Cricket 1891

(M EM B E R OF TH E K E N T COUN TY X I.) M A N U F A C T U R E R O F C R I C K E T B A T S A N D B A L L S Cricket, Football, and Lawn Tennis Outfitter (Wholesale, Retail, and for Exportation), 140, LEWISHAM HIGH ROAD , LONDON, S.E. T o ge the r jo ined in c r ick e t ’s m a n ly to il.”— Byron . Regi^erea 2 Ior 3 Tranamis 8 ioa'Abroaa. 1HURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 3 , 1891. PR ICE 2 d. D A V ID H U N T E R . T hat enthusiasm for cricket should permeate a whole family is not at all surprising. The same training produces more often than not identical tastes and avein of common sympathy, particularly in regard to sports. That a special aptitude for the game, too, is often inherited there is plenty of evidence in past as well as con­ temporary history to show. It would be easy enough to illustrate the principle of heredity in the case of cricketers who have played a by no means unimpor­ tant part in County cricket within the la^t months. The Walkers, the Lytteltons, and others, too, furnish notable instances of brotherhoods, in which cricket skill has been exemplified to a remarkable extent. But a:} far as we know there is no case in cricket history an exact counterpart of that of the Hunters. To the best of our knowledge at least there is no instance on record of a younger brother immediately succeeding to and retaining one of the most important positions in a County Eleven of the first class. If so, David Hunter has the advan­ tage of a unique record. Like his elder brother Joe, to whose'place as Yorkshire wicket-keeper he suc­ ceeded, he is a native of Scar­ borough. Born there on February 23, 1860, he also passed his apprentice­ ship in cricket within its boundaries. The election of Joseph Hunter to the position of stumper for Yorkshire gave the younger brother a reversion of the post for which he had been practically understudy to the Scarborough Club. From 1884, too, until the date of his adoption in the County Eleven the local team ,had good reason to estimate highly his abilities as an all-round cricketer. A summary of his performances both as a bats­ man and wicket-keeper will speak for-themselves. ' 1F84. 12...... • 1885. -17. ... 1886. 14 ... 1887.-20 ... 1888. 19 ... - --------- - v - - . - , His ability as a wicket-keeper, in particular is fully proved by his record in the table above. His best performance during this time was Not Stpd out. . Runs. Aver. Caught. 4 .. 89 .. 11*1 ... 9 . . 6 1 .. 145 .. 9-1 ... 14 . . 12 4 . . 173 .. 173 ... 13 . . 14 1 , . 276 • .. 14-10 ... 17 . . 8 8 . . 246 .. 15*6 ... 16 . . 10 for Scarborough against Hovingham Hall in 1887. In that match he secured the first five wickets, all of them caught, a feat which has rarely if ever been accomplished by a wicket­ keeper. Nor was his eye less true in front than it was behind the sticks. On the con­ trary, among several good scores one especially deserves mention—in 1888 when he got 75 carrying his bat all through theinnings. On his brother’s retirement from ill health David Hunter naturally occurred to the Yorkshire Committee as a capable and fitting successor. His first appearance for Yorkshire was in 1888 against Cheshire at Bradford. He had, however, only one other trial in a County match that season, though later on he took part in the Scarborough festival, and with success, makiDg 1 and 21 not out, the latter the second highest score, besides catching three batsmen. The summer of 1889, however, found him duly installed as the regular wicket-keeper of the Yorkshire Eleven. His capacity for the post had meanwhile been fully proved in the annual trial match against the Colts, when in addition to an innings of 54 he had a hand in the fall of ten wickets, three from stumping and seven from catches. His record for practically a first trial in County cricket was one of distinct promise. In first- class County matches alone he was instrumental in the dismissal of thirty-five batsmen, of whom eighteen were caught and seventeen stumped. His entire summary of the year was even more extra­ ordinary, for in all he was credited with eighty-four wickets, forty- eight from catches and thirty-six by stumping. Last year, too, 1e was hardly less successful. Though in batting in County matches he was able to show fifteen not outs in a list of thirty-six innings, his average was only a fraction over eight runs, with 22 not out against Surrey as his best score. Still behind the sticks he was as active and withal as safe as ever, and oddly enough his aggregate of wickets taken only fell bhort of that of the previous year by one. This summer Hunter certainly enhanced rather than diminished his reputation as a wicket-keeper. W ithout a doubt his best show was against Surrey at Sheffield at the end of June, on the occasion of Hall’s benefit. The Surrey rren had only need to bat once, and in this innings Hunter was very much in evidence, so much so that he helped to dis­ miss six of their best ba,tsmen, catching five and stumping one. Against Lancashire ot Sheffield he also earned the reward of merit, though in a different way, keeping during Lancashire’s long innings of five hours without giving one extra to their total of 288. On his form of this year his selection by the Surrey Committee to represent the Players against the Gentlemen was fully justified, and, more than that, the choice gave general satisfaction. Though absent owing to an injured hand in the return match with Surrey and Notts, his record has been quite out of I the common. A table recently published