Cricket 1890

NOV. 27, 1890. CRICKET i A WEEKLY EECOED OF THE GAMEi 451 “ O V E R ” A B R IA R IN TH E CH IM N EY C O RN E R . B y L e B a l a f b e , The cricket season of 1890, as far as first-class cricket is concerned, is now a matter of the past. The last ball has found its way into the pocket of the umpire, the stumps are drawn, and the snap of the lock of the Pavilion door has practically handed over the ground to the “ Merry - Footers.” The lady cricketers have carried the game into the enemy’s country a far greater distance than have the male exponents of the summer game; but, as it is highly probable that the ladies’ “ choke-bores,” where­ with to slay the succulent partridge and the toothsome grouse, have not yet come to hand,their reasons fornot discontinuing the game were not so pressing as in the case of the gentlemen. Certainly, during the latter part of September, and in the greater part of October, they have had such a prevalence of fine weather, that the marvel is, greater advantage was not taken of it, to carry on the game to, at least, the 20th of October. From our cheerful corner by the bright Novern- ber fire, from the thoughts which natu­ rally arise during the contemplation of those clouds which rise from our favourite briar, the scenes of tho defunct season pass vividly before us. What a marvellous catch ! What a splendid h it! say we, as the months from May to September unroll again like a panorama. Again we see Gann, with his long raking stride, sweep­ ing, like a hurricane, along the front of the stand, and, picking up the ball in mid­ career, hurling it with unerring aim to the man at the sticks. Again, we see George Lohmann at slip, and mark the rapid ambi-dexterous dash of his, which stops the lightning flight of the ball from the batsman. We have, during our career as a cricketer, which dates from the end of the forties, seen some good slips, but never one like Lohmann. Caffyn was good, Shaw was better; but the popular Surrey bowler, with his ready, cat-like use of both hands, fairly eclipses all the performances of the past and present bowlers. In no small degree has he benefitted the bowlers of the opposite end, and we are ot opinion that the wonderful figures which stand opposite to Sharpe’s name are, in some measure, due to the excellent stopping and “ chance” snapping of Lohmann. We must also express our sympathy with the last named bowler that he has not always had an efficient ally at the other end, when his turn has arrived for trund­ ling. The cases of bowlers in regard to their analyses assume very different aspects, at the seasons’ end, according as they are placed with regard to their co­ bowlers. The fielding around the wickets has been well up to the mark. To see two such men as W.W. Read and Shrewsbury at point, is to see the post taken to per­ fection. Some of the detractors of the former affirm that “ he never tries for anything that he cannot take.” In this, Mr. Rea,d resembles a certain purloiner of other men’s goods when he asserted that he never took anything " o u t o f his reach.” In not trying for anything that he cannot take, the great Surrey cricketer shows to what perfection he has brought his knowledge of the game, and the extreme nicety of his observation. Formerly, point stood much nearer to the batsman, and we have seen several, Tiny Wells, for instance, dash in, and take the ball within a yard of the bat. We doubt not that either of the cricketers above mentioned could do the same; but the chief feature in connection with their fielding is the beautiful action of each, in stopping a hard cut, and the graceful return of the ball to the wicket keeper. In the long-field, neither of these men display that aptitude which is so notice­ able when they are on their own stations. At Lord’s, when Grace stood point, Mr. Read and Shrewsbury were out-fielding, the result was a failure, for all three. That ball which was grabbed at but went about six inches over point’s arm, would, most probably, have been taken by either of the other two. But where there are three points, two of them must go elsewhere. Let us suggest that it would have been better, had the two younger men tossed up for the post. How many remember G. Parr, and Daft, at long-leg and cover-point ? The throw­ ing of the former was grand in the ex­ treme, and the way in which the latter, with his straw hat always blowing off, ran round almost on the toes of the inner ring, swiftly darting at the ball, with the smart pick-up and return, was the acme of cover-point fielding, when cover point stood to save the four. As regards Parr’s throwing, he once made a match for the longest throw, and won with 109 yards. Mr. Shuter is another dashing cover. The beauty of his fielding is the way in which he rushes to meet the ball, com­ bined with the pick-up and swift return. M. Read is another brilliant out-fielder, and a man who only has to stay at the wicket to get runs, sometimes at a rare pace; just the man for soft wickets, when a side has to go in against the runs. There is no funk about him . If there is any at all, it generally, after the first five minutes, settles upon the bowler. And here let us add that the veterans knew better how to play the game, on soft wickets, than do our present exponents. By their style of forward play, they took the ball at the pitch, and “ hit her.” The innings might be a short and a merry one; but the hitting tactics came off, generally, to the disadvantage of the bowlers. By the way, has any one ever noticed the low shoulder ofthe bowler? My attention was called to it, some time ago, by G. Heame and M. Bead. We had, about half a dozen of us, been down to Wandsworth, to interview the Lady Cricketers. Every man amongst us had the low shoulder. If you doubt it, get a bowler, of some standing, to walk in front of you, when you will not fail to notice that one shoulder is lower than the other. Will any experienced theorist, with his knowledge of the game, kindly explain to us the meaning of “ one short ” ? Of course we all know about the rule con­ cerning it, and the penalty, as recorded. But, what is it ? A run, we take it, is when both batsmen complete the dis­ tance, from the inside of one popping crease to the inside of the other. Should the batsman fail to reach the crease before the wicket is put down he is put out by the fieldsman. Should the fields­ man not reach the ball in time to stop them, another run has to be recorded, or, sometimes, it will happen that the voice of the umpire is heard in stentorian tones proclaiming the “ one sh ort.” Now if either batsman fail to touch the inside of the popping crease, the distance must be short. Then does he, from that position of starting point, also comm ence the second run short of the prescribed dis­ tance. Really then, it amounts to this, that the umpire should call “ two sh ort," instead of “ one,” because both runs have not been completed, and it is an utter impossibility to record “ one short,” for the reason that “ run out” would be the proper verdict, as it would appear in the scoring book. We say that both runs have not been completed, because, in the first place, at the end of the first run, one batsman did not complete the distance, and, in the second place, by not complet­ ing the first run, he starts for the second, from a point short of the distance laid down by the rules of cricket, and so on, to infinity. How about the many coloured shirts and pants of the cricketing professional twenty years ago ? What an improve­ ment may be seen, in the turn out of the “ pro ” of the present day. Take the Surrey team, as an instance, as they leave the pavilion. Are they not apicture, both for condition and style? M.Read lithe and active as a panther. “ Bobby ” “ all there,” and got up for the occasion. The immortal George, with nothing about him to stamp him as a “ pro,” and yet, in a condition that will carry him with ease through his three days’ work. “ Have a drink,” we heard one of the admirers say to a member of the team. “ Not me,” was the reply. “ I don’t want any drink.” “ Continue so,” is our advice, “ and it will be some time before the championship is again taken to the north of the Trent.” Concerning the wicket-keepers of the present day, they more than fairly hold their ow n ; but they do not, in our opinion, compare favourably with Tom Lockyer. When the arm was kept level with or below the shoulder, the bowl­ ing, on rougher wickets, too, was much more difficult to stop. A most dangerous ball for a wicket­ keeper to handle is the “ shooter,” a de­ scription of ball that is now seldom seen in a match. With the present style the balls rise higher, and are not so'swift, and are therefore (to say nothing of wickets that are more perfect) more easily taken. We have seen Lockyer stop to Jackson and Tarrant, and a shooter from either was a caution. We have seen him catch aman on the leg-side from a “ draw,” take a butterfly, by the mere shutting, or closing, of the fingers of the hand, and even take what would be considered by some to be a slip catch. To sum up, we think that a man who can hark back to Tom Lockyer’s wicket-keeping, has seen the best man at the game who has ever donned a pair of gloves. NEXT ISSUE, DECEMBER 27.