Cricket 1892

AUG. 11, 1892 C K I C K E T : A W E E K L Y R E C O R D O P T H E G A M E . 86 7 I t is no* often that the Preparatory Schools are able to produce a young cricketer of such promise as Alan Moyer Graham, this year’s captain of Temple Grove, East Sheen. A well set lad of fourteen years, he has not only strong defence, but can hit well on both sides with some capital strokes in front of the wioket. This summer he has played five innings of over seventy, and his average for the season is 57.6. In addition to being a smart cover-point and safe catch anywhere, he is also above the average as a wicket* keeper. As he goes to Haileybury College in the autumn he should prove a useful member of the School Eleven. “ T he best and most reliable sporting paper ” was paying its readers a poor compli­ ment when it suggested on Thursday that many of them might be surprised to learn that the Surrey County C.C. took all the receipts of the Notts match at the Oval last week. The surprise would be, if any, I fancy, in quite another direction. Every­ one who knows anything of the details of County crioket knows the accepted usage with regard to the distribution of tho gate in Inter-County matches. It is and has been within the memory of the present generation the universal practice that each County pays its own expenses and takes the whole receipts of the home fixture. This is common know­ ledge to the veriest tyro in cricket matters. T he Upper Tooting Club was particularly fortunate in having perfect weather for its crioket festival, which extended from July 27 to August 6. Of the ten matches played six were won and four lost. The great feature was the exciting character of many of the finishes, particularly in the matches with Bickley Park, Streatham, West Kent, and Old Westminsters. The best individual performance was the bowling of the Old Cantab, the Eev. H. C. L. Tindall, who took thirty-five wickets in the six consecutive innings in which he bowled at a cost of ten and a half runs a-piece. Alto, gether the gathering was as enjoyable as it was successful in the production of good cricket. C o n tin u o u s sucoess was the outcome of the Granville (Lee) Club’s week which began on Bank Holiday. The programme consisted of four matches, the fourth one extending over two days. In the last instance tho Bradfield Waifs represented the opposition, and on a perfect wicket the scoring was proportionately high, the lowest of the first three innings amounting to 238. The best performance in the way of run-getting was against Eltham on August 2, when 214 runs were made in the second innings for the loss of only four wickets. All the four matches, which were against the Stoics, Eltham, Croydon, and Bradfield Waifs, resulted in favour of the home team. It is worthy of remark that the closing fixture produced a score of a hundred for each side, one of 108 by G. F. Gerds for Granville, of 129 by H.A. Tapsfield for the Waifs. H o s p ita lity is nowhere more gracefully or unstintingly extended to cricketers than by Mr. Sydney Platt, at his charming residence in North Wales. The Incogs for .some seasons now have annually been numbered among Mr. Platt’s guests, and a team of them have just separated after another week of complete enjoyment at Bryn-y-Neudd. O n the cricket itself, R. T. touches in his usually light and genial style— A. E. Gibson batted and bowled in county form from start to finish. M. F. Maclean Dut on the “ gentle tapping” into and over the Doundaries. D. Brownfield, W. Felton,W.H. Bullook, Capt. Greenway, H, Harrington, F. Stevens,Major Johnson, A. Knowles, and E. H. Waller kept the fielders warm and the soorers awake with vigorous hitting, coupled with strong defence. Abney, Maclean, Wilson, Smith, Platt, and Pemberton stood forth as the most effective trundlers, the latter also fielding most brilliantly. Special mention should also be made of Frank Cobden, who, in the long ago, “ brought o ff” the three- wickets-in-succession-catastrophe at Lord’ s— when wanted—and who still, as a “ propeller,” wants a lot of watching. A. N. Hornby, I was pleased to see too, still “ all there” and jubilant as of yore ; waking up the field and his brother batsman, and galloping the short­ est of short runs in his own inimitable style. Many thanks are due to Mr. Sydney Platt for his unstinted liberality in support of cricket and other kindred sports and amusements, which tend to enliven the quietude of the town of Llanfairfechan. That he may for long be found doing so—in Health and Happi­ ness—is the best wish of 4“ R.T.” —and all that know him. Now that the premiership crioket has passed away from Surrey, t will be of interest to give a summary of the per­ formances of the eight leading shires for the last six years, during which time Surrey was in the front place. One feature is par­ ticularly noticeable, in the number of the finished games to the credit of Surrey by comparison with the other shires. The figures, however, tell their own tale :— S urrey . N otts . L ancs . Y orks . W. D. L. 1886-12 1 3 1887—12 2 2 188S—12 1 1 1889—10 1 3 1890— 9 2 3 1891—12 2 2 W. D . L. 7 7 0 8 3 3 3 5 6 9 3 2 5 4 5 5 5 4 W. D. L. 5 4 5 10 1 3 4 5 5 10 1 3 7 4 3 8 3 4 W. D. L. 4 7 5 6 7 3 6 4 4 2 2 10 6 5 3 5 1 10 Total 67 9 14 37 27 21 44 18 23 29 26 35 M id d x . G douces . I K knt . tiUSSKX. W. D. L. 188(3—3 3 4 1887—4 4 2 1888—4 1 7 1889—3 3 5 l%90—3 1 8 1891—8 3 5 W. D. L. 3 4 6 1 4 9 5 4 5 3 4 7 5 3 6 2 4 10 W. D. L 6 3 6 1 5 8 7 2 5 7 1 5 6 5 3 4 5 5 W. D. L. 4 2 6 2 2 8 1 2 9 1 1 10 1 0 11 4 3 7 Total 25 15 31 19 23 43 30 21 32 13 10 51 Played. Won. .Drawn. Lost< Surrey ... 90 67 9 .. 14 Lancashire 85 41 18 .. 23 Notts.......... 85 37 27 .. 21 K en t........... 83 30 21 .. 33 Yorkshire 90 i9 26 .. 35 Middlesex 71 25 15 .. 81 Gloucester 85 19 23 .. 43 Sussex ... 73 13 10 .. 51 Surrey has lost of the 14 m atches—5 to Lan­ cashire, 3 to Notts, 2 to Middlesex, and one each to Yorkshire, Kent, Sussex, and Somersetshire. ONE SHORT. There lurks a certain little clause— Though brief, of much import— In Number Fifty of the Laws That rule our summer sport: Re runs that can’t be scored, because In length they are not free from flaws— The umpire calls “ One short.” The Grand Old Batsman’s ninety-nine, That witched King Willow’s court Some few days back, the bard incline To holloa “ That’s your sort! ” With hundreds (heaps) your records shine, Dear “ Doctor ” —you need not repine At centuries—“ one short.” C.P. T he position o f N otts has been so fo r­ tified b y recent successes that the first place is practically assured. Still th ere w ill probably be a keen com petition fo r som e of the other positions, and the n ext fo rtn ig h t’s cricket w ill be far from lackin g in interest. T h e follow in g is the state o f th e poll up to date. Played. W en. Lost. Drawn. Points. N otts.................. 12... 10 ... 0 ... 2 ... 10 S u rrey............... 11... 8 ... 2 ... 1 ... 6 Lancashire...... 11... 5 ... 3 ... 3 ... 2 Somersetshire. 9... 5 ... 4 ... 0 ... 1 Middlesex ....... 10... 5 ... 4 ... 1 ... 1 Yorkshire ....... 12... 5 ... 4 ... 3 ... 1 K e n t................. 11••• 2 ... 8 ... 1 ... —6 Gloucestershire 10... 1 ... 7 ... 2 ... —6 S ussex............... 12... 1 ... 10 ... 1 ... —9 In scoring points, losses are deducted from wins and drawn games ignored. T he follow ing innings of a hun dred and over have com e under our n otice since last Bradbury, P. J. O’L., Bassinettes v. Kings and Clare L.V.C., Augnst 2 .......................... 108 Bayford, R.if., Pembroke and Trinity Hall L.V.C. v. Caius L.V.C., August 3 ............... 103* Browning. F. H., Incogniti v. W. H. Laver- ton’s XT., August 1 ......................................103 Brann, G., Sussex v. Gloucestershire, August 5 147 Bray,. E H., Charterhouse v. Sir Bichard Webster’s XL, August 4 .......................... 100 Barton, Hampshire v. Oxfordshire, August 8 125 Bailey, H., Egerton Park v. Bradfield Rovers, August 8 ............................................................. 103* Bennett, Rev. H., Croome v. A. H. Hudson’s XL, AugustO ..................................................138* Brain, J. H., J. W illiams’ XI. v. Penllergare, August 4 .............................................................109 Broomfield, St. Mark’s (Kennington) v. One and All, August 6 ......................................109* Chaldecott, R. F. G.( Islington Albion v. Upper Clapton, August 6 ..........................112 Challen, J. B., Old Weilingburians v. Old Bedford M odem ians, August 2 ............... 160 Challen, J. 3 ., Old Wellingburians v. Rol- venden, August 6 ......................................104 Cotton, Rev. E. B., Reigate Hill v. Old Sut- tonians, August 4 ......................................189 Coxall, F. W., Hitchin v. A. J. Boger’a XI., August 6 ............................................................. 115 Denning, A. W , Hungerfordv. Early Closing Association, August 4 ..........................Ill* Denning, Rev. J., Hungerford v. Early Closing Association, August 4 ............... 101* Doyle, A. ConaD, Norwood v. Dulwich, August 6 .............................................................1C4* Fairtlough, Major, Broadwater v. Esher, August 1.............................................................115* Foster, H. K., W orcestershire v. Radley Ringers, August 6 ......................................101 Foster, W. L., W orcestershire v. Radley Rangers, August 6 ......................................128 Freeman, E. H., Burlington Wanderers v. Croydon, August 2 ......................................142* Glover, A. C. S., Old Reptonians v. W. G. Michell's Eleven, August 3.......................... 124 George, F., Granville v. Bradfield W aifs, August 6..............................................................108 Greenstock, W-, Henley v. Stantake Park, August 3 .............................................................115* Hanson, B. F., Old Yverdonians v. Tedding­ ton, August 6 ................................................. 102* Hodgson, T. E., Plaistow v. Old Suttonians, August 2 .............................................................12 l * Hollands, S., Horsham v. A, F. Somerset’s Eleven, August 6 ............... ............... 110 Hea^ne, G. G., M.C.C. & G. v. Bishop Stort­ ford, August 3 ................................................. ICO* Henery, P. J. T., Harrow Wanderers v. Man­ chester C. & G., August 6 ..........................101 Ingram, F. M., G. G old’s Eleven v. Rickling Green, August 8 ......................................115 Johnston, A. S., Granville v. Eltham, August 2 135 Kittermaster, F. J., Kings and Clare L.V.C.v. Bassiuettes, August 1 ....................... 107 Killion, H. M., ChiHwick Park v. Birkenhead Victoria, August 5 ..................................100* Lyttelton, Hon. Bev. E., Eton Ramblers v. J. Burrell’s Eleven, August 4 ......... 116 Leese, N., Bere Court v. Bradfield, July30... 136 Leigh, J., Uppingham Rovers v. Hants C. & G., August0 .............................................. 106 Maclagan, W. E., London Scottish v. Stan- m ore, August 6.............................................103 Murdoch, W . R., A. F. Somerset’s Eleven v. Horsham, Augnst 6 .................................. 102 N utta'l, R. H., South Saxons v. Clapham Wanderers, August 5..................................133 Phillips, L., Trafalgar v. Southgate, July 80 104* Platt, A. W .. Old Wellingburians v. Old Bed­ ford Modernians, August 2.......................147 Powell, E .' O., Old Carthusians v. A. P. Lucas’ Eleven, August 8 .......................141 Quinton, Capt., R. A. v. Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers, August 3 ..................................123 Read, M., Surrey v. Leicestershire, August 4 181 Rashleigh, W., Tonbridge v. Old Cliftonians, A u g u st6 ................................................. ... 101