Cricket 1891

APRIL 30, 1891 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME; 81 THE UPS AND DOWNS OF COUNTIES. “ It is only natural to linger lovingly on the old days . . . when the stout-hearted players of Surrey and Hampshire contested for the supremacy.” W hen the unhappy conflict between the Northern and Southern States of America was at its height, a number of fiery zealots passed through the once “ sunny South,’’ preaching the doctrine that “ one Southerner can whip five Yankees.” But we never heard of one of these fire-eaters who was willing to be that one Southerner. Some half-dozen years later, history re­ peated itself with a curious exactness—this time in Europe. Metz had succeeded Sedan, Strasburg had succeeded Metz, when a similar band of *•patriots ” spread themselves through France, snouting the Empire and the R e­ public by turns, and urging that it was a joyful and pleasant thing “ m ourir pour la atrU .” But we would very much like to now the name of anyone of these gentry who was found willing to give up his life in defence of la patrie. You will be wondering, however, what this preamble has to do with “ the ups and downs of Counties ” in its relation to the game we all love. We would merely draw a parallel between these same “ patriots ” and the eccentric behaviour of those well-meaning (?) individuals who, ever since the period when the struggle for cricket honours re­ solved itself into a County Championship, have been telling all those interested in oricket (both verbally and through the columns of the Press) that this or that Shire is to hold the said Championship for an in­ definite number of years. Then, when the whirligig of time has brought its revenges, when Hampshire has knookea under to Surrey, and Surrey to Kent, and Kent in turn to Gloucestershire—all in a comparatively brief space of time,—these gentlemen have hidden their diminished heads, and the “ glorious uncertainty ” of the game has been reasserted. In fine it has been amply demonstrated that “ the battle is not always to the strong ” ; whilst the keen rivalry amongst the Counties has carried the premiership from the South to the North of England, and back again. Another interesting phase of the struggle has been the fact that nothing—not even the presence in this country of an Australian eleven—has caused the popular enthusiasm for County cricket to waver for a moment. A century ago, we find Surrey not only absolutely without a rival on the cricket field, hut literally making mincemeat of thirteen of England, even “ after giving them one of the Walkers,”—ay, and repeating the defeat a year^ later. At this time, the celebrated William Beldham was “ the Terror” of the Surrey Eleven, and was worthily supported by the brothers Walker, Wells, and Sherman, by Sparks, Lambert, Bently, Robinson, and others. Shortly afterwards, the Counties of Hampshire, Kent, and Sussex began to assert themselves, so that the interest presently centred around these four—proficiency in the game being for the present, you will observe, religiously confined to the Southern Shires. About the time that Surrey was defeating the jjest of England, there was born near 'goodwood (1792) a man who more than any other was fated to mould the destinies of Sussex cricket. We allude to F red erick W illiam L illyw h ite . Twice during 1827, at fo rd ’s and at Sheffield, did Sussex lower the oiours of England, and each time were they ndebted to the skill of Lillywhite and his a88^8t’ant ” James Broadbridge, with wie new style” of bowling (round arm). It *y be noted that Lillywhite was then thirty- .years of age, and that he actually Prominently before the public for twenty-two years afterwards. Look at the Sussex Eleven of ten years ago I They were quite a medioore lot, though possessing several promising batsmen in Messrs. Ellis, Bettesworth, Newham, M. P. and F. M. Lucas, Whitfeld, and Rev. F. F. J. Greenfield; a wicket-keeper of the first rank in Henry Phillips; ana three bowlers of varied pace and style (but by no means to be depended upon) in Walter Humphreys—who by the way, will get a thoroughly well-deservec benefit match this summer—the late Mr. Blackman, and Juniper. James Lillywhite and Chariwood were just fading out of first- class cricket, and altogether—with Jesse Hide not yet arrived from Australia, and Arthur not yet on the scene—the out­ look was by no means promising. Few, indeed, would have imagined them to be descendants, or representatives, of that eleven who for years struck terror to the hearts of all who would have posed as their antagonists in the field. Of those we have named, several were really first-class batsmen. A per­ formance quite out of the common was that of Mr. E. T. Ellis at Brighton, against the Second Australian Team, at the close of the season 1880. In addition to oarrying his bat through the first innings for 50 out of 104, he partnered Mr. M. P. Lucas whilst over 100 were added for the first wicket, in the second innings—the last named contributing 66, and Mr. Ellis being again not out with 68 to his credit. Mention of the name Lucas, recalls the wonderful performance of “ F. M.” of that ilk for Sussex v. Gloucestershire in 1885, when he scored 215 not out. For that season, at least, Mr. Lucas was far and away the best left-handed amateur in England; and his extraordinary averages of 99 for the county, and 49.3 for all first-class matches, were materially assisted by scores of 76 (not out) v. Cambridge University, 63 v. Yorkshire, and 89 and 31 for Gentlemen v. Players. The argument maybe advanced that, with the galaxy of amateur talent provided by the Colleges of Brighton Lancing and Ardingley, Sussexcanhave no adequate excuse forbeing so lamentably weak as she is. Most of the gentlemen named above hailed, indeed, from one or other of those seminaries —and they have been recruited, from time to time, by Messrs. Brann, Cotterill, Wilson, McCormick, and others. Mr. G. N. Wyatt, too, steered the Eleven through more than one disastrous season, with praiseworthy pluck and energy — whilst later, Mr. “ Round-the- Corner ” Smith set an excellent example by playing in every match. But the great difficulty is that one which always stands in the way of success for an eleven composed mainly of gentleman, the task of getting a team that can be termed at all re­ presentative during the months of June and July. Look at the Kent, Middlesex, and GloucestershireElevens of to-day—how power­ ful they are during the second half of the season, when able to muster their amateurs in full strength. That this should not be, is a great truism ; but that it is a state which is likely to endure, and that it is next to im ­ possible for a County to attain a high position unless her ranks be re-enforced by five or six first-class professionals, are likewise true statements. Why, in the height of the season 1882, the illness of Messrs. F. Penn, A . Penn, Cunliffe, and the Hon. Ivo Bligh, all occurring coincidently, well nigh involved the collapse of Kent County ! This is a case in point. In the pages of the now defunct “ Lilly- white’s ComDanion,” for 1883, occurs the following passage: “ Certain Counties are trying to force their way to the front, notably . . . Somersetshire, but professionals not being indigenous to their soil, it is to be feared that their advance is only a temporary one .” Very gratifying and encouraging should a perusal of these lines be, after a lapse of barely eight years, not only to the writer of them but also to those who have worked so bravely to force the Western County into the front rank of Counties. They have indeed worked hard, and now, at long last, they have achieved a very considerable measure of success. Al* though the side is principally an amateur one, it would be idle to .assert that this position has been attained without professional aid, for in Niohols and Tyler Somersetshire certainly has two of the foremost players of the day, their skill in both departments of the game being quite first-class. In bowling, especially, the performance of the pair last season was a great factor in the success of their side —Tyler taking 126 wickets for 9.58 runs apiece, and Nichols 79 for 10.32. Mr. S. M. J. Woods, who was not often available, captured 24 wiokets for a fraction under 11 runs apiece. These three players, with the Palairets, Messrs. H. T. Hewett (the skipper of the team, whose not out innings of 203 against Leicester gave him remarkable batting figures), W. N. Roe, W . C. Hedley, Challen, Newton,Robinson, and Clapp, constitute a side that should prove equal to batting with the best of our leading Counties. This task will be set them during the coming season, and if only they can muster in full strength, it will be most interesting to observe how they fare. As everybody knows, their match card read as follows at the close of last summer: 13 matches—Won 12, Lost 0, Tie 1. But deserving as the object is, we must not linger over it. Turn we now to the neighbour­ ing County of Gloucestershire, whose table of “ forces and losses ” in 1890 presents five wins against six reverses and three drawn games. It should be mentioned that two of these draws were “ morals ” for Glo’ ster, as against Kent she wanted but twelve runs with seven wickets in hand, and against Lancashire 69 with all her wickets to go down. The writer from whom I have previously quoted rightly attributes the fact of Gloucester­ shire holding the Championship for a term of years, and proving equal to the Best of England, to “ the extraordinary phenomena of the three brothers Grac* ” ; ana this writer points with pardonable pride to the fact that for twelve successive seasons the County remained unbeaten within her own borders —viz, when in full strength. Indeed, it may be remembered that Gloucestershire did not experience a defeat on its own ground until September, 1878—and then not at the hands of a rival County, but by the First Australian Team. But then consider the eleven that the County had at command! * * The three Graces,* Messrs. Gilbert, Moberlv, Townsend,Cranston, Miles, Hattersley-Smith, Bush, re-enforced a little later by the late William Midwinter and by several fine players from Oxford University. But they couid not be kept together for many seasons, and the void caused by the death of G. F. Grace could only be partially filled by the acquisition of Midwinter—whilst W oof was not brought to light until several seasons later. This inability to keep the eleven together in June and July accounts, as we have already pointed out, for much of the falling off noticeable of late years. Still, despite other misfortunes, they have done several noteworthy things since, as p a r exem ple the score of 484 with which they replied to Surrey’s 464 in 1884. And we feel confident that better days are in store for Gloucestershire, which is necessarily one of the most interesting of cricketing Counties. All that calls for comment in the case of Middlesex—another of the chiefly amateur Counties, with much good batting but no bowling to speak of—is, that she has only been at the head of the list during one or two years, and those not recent years. Still, though Mid­ dlesex has not been as successful as the merits of the Eleven would lead one to expect just lately, it is always sure to be formidable. It has indeed one point always in its favour, an inexhaustible supply of capable amateurs always available under the residential qualification. “ The Mystic Nine,” as the ring of first-class Counties has been aptly styled, was narrowed to eight, a couple of seasons ago, by the relegation of Derbyshire to the second rank, though we hope to see it raised to its full