Cricket 1893

820 <8RICKE?§ A WEEKLY BECORD OF THE GAME0 AUG. 3, 1893 REMINISCENCES OF CEICKET. B y RICHARD DAFT. A G reat T rio . If asked to name the three greatest left- hand bowlers I ever saw, I should unhesitat­ ingly say Edgar Willsher, J. C. Shaw, and Fred Morley. When at his very best I believe Willsher was the best of the trio. He was faster, aud his ball got up more than those of the other two, and when he got on a wicket that kicked he knew how to make use of it better, perhaps, that any other bowler I can call to mind. Willsher was a tall, lanky, cadaverous- looking man, with a very long thin left arm. His delivery was rather a peculiar one, He caused a great deal of bother by bowling unfairly, as was declared by many—that was, by delivery above the height of the shoulder, and indeed the commotion which his delivery caused was eventually the means of the rule being altered to its present form. I myself always thought that Willsher’s delivery was within the limits of the old law, although it cannot be denied that to the spectators who did not watch him most closely he appeared to deliver above the shoulder. As a matter of fact, I believe that when the ball left his hand it was exactly on a level with his shoulder. He came up to the wicket with a quick-march kind of step ; raised his hand high above his head, bringing it down, how­ ever, with a very quick jerky movement just as he delivered. That last movement of his seemed to put a spin and impetus on the ball tnat caused it to rise like lightning from the pitch. It seemed to reach one almo3t before it left his hand sometimes. I always found that I could play him baok more successfully than forward, although until one got used to him it was difficult to believe this could be done. Willsher was always a bowler that one was glad to see taken off if one were batting against him, and were well set even. One never knew what might happen, as he had so many nasty balls “ up his sleeve” which often produced disastrous results. Willsher was born in 1828, and played first for his native county, Kent, in 3817. In an All- England match at Broughton against Twenty- Two, he once bowled 100 successive balls for one run against some really excellent batsmen, as the Broughton Club always possessed. In the Kent and England match, too, in 1860, he bowled against some of the finest batsmen in England 164 balls for sixteen runs. Besides being so magnificent a bowler, Willsher was a most useful bat, often making large scores. He batted as he bowled, left-handed, and was a hard and clean hitter, and possessed a very tolerable amount of defence. Wilsher was known as “ the Lion of Kent.” He was not con­ stitutionally a strong man, and only weighed about ten and a half stones. Of the second of this trio of bowlers, J. C. Shaw, I have already spoken in these columns. In order of merit, as in chronological order, I should place him next to the “ Lion of Kent.” He was not such a dangerous bowler as Willsher, but could vary his pace more successfully, being a muoh stronger man than Edgar. Jemmy was, I always consider, the most difficult bowler, either left or right, that ever hailed from Notts. We now come to the last of the three—Fred M orley; and if his bowling was less difficult than W illsher’s or J. C. Shaw’ s, he was more distinguished for keeping a beautiful length than they. If Morley bowled like a machine, he certainly resembled a machine that was well oiled and in perfect working order. Never have I seen a left-hand bowler with such a perfectly easy swing as poor Fred possessed. One can scarcely ever remember his sending a bad length ball down the wicket. Like Jemmy Shaw, Morley was born at Sutton-in-Ashfield, which has been the birthplace of so many famous cricketers. He first came into note in the beginning of the “ seventies.” In 1873 he was ahead of J. C. Shaw in the bowling averages. In 1874, for his county against 16 of Derbyshire, he took seven wickets for 60 runs; v.Yorkshire, seven for 73 ; v. Surrey, six for 25 ; v. M.C.C., six for 47; and in the second match against Surrey at the Oval he clean bowled, in the second innings, six wickets for 14 runs. He was at the top of the bowling averages for Notts in this year. In 1875, for the Players v. the Gentlemen, at the Oval, he bowled 47 overs for 36 runs and five wickets. After lunch he bowled in this match 12 overs (in which he took the five wickets mentioned) for 3 runs ! A marvellous performance, truly. At Prince’s this year, for Players of the North against Gentlemen of the South, he took five wickets for 36 runs, and in the second innings eight wickets for 31; altogether making 13 wickets for 66 runs, at an average of 5 runs a wicket. It will give some idea as to Morley’s accuracy of pitch when one comes to look at his bowling in the Gentlemen v. Players’ match, at Lord’s, in 1876. The former made the large score on this occasion of 449 ! Morley taking six of their wickets at the cost of 76 runs only. On the first day of this match, the Gentlemen scored 433 for six wickets. On the second day Fred finished them off in twenty-five balls. Against York­ shire for Notts, at Sheffield in ’76, in the first innings he took seven wickets for 33 runs (five bowled), and in the second innings six wickets (four bowled) for 12 runs! In the following three days against Surrey, at Trent Bridge, Morley kept up his reputation by bowling in the first innings twenty-six overs and two balls, twenty-one maidens, for 10 runs and five wickets. In 1877 he took seven wickets of Lancashire at Trent Bridge (six bowled) for 20 runs. Against Yorkshire this year he took five wickets for 43, and against Surrey five for 32. This year, too, when helping the Players of the North against the Gentlemen of the South at the Oval, he had five wickets for 48 runs, three of the five being Dr. W. G. Grace, and Messrs. G. F. Grace, and C. F. Butler. His best performance for the season of 1877 was for M.C.C. against England. For Marylebone he took four wickets for 9 runs ; and against Oxford University seven wickets for 6 runs in the first innings and in the second, six wickets for 8 ! It would, I fear, prove wearisome to give in detail a’l the brilliant performances of this magnificent bowler—I will j ust put down a few of the chief remaining ones, however. In 1878, for Notts against the first Australian team, Morley took eight of the Colonals’ wickets for 72 runs. This year he took twelve of the Surrey men’s wickets for 70 runs, and against Yorkshire he did still better by obtaining fourteen wickets for 94. Six for 37 v. Middlesex, five for 39 v. Kent, six for 49 v. Gloucester, six for 41 v. Derbyshire, eight for 68 v. Surrey, seven for 9 v. Kent in the firstinnings, and eight for 26 in the second were his most notable perfor­ mances in 1878. In 1879 his principal feats were for M.C C. v. Cambridge, six wickets for 28; v. Somerset­ shire, eight for 28. For North v. South, nine for 80. F or Notts v. Lancashire, six for 38; v. Derbyshire, first innings, seven for 7 runs, and in the second, five for 28. And in the return match against this county in the two innings he took fourteen wickets for 53 runs, and v. Gloucestershire, eight for 52. In 1879, for my American Team, during the tour Fred took 100 wickets at an average of 3£ runs. For M.C.C. v. Oxford, in 1880, he took eleven wickets for 43 ; for Notts v. Yorkshire, thirteen wickets for 83; Notts v. Middlesex, eight for 36; v. Lancashire, ten for 64; v. Surrey, at the Oval, in the first innings, seven for 9 runs; for Notts v. M.C.C., six for 14 runs. Death claimed this great bowler in 1884 at the early age of thirty-four, poor Fred succumbing to congestion of the lungs. Like many other of our great fast bowlers he was not blest with a strong constitution. As a batsman he was by no means successful, being just a little better than old Jemmy Shaw in this respect. It was laughable to see how Dr. W . G. Grace could get him out. “ Who wants a catch ? ” I have often heard W.G. ask when Fred appeared on his way to the wickets. “ I do,” some one would remark. “ Go out yonder, then,” the Doctor would say, pointing to a place in the long-field, and sure enough a ball would soon drop into this fielder’s hands off the bat of Fred Morley. Fred used to call this “ baiting a mouse trap ” for him. Morley was of medium height, and carried no superfluous flesh. He had a remarkably small head. This was very noticeable when one tried on his hat, and many a laugh have we had when doing this in the dressing-rooms on cricket grounds. First one would try Fred’s hat on, and then another, and it was amusing to see how absurd every one looked in Fred’s little tile. Whenever he used to go to purchase a new one he always had to request to see a few samples of boys’ hats to select one for himself from. When we were in America Fred very much liked the American shaving and shampooing, and not­ withstanding the somewhat high figure charged for these operations, there was seldom a day passed without his paying a visit to the barber. Poor Fred was much liked by every one. He was not an intellectual man, but was as kind-hearted and as entirely without vice as a child, and as easily led. He never lost his temper, and was always respectful and civil to his superiors. Few cricketers had fewer enemies and more friends than Fred Morley, and few have left a more celebrated name behind them in the annals of cricket. LONDON AND COUNTY BANK v. LONDON AND W ESTM INSTER BANK.—Played at Dul­ wich on July 26,27, and 28. L. & W .B. C. A. Snell, c Finlin- son. b Blom field ... 31 F. F. Musson, b Hear- sum ..........................23 C. A. Goodchild, b H earsum .................. 57 C. S. J. Douglas, c Blizard, b Hearsum 4 G. Raby, b Broom ­ field...........................12 H. Bradbery, not o u !;...........................43 E. B. Manfield, b Blom field ........... 0 B 1, lb 4 ........... 5 T ota l......... 178 L. Pitt-Brook, A. Podm ore, J. H. Herschell, and C. C. Simpson did not bat. Innings declared closed. L. & C.B. J. Hearsum, n otou t .. 68 W. Bentley, b Pod­ more .......................... 8 C. W allace, c Pitt- Brook, b Podm ore 0 W. E . Broom field, b P o d m o r e ................... 5 F. H. Thirlwall, c Manfield, b Pod- r^ore ...................25 W . K. Pattinson, b Podmore ........... 1 A. Jackson, not out 26 B 18,1b 3,w 1, nb 2 24 T o t a l......... 167 C. E. Blomfie’d, S. H. Sargent, F. J. Finlinson, and G. P. Blizird did n ot bat. LONDON AND W ESTM IN STER BANK v. HON. A R TILL E R Y COMPANY.—Played at H. A. C. Grounds, Finsbury, oa July 29. L. & W . B. J. Herschell, c and b N orm a n ...................14 B 11, w 2 , n b l ... 14 Total ..112 C. A. Snell, not ou t... ; F. F. Musson, lbw, b D a le ........................... 1 C. A. Goodchild, run out ....................... 61 L. Pitt-Brook, b Dale 19 G. Raby, b Dale ... 0 W. Bradbery, T. W . Mackintosh, A. T. Clarke, T. H . Breman, and A. Podm ore did not bat. Innings declared closed. H on . A r t il l e r y C o m p a n y . Parke, not out . B 5, lb 3... . Total 63 A. J. Clarke, c Mus­ son, bPodm ore ... J7 C. Blizard, b Pod­ m ore.......................... 8 R. A. Holliborne, b Podraore ........... 8 A. T. Smith, not out 16 N .Y . Norman. E. Treefry, A. Flatau, J. Dale, Rev. Clarke, and E. Clements did not bat. LONDON AND W ESTM INSTER BANK (2) v. LONDON AND COUNTY BANK (2).—Played at Greyhound, Dulwich, on July 26 and 27. L. & C. B. R. H. King, c and b Richardson ...........20 H. R Oxley, c Man­ field, b Richardson 1 A. A. Yeoman, b All­ cock .......................... 9 H. W. Walrond, b AUcock ................... 0 C. R. Trowell, b All­ cock .......................... 5 W . Bass, b Allcock... T. Fowler, b A lcock C. G. Day, b Stone ... C. E. CuU, not out ... E. de C. Ricci, c and b Allcock.................. R. W enm an, b c o c k ... Lb ... All* Total , 50 L. & w . B. H.O.Manfield,b Wen­ man 56 A.W .Brown, bTrowel 1 A. J. Richardson, b C u ll.......................... 9 A. T. Maingay, not out ...........................34 C. J.Crossley, b W al­ rond .......................... 0 A. W. Harris, J. M. Allcock, and T. H. Pritchard did not bat. J. P. Murray, st Bass, b W alrond... W. E. Hunter, not out .......................... F. W. Stone, b Cull B 4, l b l ................... Total ...118