Cricket 1892

484 CKICKET: GENTLEMENv. PLAYEBS. W ith the completion of this match yesterday, the Hastings and St. Leonards Cricket Week of 1892 came to an auspicious close. Though the elevens were not quite representative, still the management under all the circumstances were fairly to be congratulated on collecting two very strong sides. There was one disappointment at the last moment, owing to the withdrawal of Ferris. He had strained himself in thfe previous match, and in the comparative weakness of the bowling, his absence was a serious loss to the South team. Every possible effort was made to secure a reliable bowler in his place, but without success and in the end, the vacancy was filled by G. K. Papillon, of the South Saxons Olub, who has been successful in local matches, With the wicket in excellent order, the choice of innings was of some importance, and as luck favoured the Gentlemen, the Players had naturally to take the field first. W.G. returned to his old place in the order of going in, taking the Somersetshire Captain with him to the wicket. Attewell and Loh­ mann, who commenced the bowling for the Players, met with considerable success, and with Hewett, Stoddart and Palairet all out for only 83 runs, the chances of a large total were not particularly hopeful. The dismissal of the two big scorers of Somersetshire came as a considerable disappointment, and, as will be seen, the Players were very fortunate in getting rid of them for a joint contribution of 16. The best batting of the innings was shown by the two veterans, W. G. Grace and W. W. Read. While they were together the score was increased by 99 runs, and their partnership fcr the fourth wicket produced some exceptionally good cricket, fully worthy of their reputation. During the hour and a half they were associated there was only one mistake, a big hit to square leg by W.G. when he had got 47, when he ought to have been caught. Read was in his best form, and during his stay of an honr and a half there was nothing that could be construed into a chance. W.G.’s batting, with the one ex­ ception already mentioned, was faultless. He was in for two hours and a quarter, and his score of 54 brought his aggregate in first- class matches to over 1000 runs. Subsequently Wright, Crosfield, andWoods lentuseful assist­ ance,and Papillon showedvery promising form, getting his runs in good style. Thanks to the plucky play of the later batsmen the Gentle­ men after all made a good show, the inniDgs, which had lasted three hours and a quarter, ultimately reaching a total of 211. Attewell andLohmann both bowledwith success, though the former had the better analysis, taking five wickets at a cost of less than eleven runs apiece. In a far from good light the Players began their innings, and in the fifty minutes left on Monday fared very badly. Gunn was caught at the wicket from Woods, whose next ball beat Albert Ward. Abel was stupidly run out. and then Chatterton and Bean played out time, leaving the score at the end of the day thirty for the loss of three good wickets. Though on paper the game, when play was resumed on Tuesday morning, looked all in favour of the Gentlemen, still the small amount of bowling at their disposal justified the belief that the Players would make a good score. Such hopes were, however, net realised in tho early part of the day, aud Woods’ fast bowling proved so successful that after Chatterton aud Bean had been parted the innings soon came to an end. The score was 73 when the fourth wicket fell, but the later batsmen could do nothing with Woods, and he brought the innings to a speedy close for an addition of only 36 runs. His figures were remarkable. Of the nine wickets which fell to the bowlers he was credited with eight, and these were obtained at a cost of only 46 runs. In a minority of 102 runs, the Players had to follow on, and with the wicket all in their favour, and very little bowling against them t.hev showed this time to great advantage. Abel and Gunn, who started the batting, were both in form, and the score was 67 when the latter was caught. Ward, his successor, gave little trouble, and Chatterton after making A WEEKLY RECORD OF fifteen was had at the wicket. Bean, however, lent Abel useful assistance, and the latter, whose ninth run completed his thousand for the year, has not played better for a long time. With the edge taken off the bowling, too, Bean came out well, and after an hour and a quarter, when play ceased, they were still in, having added 72 runs. Soon after the recommencement yesterday Bean was caught, and Abel, after adding nineteen, was smartly run out. He had been in altogether three hours and a quarter, and with the exception of one chknce at 59, there was no serious mistake. Lolimann had from the first scored freely, and with Peel runs came fast till the Surrey bowler was caught for a well hit, if not faultless, score of 58. After Ulyett’s dismissal Peel found a useful partner in Attewell, and the score again advanced by rapid stages. Both batsmen were still in, with the total 388 for seven wickets, when Ulyett decided to close his innings. After luncheon the Gentle­ men, who wanted 287to win, commenced their second innings. Avery bad start was made, as a fine catch by Lohmann off his own bowling, which got rid of Hewett, was followed by the dismissal of Stoddart and W. G. Grace. Palairet and Read became partners with three wickets down for twenty, and they had added thirty-two when the latter was bowled. Palairet and O’Brien made another stand, and the former was getting dangerous, when be was caught for a very useful and well-played score of thirty- eight. Neither Wright nor Crosfield gave any trouble, but O’Brien continued to play in free style, and when play finally ceased last night, was still in with 57, the result of capital cricket, to his credit. At the finish the Gentlemen had scored 131 for the loss of seven wickets, so that they had all the worst of the draw. G e n t l e m e n . First Innings. Second Innings. Dr. W.G. Grace, bAttewell 54 c Abel, b Atte­ well ................. 5 Mr. H. T. Hewett, b Atte­ well ...............................12 candb Lohmann 5 Mr. A. E. Stoddart, c Wood, b Lohmann 8 c Attewell, b Lohmann .. 1 Mr. L. C. H. Palairet, c and b Lohmann .......... 4 c Bean, b Peel 38 Mr. W. W. Read, c Bean, b Attewell ................ 56 b Attewell... .. 11 Mr. T. C. O’Brien, b Loh­ mann ............................... 0 not out .. 57 Mr. C. W. Wiight, b Loh­ mann .............................. 27 b Attewell... .. 7 Mr.S.M. Crosfield, runout 20 st Wood, b Peel 0 Mr. G. K. Papillon, fc Atte­ well ............................... 10 Mr. S. M. J. Woods, st Wood, b Attewell.......... 17 not out .. 2 Mr. A. T. Kemble, not out 2 N b............................... 1 B24,lbl .. 5 Total .................211 Total ..131 P layers . First Innings. * Second Innings. Abel, run out ................. 5 run out ..117 Gunn, c Kemble, b Woods 7 c Crosfield, b Woods ... .. 29 A. Ward, b Woods .......... 0 b Stoddart... ... 5 Chatterton, c Grace, b Woods............................... 26 c Kemble, b Crosfield... .. 15 Bean, c and b W'oods 80 c Wright, b Woods ... .. 37 Lohmann, c and b Woods 14 c Papillon, b Wood 8 ... ... 58 Peel, b Stoddart .......... 3 not ont ... 56 Uuett, b Woods .......... 5 b Palairet ... ... 4 Attewe‘1, b Woods .......... 0 not out ... 61 W ood.c O’Rrien, b Woods 1 Martin, not ou t................. 1 B 7, lb 11) ................. 17 B 10,lb 6 ... 16 Total .................109 Total ...388 * Innings declared closed. BOWLING ANALYSIS. G e n t l e m e n . First Innings. Second Innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R, VV. Lohmann ... 3* 6 90 4 ........... 21 3 53 2 Attewell........... 34.417 5t 5 .......... 27 13 42 3 Martin ........... 10 2 29 0 ........... 11 6 15 0 Abel................. 3 0 6 0 Peel.................. 10 1 27 0 ........... 15 9 16 2 Bean .......... 1 0 4 0 Attewell bowled a no-ball. GAME. s e p t , 15, 1892 P layers . First Innings. Second Innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. W oods... ,... 26.1 10 46 8 .......... 65 15 201 3 Grace ... ... 14 6 25 0 .......... 3 1 4 0 Stoddart ... 12 2 21 1 .......... 40 9 96 1 Crosfield 17 4 37 1 Read ... 1 0 8 0 Palairet 10 4 26 1 CLAPTON CLUB. Matches arranged, 50—played 45, won 16, lost 13, drawn 16, abandoned 5. RESULTS OF MATCHES. April 39—v. Honor Oak. Lost. Honor Oak, 185 for five wickets (innings declared closed); Clapton, 55. May 7—v. Streatham. Lost. Streatham, 76 and 75 ; Clapton, 65 and 33 for one wicket. May 14—v. Willesden. Drawn. Willesden, 131 ; Clapton, 87 for four wickets. May 14—v. Pallingswick. Lost. Clapton, 25 and 46 for two wickets; Pallingswick, 92. May 21 —v. Hornsey. Lost. Hornsey, 159; Clapton, 67. May 21—v. Buckhurst Hill. Won. Clapton, 118; Buckhurst Hill, 93. May 28—v. Cheshunt. Won. Clapton, 192; Ches- hunt, 75 and 45. May 28—v. Burlington Wanderers. Won. Bur­ lington Wanderers, 187; Clapton, 138 foe seven wickets. Juno 4—v. Hornsey. Lost. Hornsey, 180; Clapton, 90. June 4—v. Hendon. Lost. Hendon, 175; Clapton, 83. June 6—v. Essex C.C. and Ground. Won. Essex C.C. and Ground, 49and 74; Clapton, 241. June 8—v. High Wycombe. Drawn. High Wy­ combe, 246; Clapton, 142 for three wickets. June 11—v. Tottenham. Drawn. Clapton, 162for sir wickets; Tottenham, 95 for three wickets. June 11—v. Tottenham. Won. Tottenham, 61 and 38 for six wickets; Clapton, 200. June 15—v. Lower Clapton. Won. Lower Clapton, 123; Clapton, 394 for five wickets. June 18—v. Colveston. Won. Colveston, 53 ; Clapton, 274 for seven wickets. June 18—v. Wanstead. Drawn. Wanstead, 164 for t-ix wickets (innings declared closed) ; Clapton, 95 for five wickets. June S2—v. Highgate Bohemians. Lost. Clapton 111and 76 for eight wickets ; Highgate Bohemians, 227. June 25—v East Moulsey. Won. East Moulsey, 85; Clapton, 102 for three wickets. Jane 25—v. Woodford Wells. Won. ClaptoD, 124; Woodford Wells, 95. June? 29—v. Bishop’s Stortford. Lost. Bishop’s Stortford, 189; Clapton, 43 and 81 for se^en wickets. July 2—v. Hendor. Drawn. Hendon. 194 for eight wickets (innings declared closed); Clapton, 109 for seven wickets. July 2—v. South Hampstead. Lost. Clapton, 150; South Hampstead, 164. July 9—v. Pallingswick. Drawn. Clapton, 180 for six wickets (innings declared closed); Pallingswick, 161 for four wickets. July 9—v. Islington Albion. Drawn. Clapton, 96; Islington Albion, 26 for five wickets. July 16—v. Willesden. Won. Willesden, 31 Clapton, 110 for nine wickets. July 16 - v. Cheshunt. Drawn. Clapton, 268; Cbeshunt, 160 for five wickets. July 20—v. Luton Town. Lost. Luton, 149; Clapton, 53 and 54. July 23—v. Tottenham. Drawn. Tottenham, 163 for eight wickets ; Clapton, 84 for three wickets. July 23—v. Tottenham. Won. Tottenham, 138 ; Clapton, 157 for four wickets. July 27—v. Stoke Newington. Won. Btoke Newington. 116; Clapton, 414. July 30—v. Islington Albion. Drawn. Islington Alb'.on, 271; Clapton, 88 for five wickets. August 1—v. Lower Clapton. Won. Lower Clapton, 141 and 62; Clapton, 173 and 34 for two wickets. August 1—v. High Wycomfce. Won. Clapton, 253; High Wycombe, 76. August 6—v. Buokhurst Hill. Won. Buckhurst Hill, 115; Clapton, 133. August 6—v. Woodford Wells. Drawn. Wood­ ford Wells, 221 for six wickets, innings declared closed; Clapton, 98 for one wicket. August 13—v. Wanstead. Drawn, ^vanstead, 156 for eight wickets, innings declared closed ; Clapton, 104 for four wickets. August 18 v. Ibis. Drawn. Clapton, 179; Ibis, 46 for one wicket-