Cricket 1893

256 CRICKET s A WEEKLY EECOED OF THE GAME, J u l y 6,1893 CRICKET NOTCHES. By t h e R^v. R. S. Holmf.b. B r oth er J onathan is nothing if not original, yet that is a fairly large order of his, in the shape of sundry proposals to economise time at cricket matches. Let’s have a hurried glance at them. Time is needlessly wasted, says Brother J . ; less so perhaps than formerly ; ought it to be ? In one-day matches, which seem to be the rule in America, this is of course a more serious matter than with us, who find the three days quite enough to complete almost every match, though on this side some of us are anxious to see the strict game played always. I don’ t suppose we shall favour tie following suggestions : prolong the overto twelve balls ; fielders only to change when six overs have been delivered from the one wickel; the other bowler to sta» d at mid-on, and after the twelfth ball step up to the sam** wicket, the first bowler going to his old place at mid on. Next, let the incoming batsman start from the pavilion the moment a busman is out. Lastly, draw or e or three lines from wicket to wickftt so 1hat batsmen could find the lequisite b ock v i hout askiDg umpire for it, Well, whal can w e answer? We might be ready to have *ix balls to theo\er, I wish for oue that we ha 1 ; but twelve—never. W hy, umpires would pro on ptrike ; there would o e no end of mistakes in the counting of the balls, unless we did as our cousins do-instruct scorers to call over.” Ihen, try and imagine a game in which six over.s (30 or 72 balls) were bowled from each wicket; wouldn’ t the fielders protest, and the umpires too. aye, and the oi - lookers ? The strain would b e too great for everybody. The changing over is a pleasant relief; fancy the stumper in one cramped position for so louf. When I am intensely interested in a game, I find the end of the over an immense b>on. Besides, there’s no reason why it should take any longer for the whole field to change than for the two bow lere; now -a-dajs one L e v e r sees the same man at long field or square-leg at both ends. It would be a gaiu perhaps to insist on the fresh batsman turning out as soon as his prede­ cessor is out ; umpires cug'it to s e e that the two minutes interval is never exceeded. But surely it is carrying matters too far to forbid batsmen after running out a big bit to rest a moment or two so as to recover wind. D e­ pend upon it, baf8men would adopt all sorts of ruses if you made this rule ; what’s to pre­ vent a blown batter patting the ground,asking for a new block, refastenir g pads, and I know not what else ? Last’y, blouK must be given by umpire, for there is a very marked difference between a left ha*id bowler and a right hand, both of whom bowl round the wicket; ba'smen would never play with confidence unless they had the exact block they have been accustomed to, for there is a difference of four inches (or thereabouts) be­ tween “ one-leg ’’ and “ centre.” No, better cricket as she is played to-dav than cricket as proposed to be p'ayed by our Yankee fiiends ; it’s possible to make cricket too lively. I have no ambition to enjoy a reputation for finding mare's nests, but here’s a matter that has been on mv miud for weeks. Law No. 11 exacts that “ the bowler shall deliver the ball w th one foot on the ground behind bowling crease,” &c. Hut how many bowlers do so ? I would ca’l all umpires’ attention to ihis, I noticed it fiisfc when “ standing.” So far as I can see, in nearly every instance when the ball actmlly haves the bowler's hand , his f.iot behind the create is not on the ground ; in fact, 1 don’t know how it can be unless he stop dead before sending down the ball. Tbe foot r aturally synchronizes with— perhaps “ follows is a more understandable word—the hand; with the ordinarymomentum which the run gives, it is next to impossible to fulfil the letter of this law. As this is a matter of some importance, and I have never seen it pointed out, it would be interesting to learn the opinion of experienced cricketers and umpires. There was a bit of a breeze at Tonbridge* last week, when it was known there would be no cricket on the Tuesday. The crowd got obstreperous—perhaps, as Lamb once said of Coleridge, it was only their fun. It is cruelly disappointing to set a day aside for a match only to find play is out of the question ; one must grin and bear, however. I have often remarked on the patience of the ordinary cricket crowd; on Whit-Monday, for instance, the heat was intense, the sunshine of the fiercest, yet there stood the long-suffering riug, in many cases six ard eight deep, in all manner of painful attitudes,with the sun beating down on head and neck and back, quite contented many of them to get an occasional tight of the ball. Oue doesn’t worder if sometimes they show their vexation. Yet during all the years I have studied or watched cricket how seldom there has been any hostile demonstration. I rem-mbcr the Surrey and Notts match at the Oval in 1865, which Surrey won by one wicket. S:ephensou and little Tom Sewell were the lieroe* in at the death. There was an appeal, umpire nnswered in batsman’s favor ; Notts contingent present were not satis­ fied, growled, hooted, hissed, and finally encroached on the field ; Surrey mob fo.lowed suit; game stepped. One of the bowlers— name a secret—tried to drive crow’d back by bowling his fastest in among them—and he could bowl f*8t. After awhile things righted themselves, but Notts did not appear again at the Oval till 186S. The historic no-ball episode in 1862 provoked no disturbance from the riug Willsber, by throwing down the ball and making for the dressing room, simply stopped play for that day. .vpectators were dumb­ founded, and though they lingered long, said and did nothing beyond discuss in little knots ihe action of the umpire aud the Kentish bowler. I can never forget that incident, as it happened at my very first visit to the Surrey ground. In 1884 there was a row at Old Trafford ; Eng'aud were playing Australia. Jnst aslreached Manchester it began to mizzle and it kept mizzling the rest of the day. Not bpi iously enough perhaps to have stopped play all at once, but seriously enough to prevent a start being made. We waited on hour after h< urin silent hopefulness. Sundry incidents of course happened, the sight of any of the cricketers provoked a cheer. At four o’clock we learned that there would be m play; then some wag slowly walked up to the pitch, pulled up the stumps, laid them do vn flat, and deliberately returned, amid a hurricane of app’ause. People wanted badly a diversion. Then came the customary assembly in front of the pavilion, and then later on a move in the direction of home. Unfortunately the au’ horities had given no orders for the issuing of passes or checks for the next day, and then followed the liveliest scene I ever witnessed on a crioket ground. The consequences might have been serious but for the a’ rival of a couple of mounted officers, who after showing off, as those workers generally do, proceeded to business, and in a few minutes the ground w’as clear. It must have been nearly as lively as that half-hour at the Oval when Australia met the Players, and the Co’onial captain refused to play the match out before luncheon, even though a few minutes sufficed to finish it. On the whole, if cricke’ ers cannot be paid to lake their pleasures *aily, both placers and speo- tators are entitled to no scanty meed of honour for a certain grim Mark Tapleyism under the most trying conditions. But I am gas-ing. L- t’s to our muttons. A correspondent from Aberdeen writes : “ I hope you may go on writing Notches for ever. I am a little perplexed, however, why Lanca­ shire cricket should receive such scant notice from you, seeing that you have avowed that the purpose of Notches is maiuly towards Nor­ thern cricket.” The slight is unintentional: for eleven years the Red Rose was my count}', and I am as enthusiastic as ever in my sym­ pathies. But t 'e fact is thefe Notches don’t profess to treat exclusively of current cricket; when they do it’s natural they should have most to say about the matches I fee, and those, of course, are chiefly Yorkshire. However, I will take this fiiendly hint, though one had sooner not this week. The honors for once go to Kent, and Martin was certainly the hero of last week’ s cricket. The earliest recorded match was Kent v. England in 1746; “ Long Robin ” — probably an assumed name—is perhaps the most rememberable Kentish cricketer in that far away match which the County won by a wicket. One hundred and forty-seven years later the su m Coanty is still well to the front. When Kent boasted such names as Mynn and Felix, Hillyer and Wenman, Pilch and Mynn, “ 'twas but natural to win.” And they are not done for yet. It was creditable to beat Somersetshire by eight wickets: it was a veritable triumph to score off Lancashire after thelatter’a series of successes over Derbyshire, Notts, Yorkshire, and Oxford, especially as Mold was himself— witness twelve wickets for twelve runs apiece, and at the close of the first day, 1 ancashire were only 35 runs behind, and had but three dead men. And Kent had to leave out Walter Hearne, who single-handed beat Lan­ cashire earlier on at Old Trafford, when he sent down about the finest bowling of the ^ear—fifteen wickets for 124 runs. But Mar­ tin did all that was required, scor­ ing the highest innings of the match (65), and taking five wickets in each innings; against Somersetshire he was just as effective with an innings of 69 runs, and one wicket less than against Lancashire. No one will grudge him his double. Three years ago he got a place in the England team, but last year and this, his left-hand seems to have lost its old knack. Parson Rashleigh had a week out too, with innings of 40, 20, and 86, and George Hearne—now well nigh a veteran, seeing that 1875 was his first season —still knows how to turn out the runs— witness 77 for only one completed innings. It is to be regretted that the famous batsman <f the West had to retire from this match, but as h i9 substitute-another parson—Wood, scored an innings of 52, the result could not have been different had Hewett been in bis old place. As Ferris took fourteen wickets for 88 runs against Scotland —though this match does not count—would­ n't it, think you, if Surrey last year had scored as indifferently as Gloucestershire this year against the same team ?—there’s an off-chance that the ex-Australian may find his spot again. Mold is certainly doing better, and Attewell redivivvs would be safe for a place in the England eleven, which will have to be chosen ere long, and in which present form alone should secure a place. Oh, Ulyett, aren’t you regretting now that you did not aocept the invitation to feast with tbe “ Yorkshiremen in London,” at the Holborn on Wednesday last? One never suspected you carried about such stores of self-denial. Virtue does not always get its reward—more kicks than half-pence some­ times. You lost the dinner, and you lost the match ; you must learn not to be so virtuous in future, else you will find yourself im­ mortalized in copy books. And don’t you think that in the case of a follow-on, tho not­ out man should go in first the second time, unless his first innings be of colossal pro­ portions and the batsman needs a rest. That used to be the standing order in cricket in all matches except when the not-out man happened to be a “ passenger.” I feel bound to mention here one of the most thoughtful and kindly compliments ever paid me. An interested reader of these Notches, unknown to me personally, was anxious for me to see the Surrey-Yorkshire m a'c'i last week. He was one of the founders of the Surrey Club in 1844, and wai generous enough to forward me his “ \ass ” ticket accompanied by a hearty wish that we might meet and compare notes. Favors of this sort somehow make life brighter, and work easier. Surrey made no mistake this time, though the absence of Richardson might have knocked all the heart out of the team. An initial score of 356 set me wondering as to whether the Oval wickets must not be improving, and if so, how ? Kindly forward the secret to Bramall Lane, for we may want it before the week is out. K. J. Key (100) was best man with the ba t; it’s just five years since he scored as heavily (108) off Yorkshire bowling ; four contributions of thirty runs apiece, reared up by Lockwood’ s splendid handiwork—61 (not out), and 11 wickets for less