Cricket 1893

342 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OE THE GAME. AUG. 17, 1893 body has a better time of it, from the crowd to the reporters. If I remember rightly, such reporters as were present in the long ago used to sit out in the open on a form in front of the scoring box (then or. wheels); to-day they have, as they deserve, the best view of the game possible. Once upon a time there was not a single row of back-less forms round the rin g; now there is a splendid terrace, with foothold (if not seat room) for a bigger crowd than has ever yet patronised any match. The players’ room was up that curious step-ladder by the side of the long bar, now they are quartered in the Pavilion in lavish style. And yet one thought regretfully of the early days, and visions of Willsher and Tom Hay­ ward, Tom Lockyer and Ben Griffith haunted me all last week. There is one improvement Surrey may with advantage take in hand. Why not abolish the separate gates leading from the Pavilion to the enclosure, one of which is used by the amateurs, the other by the pro’s ? This is an invidious, and to me wholly irritating, caste distinction that should be unknown at cricket. I rejoice that we have it not on our Yorkshire grounds; all the cricketers leave the pavilion by the same way. True, we have here different dressing rooms, and the amateurs are generally found sitting in the committee room. I would not be sorry to see this, too, abolished. At cricket we all stand on common ground; if amateurs and pro’s travel together, surely they might sit together during a match, and nobody suffer in con­ sequence, Even supposing our modern pro’s were not gentlemen (which most of them assuredly are), it would do them gcod to mix freely with their betters. If the Australians are good enough form for the Pavilion and all its privileges, our home players are. Oh ! don’t let us be snobbish. I am disposed to think your real gentleman would prefer to use the same gate as his brother-pro’ : it’ s your amateur-professional who might turn up uis nose. Fellow-sinners, “ do let us clear our minds of cant,” in other words, first get rid of these highly-paid pro’s who pose as amateurs, and then we shall abolish all these idiotic class-barriers which war against the genuine freemasonry of sport, I do sincerely hope, in the best interests of cricket, that we shall have vanquished, at the close of the season, separate batting and bowling lists for the two classes. Friend Wisden, kindly make a note of this, and no longer disfigure your •*Almanack/' I wonder if anybody keeps old cricket ‘ cards of the match ?” I wish I had of every match I have seen, they would make an interesting collection. I do now buy a card at tbe close of the match. Not very long ago somebody sent me a wonderful lot of Notts’ cards, which I much value. I have some genuine old cards as well, or rather, they were not cards, simply pieces of thin paper; here’s one before me, for the year 1839, Kent v. All England, for the benefit of Fuller Pilch—“ correct state of game, printed on the ground, by G. Windsor, from Gravesend.*’ Umpires, Messrs. Bayley and Gord. “ Refresh­ ments provided by the Committee ; a full statement published at the end of each day.” I should be glad to hear of some cards for sale. Whittam is our printer up North ; all visitors to Scarborough know him and I dare­ say vote him a bit of a nuisance after a while. Well, he may be, but he does his work well. He prints the bowling analysis immediately on the termination of an innings, which I did not see, nor have I ever seen, on the London cards ; and Whittam also reproduces the wires from other grounds. Of course he is in the fashion of noting maiden overs, which I want to be ignored. And I shall not be perfectly happy until, as I said last Autumn, we guage bowJers not only by the runs per wicket test, but also by the overs or balls, they bowl for each wicket taken. As the bowler’s object is to get wickets, that bowler is most successful in this matter who gains his end most quickly, and with the smallest output of strength. If the London paper, which give3 a £25 monthly prize to] the best bowler and batsman during any month, would hand that amount over to the captain of the most successful county during the same period, it would do much greater service to cricket. Why, here’s Brockwell carried off one of the prizes this summer for bowling. Only a born idiot would give him the place of honour, good man though he is with bat and ball, good enough, many of us think, to be chosen for England, a lot better than Flowers, who was selected both at Lord’s and the Oval. And here let me say that there is one county club that has abolished the talent-money, but, in its place, entrusts its captain with no less a sum than £100, to be given away to his pro’s wherever and however he thinks best. A capital arrangement, which might become universal with advantage. Bowling, fielding, as well as batting, get a chance of recog­ nition. And no need for any hard-and-fast standard in either department of the game. Thus, there’ s many an innings of 25 (or even less) that deserves a sovereign far more than some innings of 50 (or even more). And there are some rare bits of bowling that often decide the fortune of a match. And what of many a wonderful catch ? The amount just mentioned might be beyond the ability of all county clubs, and the captain must of course be a gentleman in every sense of the word. But the idea is good, and might be worked out by all. Another gobd idea: get rid of trial balls to bowler ; they waste time, and ought no more to be allowed than similar balls to batsmen—bowler resorts to them, not to ease his muscles but to get his length. Down at the Oval last week, Flowers actually was allowed half-a-dozen. I suppose one can’ t stop the interruption of the game by telegrams. The postal authorities would have to be coaxed over ; but tbese wires are all of the same nature, sent by soft enthusiasts like myself who can’t wait for the evening papers to give them the state of the poll. They might be kept back till the close of the innings. Now for the week’s cricket, though I am sorely tempted to shirk it for ever, having many more things on my mind. I was at the Bank Holiday match at the Oval, having seen the same match earlier on at Trent Bridge. If I say that Surrey literally waltzed round Notts, you will understand how these respective counties impressed an unbiassed individual with two eyes wide open. Notts were beaten from start to finish at every point of the game. Their batting was tame, their bowling without sting. All very fine to say J. A. Dixon should have put Surrey in. No man in his senses would. The wicket on Tuesday was almost perfect, and yet the Notts cracks did nothing. Can’ t they play fast bowling ? It would seem so, as far as Shrewsbury and Gunn are con­ cerned. Why, Arthur S.’s nine last innings against Surrey total up 62 ! The only really first class Notts batting was shown by Atte- and Sherwin on the second afternoon—better cricket I never want to see. True, old Mor- decai scored only 14 (not out), but it’s a long time since one saw so much really first-class cricket in an innings of such dimensions. A. O. Jones (38) was plucky, but Attewell played the game. When Sherwin retires from behinp the stumps he will have to be tried as a bats­ man. What man of his weight (his 40 odd years are no matter) could possibly bat well after stumping under so fierce a sun as Londoners enjoyed on Bank Holiday? Surrey did so well all round (not in the field—witness much wild chucking, at the wicket when nobody covered the stumper) that I am wholly at a loss to understand why they aren’ t at the top again this year. In a solid score of 290, Brockwell (51 not out) took the lead, but W.W. (40), Abel (40), Hayward (37), Key (38), every one played very fine cricket, whilst Lockwood’ s (and in only a lesser degree Richardson’s) bowling was quite top-class, better indeed than his analysis (8 for 95) would indicate. Both bowled at a great pace and made the ball do a lot. Flowers was decidedly difficult, and gets more spin on than any of his chums. It was mournfully pleasant to get a glimpse of Lohmann again; but I did not speak to him ; it’s kinder not to bother him with questions as to his health. He looked in splendid form, and his father told me he fully expects him to be his old self next year. And Tom Emmett was in evi­ dence, and looking years younger than he did. Just the same in spirits; I could not help having a crack with him, and congratulate him on the good form shown by his (Rugby) boys up at Lord’s recently. Tom isn’t quite happy about that match : “ They got at my ? et boy in the pavilion, told him to play care- ully, which he did, and took an hour to get 3 runs, when ” (and here was the old twinkle in his eye) “ he ought to have got nearer 300 in that time.” C. W . Wright was also met. He bossed the ’Varsities’ team at Portsmouth a fortnight since, and the army of critics who are bothering their heads as to whether that match should reckon first-class or not may like to learn on the word of the old Light Blue skipper that the ’Varsities’ bowling was wonderfully good throughout, and their field­ ing even better. But “ it was the most perfect wicket I ever saw, and Australia soon found it out-” W ith a last longing look at the Surrey Loving Cup, which went round each afternoon, as it has done at every match during the last 30 years at least, let us say good-bye to the Oval for the present. The Wars of the Roses up to date, and the House of York once more worsted. I am thankful I did not help to swell that record gate at Old Trafford; a friend of mine did, paid 2s. for the enclosure, and then never saw a ball. It’s a shame to take people’ s money, and give them nothing in return. Packed like sardines—well, is not my idea of earthly bliss. And yet one does honestly admire the amazing enthusiasm for cricket which can keep a huge crowd out for the day under blazing sunshine. Football is soon over, and in its season there is not a superfluity of sunshine. There’s no game so sincerely loved for its own sake, and never will be. A match to be remembered on many accounts; wicket heavy after much rain ; scoring very low throughout; consequently much wonder­ ful bowling; umpire’s decisions seriously ques­ tioned ; result, balance of only five runs in favour of the house of Lancaster. The four scores were 64, 50, 58, 51—or 223 for the loss of 40 wickets, i.e., just about 5£ runs per wicket, So the batsmen did no mighty depds, in fact only one of them (Baker) ran beyond 20. Twelve duck’ s - eggs ornamented the scoring sheet. I wish they could fight it over again, especially as the umpires failed to give satisfaction. By the bye, some people never do agree with the umpire. Still, it does seem odd that umpires should lift his hand high preparatory to touch­ ing his leg. F. S- Jackson thought the verdict was against, and so left his ground, when the umpire said “ not out,” but too late for the batsman to recover. He should have been given in on the appeal for a run out. Ernest Smith may or may not have been o u t; those ground catches are very hard to see. I can’t think S. M. Crosfield would have appealed unless he felt certain the ball had come to hand. Anyhow, as Jackson (13) and Smith (12) were both getting set (well set, we may call it in this match), and Yorkshire lost by onlv five, we may say—“ Hard lines, York­ shire.” If there be any comfort in sympathy, then may the White Rose be greatly helped in this disappointment by learning that both Notts and Surrey lamented their overthrow in sincsrest terms. It looks to me as if on that Mon­ day ; wicket Hirbt should not have been put on certainly not first; it was a wicket made for Wainwright, yet he never bowled a ball that day ; when he got an opening he took four for eight. Briggs, as usual, eleven for 60, had a day out; our boys tell me they tried to force the game, but couldn’t ; the ball would go straight to hand. But Peel (ten for 39) took highest honours; he has rarely done so gamely. If Yorkshire should be top after all, history will repeat itself. Last year Surrey headed the list, though twice beaten by Notts, and this year Yorkshire have twice been made to eat the dust by Lancashire. The glories of the Canterbury week have been sun.* so often, that one may here pass them by. The week is to me a memory only, Still most delightful, having seen every ball bowled in 1874,1875,1876. Kent, as usual, did great things. First Australia went under, and then they made a decent draw with Notts*— both somewhat lucky results. It is the fourth time they have beaten Australia, and having been beaten only twice, their record against