Cricket 1893

“ Together joined in cricket’s manly toil.”— Byron • Regi^tered^oiPTransmissionAbroftfl. T H U R S D A Y , J U L Y 2 7 , 1 8 9 3 .PR ICE 2d. CRICKET NOTCHES. By the R e v . R . S. H olmes . The big match of the American season seems to be that between Belmont and Germantown, in which figure many of the cricketers that came over here with the Philadelphian Ama­ teurs a little time ago. That match has just come off. One innings each was completed, and then we learn that “ the second inning will be played in September.,, Odd, isn’t it, to us ? Completing a match after an interval of a couple of months. I refer to it to call attention to a difference in cricket nomenclature on the other side; it’s the first time I have noticed that in America they speak of an inning, whereas inn­ ings is our word. Which is right, or rather whioh is the more correct form of the term—the singular or the plural—philologists must settle; cricketers are not likely to bother their heads about it. I wish there were a thoroughly good glossary of terms used in cricket, for there are certain words in common use the origin of which is entirely obscure. Take, e.g., the word “ Yorker.” Every cricketer knows what a Yorker i s ; can anybody tell us where the word comes from, who invented it, and what it really means. It was evidently a new s term in 1877, when Charles Box wrote “ The English Game of Cricket; ” for he defines it as “ a ball between a tice and a full pitch,” whilst a tice he says is “ a ball pitched up to the block hole.’ , But that is what we understand by a Yorker now-a-days. The first time I ever saw the word was in a match between Northamptonshire and M.C.C at Lord’s; it must be twenty ears since, or thereabouts: until began to hunt up that match last week I felt certain I knew its exact date; but it evades a diligent search. Anyhow, I remember well that one of the Northants men adopted the assumed name of “ A. Yorker.” As I have many a time, but to no purpose, asked for information on the origin and history of this word, I should esteem it a great favor if any of my readers can cast any light upon i t ; in twenty years’ time it will be too late. I saw no cricket of consequence last week • Yorkshire’s show at Derby creating no desire to see them at Dewsbury. The crack in the weather should make Yorkshire thankful that they were resting from front rank engage­ ments* But I saw a local tradesmen’s match, and good fun it was too. We have the most original umpires up in -these parts; with scarcely an exception they raise one hand on high just as the bowler is about to deliver the ball; they all do it. Now, as this gesture must be somewhat distracting to the batsman, I ventured to ask an umpire why he did it. “ Because I must,” was his naive reply, “ it’s in the rules.” I contented myself with saving that I supposed for the same reason he did not lift his hand when a bye was scored, and indeed for the most part took no notice of byes at all, left the scorers to decide on that p oint; and that whenever the, ball glanced off the stumper’s legs, he invariably shouted “ Leg-bye,” though quite satisfied to take no notice of any runs scored by the ball going off the batsman’s pads. Thinking that I endorsed his judgment throughout, he evidently put me down as a most competent authority. Yet this is the kind of umpire specially selected for the League matches now all the rage in the North. Before the season began a quite third-rate Yorkshire League was bold enough to hint that all umpires in these matches should pass an examination. One would love to set the paper; the answers to it would be as start- lingly original as those we have laughed over again and again in connection with the Elementary Schools’ inspection. When somebody writes to know whether I would recommend him to get the new edition of “ Nyren’s Cricketer’s Tutor,” just issued by David Nutt, my answer is, Get it by all means, and any other treatise on cricket you can, no matter whether it be large or small, valu­ able or valueless; that’s been my motto for years. But when he asks me what I think of this latest Nyren, he appeals to a man that ha3 a prejudice against all reprints of famous books of every kind and description. Not that this book is not well printed and tastefully bound, but then I happen to possess eight different editions of the original work, with the exoeption of the first issued in 1833. They are all bound exactly alike in simple embossed cloth, the front cover being embellished with a repre­ sentation of a batsman at the wicket with the stumper behind; a charming book in every way. This reprint wears a strangely unfamiliar look to my conservative eyes, and I cannot admire or love it at present, any more than I took to the “ Chronicles of Cricket” which was an exact facsimile of Nyren’s Tutor, Denison's Sketches of the Players, and Lillysvhite’s Illustrated Hand­ book of Cricket. Nor did the general publio either, for I have been given to understand it was a drug in the market. This latest Nyren has a brand new introduc­ tion of 33 pages which might have been dispensed with. A classic like Nyren, now 60 years old, surely needs no introducing ; the book can stand on its own bottom ; such a heresy as this, “ At timeB he falls into the sin of tall writing, and there are pages which clamour for the pruning knife,” provokes my most righteous anger. There isn’t a word too many in old Nyren, not one that could be changed except to destroy the charm of per­ haps the freshest and most realistic book ever produced on our national game. Some persons could improve on the original plan of creation, better leave it as it stands. Still, buy this reprint, and then resolve never to intermeddle with things too high for us. MARSHALL, Captain of the Bugby Eleven—(See p. 200). From a photograph by R. E. M ason, Bayswater.