Cricket 1892

“ Together joined in cricket’s manly toil.”— Byron . Registored Tronsmiss'ion'Abroad. T H U R S D A Y , S E P T E M B E R 1 5 , 1892. PRIOE 2d. CRICKET NOTCHES. By t h e Rev. R. S. H o l m e s . T he last match of the Scarborough series was the best every way, in spite of its being unfinished; but it was no genuine trial of strength between the Champion County and the rest of England. Had the original match against the North been played, we should have had a re­ vival of an old favourite fixture of thirty to thirty-five years past. But in that case Scar­ borough would not have been selected for a serious test match. C. I. Thornton had got together a very strong side ; of course it might have been stronger. We must still pickW.G. first in any representative eleven ; and we should also want Shrewsbury, Ilewett, and Palairet, not to mention either Briggs or Mold, to make the team perfect. And yet a practical difficulty crops up here: whom to shunt ? Barnes and Ferris would have to go, and perhaps T. C. O’Brien on this year’s form. Anybody else ? Before last week one would have said Ernest Smith andW. Murdoch. Should we be so confident ajter the event ? Smith (122), and Murdoch (83), not forgetting Stoddart (25 and 73), were the heroes of the match, and cer­ tainly earned their blue. Surrey most likely would have been beaten with a deficit of 280 to make up on the last innings. But the match was not a serious one, else John Shuter had been present, and Surrey’s generosity to Smith might not have been quite so profuse. Shall we ever have a real test match of this kind again ? Perhaps not, so long as the County struggle is maintained so keenly. There is not room for it, and is there any urgent need for it ? With so many good matches on hand right through the season, such a trial could scarcely be made before September ; and then it’s too late in the year, and besides oricketers are getting scattered. You could not, with any show of reason, have such amatch till the County supremacy was decided; and without the very best England team it would be quite super­ fluous. Then again, no one County R EG IN A L D W IL L IA M R IC E .— (See page 431.) From a photograph by Norman, May &Co., Limited, Cheltenham. to-day is strong enough to meet England. Surrey used to be ; and in the same years they threw down the gauntlet to the North of England, afterwards playing the South in the stead of the North. And is there not in the club room at the Oval a handsome oval tablet in marble, which, in gilt letters, commemorates a year (1858, if I am not mistaken) of unbroken successes? The full strength both of England and the North beaten easily, the former in an innings. That never hap­ pened again. True, in 1864, every eleven-a-side match was won; but then we had the wretched “ Cricket Schism” on, and so England played weak. As they did for two more years, when Surrey, on the down-line, gave up this old fixture, and have never since revived it. I remember Middlesex attempting the same bold venture in 1867; so did Gloucestershire—then at their best—in 1877 and 1878 ; and later still, Notts, full of well- earned confidence, followed suit in 1885. But, though Glouces­ tershire pulled off their first match, as did Notts their solitary match, in no case was England represented by more than one-half of its possible strength. Hence none of these matches excited much interest. They were a tacit confession that the day was past for such a trial. And we must wait until either one County is overwhelm­ ingly strong, or all the other Counties are deplorably weak, before England v. the County o f-------- will be an authorized fixture. As there is no current cricket to hamper me, I shall just wander about at my own sweet will. First of all, an enquiry from Monmouthshire requires attention. “ Several disputes as to the meaning of Law No. XI. have arisen in matches here.” As everybody knows, that Law enacts that “ the bowler shall deliver the ball with one foot behind,” etc. What about the other foot ? Where must that be ? Here’s the question—“ Is the bowler at liberty to keep b o t h feet behind the crease, or must he have one foot over the crease and one behind it; if he keeps both feet behind, should he not be no-balled ? ” A very ingenious, but at the same time a very natural, question.