him to judge whether the ball would have hit the wicket. Under the new rule, he will have to decide the question irrespective of the pitch of the ball. He will have nothing to help him. He will, in a manner, have to look round a corner. Take a bowler like Peate; his arm came very wide round the wicket, and he could make a ball pitching well wide of the wicket come right in, or, to use a phrase com­ mon amongst cricketers, he could make the ball “ come with his arm .” In order to tell at all accurately whether such a ball would have hit the wicket, the umpire should be some­ where about the spot usually occupied by extra-cover. It seems to me that this is a case which will be constantly occurring under the new rule, and the umpire will only be able to form a very unsatisfactory guess. How can an umpire be expected to give a satisfactory decision when a ball is pitched wide of the wicket,and breaking back orbreaking in at avery considerable angle to the direction of its flight? If I am right in my contention that the new rule will be far more difficult to put in practice than the old, it is unnecessary to show that it will affect cricket very disastrously. I believe it will mean almost death to a great deal of second-class cricket, or probably many clubs will revert to the old rule, and there will be two opposing rules in existence at the same time. Secondly, I think the alteration unnecessary. Leg-play is only practised by a very few, and yet it is proposed to make a radical alteration in the rules of cricket on account of this small minority. It has been suggested that leg-play might be stopped by concerted action on the part of the different authorities; and surely something of this kind might be tried' first. If this did not succeed, why not meet the difficulty full in the face, and pass an additional law something like that proposed by Mr. Webbe, only stronger. If leg-play must be stopped at all hazards, then make a law something like this:—“ If, in the opinion of the umpire, the batsman shall wil­ fully stop the ball with his person, he shall be out.” There would then be no question of the ball hitting the wicket. It has been well re­ marked to me that, in giving effect to such a rule, the umpire wrould be backed up in his decision by the general observation of the whole field, players and spectators alike, and that this would make his responsibility lighter. I quite agree with this, and I do not think it would be found difficult in practice to apply the rule in a satisfactory manner.—Your obedient servant, P. B il lia r d s ! B agatelle ! All those requiring / N e w or Second-hand Tables, Re- quisites, or Billiard work done should, before going elsewhere, send for H E N N IG BROS’. New ^ rice List. Cloth and Cushion , to#-* Samples.—Address, 29, New Ox­ ford Street, London, W .C. Established 1869. CRICKET IN NEW ZEALAND. O T A G O v. C A N T E R B U R Y . The tw enty-fifth m a tc h between repre­ sentatives of these provinces was played at D u n e d in on Ja n . 27 and 28. Otago w on by 103 runs. O tago . First Innings. Second Innings. Harris, c Frith, b Bush ... 2 lbw, b L abatt ... 83 Beck, c Fowke, b Bush ... 4 cFow ke,bLabatt 12 Parker, lbw, b Dunlop ... 1 c Fowke, b F rith 27 Carson, c and b Bush ... 0 b F rith................. 14 Harper, c and b Frith ... 53 b Dunlop ..........14 Raynor, c Studholme, b Dunlop .........................11 c Reeves, b Bush 83 Grieve, c Labatt, b Bush 11 lbw, b D unlop ... Niven, c Frith, b Dunlop... 4 c Reeves, b D un­ lop ................. 6 Downes, c Cuff, b Bush ... 1 b B ush................. 4 Hope, b Bush ................. 1 not out................. 0 Macfarlane, not out.......... 2 b D unlop .......... L b 5, nb 2 ................. 7 B 5, I b 7 , n b l l 3 Total ................. 97 Total ...167 C anterbury . First Innings. Second Innings. Dunlop, lbw, b Carson ... 11 c Macfarlane, b Carson ..........17 Fowke, b Downes ..........16 c Downes, b Car­ son ................. 4 Labatt, c Niven, b Carson 17 run out .......... 0 Harman,cGrieve, b Carson 0 c Niven,b Carson 1 Reeves, c Macfarlane, b Downes ......................... 9 b Hope..................31 Studholme, c Harper, b Carson ......................... 5 c and b Carson 15 Bryars, b Downes .......... 1 lbw, b Carson ... 1 Cuff, c Macfarlane, b Downes ......................... 0 c Niven, b Hope 0 Bush, c Hope, b Downes 4 not out .......... 5 Frith, b C a rso n ................. 0 b Carson .......... 5 Reese, not out ................. 5 run out .......... 0 B 11, lb 3 ... 14 Total .......... 68 Total ... 93 B OW LIN G A N A LYSIS. ‘ O tago . First Innings. Second Innings. B. M. R. W . B. M. R. W . Bush ......174 8 40 6 ..................... 60 3 19 2 Dunlop ... 102 2 36 3 ......................155 8 46 4 W . F rith ... 55 2 14 1 ......................114 8 25 2 Studholme 36 2 11 0 L abatt ... 84 2 33 2 H arm an ... 12 1 5 0 C u ff.............18 0 15 0 Bush bowled two no-balls. C an terbu ry . First Innings. Second Innings. B. M. R. W . B. M. R. W . Downes ...183 12 31 5 ..................... 96 7 20 0 Carson ... 102 8 26 5 ......................194 9 51 6 Hope ......... 78 9 8 0 ..................... 96 12 8 A R E M I N I S C E N C E . B y R obert T hom s . The graceful tribute to the memory of the late Mr. Daniel Norton, of Northwood Park, written by a gentleman whom I have known since the time when the “ Islington Albion ” was located at the Old Cope—and which holds the position of being now the second oldest cricket club in England—brings forcibly to mind the many happy days that I have passed with suburban clubs, and also the many cricketers that I have from time to time met, and with whom I have been connected. Amongst those mentioned as often to be seen playing with Mr. Norton’s eleven is the cele­ brated John Hughes of Hertford, whose first introduction to Mr. Norton was made under peculiar circumstances, in which I acted as a sort of agent in advance. For some time the Northwood Club had been most successful in winning all their matches, for Mr. Norton was always on the look-out to secure the best amateurs in his district, and also always had a couple of good professionals to assist, he also allowing the same to any club with whom he aiTanged a match. It so happened that an intimate friend of his — who, though no cricketer himself, was devoted to the game- in friendly rivalry had undertaken to find a team to play the victorious Northwood; and one Saturday evening in June he called on me to know if I could assist him in finding two pro.s to play in his match, fixed for the en­ suing Wednesday. I informed him that I knew a “ pretty good tradesman ” at Hertford who would do for one if I could get h im ; when, not quite understanding my meaning, he said, “ Well, I am not particular to their being tradesmen, so as they are good bowlers.” “ Oh yes,” I answered, “ I know what you want, somebody who would be likely to settle Northwood and win the match.” “ Yes ! ” he added, “ that is just what I do want.” It was then settled that I should go down to Hert­ ford and secure Hughes, which I did—I also stipulating that I should get a wicket-keeper, to make matters work more smoothly for the trundler, well-knowing that it is the '‘snapper” who shows up and makes the bowler, especially the medium and the slow. (And here let me, as a passing remark, state that the finest exhibition of collective wicket-keeping ever seen was when the Hon. A. Lyttelton and J. M. Blackham, then both at their best, were behind the sticks, in that momentous match when England met Australia for the first time, at the Oval. I say momentous, because “ sup­ pose Australia had leathered us the first time they met us at our own game. W h y ! it won't bear thinking of.”) At length the eventful day arrived, and so did Hughes. Everybody personally acquainted with him knows that he is one of the most unassuming and quiet cricketers that ever existed; and in his well- known garb of flannel trousers and black waistcoat, with silk pocket-handkerchief tucked ready for emergencies, he never appeared—until he got into action—the class of cricketer that he really was. And on this particular occasion—knowing the job that was on—he looked, with his upright, stiff and stately walk, more like a master undertaker out for a day’s holiday, than the bowler, making for the wickets to bowl the first over to the Northwood Club, who went in first— with a result that is soon told. Hughes, with a bit of a side hill, and the help of Thornett, a capital wicket-keeper, disposed of Mr. Norton’s eleven for under 80 runs, and as the other team managed to head that total, it being a day’s match, they won on the first innings. Now for the sequel. After the match I saw Mr. Norton in conversation with Hughes, and guessed what was up. Making for the tent, where I had sat with a lot more to watch the game, he called me aside, and over a glass of wine he quietly informed me that he had put matters right for the return m atch; it was the first time Hughes had been against him , and it would be the last, for ho had engaged him to play in his matches from that day for the future. And at that good shop at Northwood the Hertford tradesman was to be found with Mr. Norton to the end of the cricket chapter. Having watched Hughes bowl hundreds of overs, I go so far as to say—in my humble opinion—that he was one of the best of the original “ back snatch” school of trundlers; and that for length and rapid break from the off, and slicking the wickets down—in his day —he has never been excelled. Starting in his teens, while located at Bedford, he was then a fast bowler, and used to play in the matches that were arranged by that enthusiastic cricketer, Lord Charles Russell; and it was not until some years after, on his return to Hert­ ford, that he slowed down, and took to the break-backs, which art he learnt and perfected by incessant practice on a quoit ground facing his “ pub.” Hughes, in his time, has done some wondrous bits of bowling; amongst others that I call to mind was when, from my end, he settled Jupp, Tom Humphrey, and Pooley in three successive balls, and bowled down twenty-two consecutive maiden overs in the same match. He also has done most effective trundling when attacking the South­ gate stronghold of the celebrated “ W alker’ brotherhood, at the Node, at Lord Ebury’s, at Charleywood; in fact, att over the county and elsewhere for a period of thirty-five un­ broken seasons. And he has the satisfaction of knowing that no batsman, w'ith only one single exception—and that was Mr. E . Sainsbury, on Bernard’s Heath, for Somerset v. Herts—ever did get into the century the first time that he bowled at them. And it is worthy of] record NEXT ISSUE, APRIL 12.