Cricket 1893

410 CJKICKETg A WEEKLY BECORD OF THE GAMEi SE P T . 14, 1898 THE EIGHTH AUSTRALIAN TEAM. W ith the close of their match against the South of England at Hastings on Saturday last, the lour of the Eighth Australian Team came to a close. Overtures had been received for a few additional fixtures, and it had been officially reported that in any case there was every probability of one engagement at the Crystal Palace after the completion of the regular programme. Still it was decided, and wisely in the face of the departure of the team for America next Monday, to bring the cricket part of their visit to an end last week. The match at Hastings was the thirty-sixth in which the team had taken part. As only one half of these ended favourably, it can hardly be argued that the result from a rarely cricket stand-point was a brilliant success. As a matter of fact, in view of the sanguine opinions which reached us from Australia in anticipation of the visit, the general summary of the tour was productive of some disappointment. The all-round cricket of the side certainly did not reach the high level one might have been led to expect from the confident anticipations of their capabilities by some of the most experienced judges in Australia. W ith one exception, perhaps, the combination was thorouehly representative of Australian Cricket. The exception cf course was Moses, and even here we are not qui e certain as to whether he ought to be included, for tbe mere reason that there were, and with reason, grave doubts as to his fitness to bear the arduous and con­ tinuous work of an English season, after more than one break down from a strained leg. Still with this one reservation it may be conceded that the full available strength of Australian cricket was represented in the combination The general confidence in their ability was only qualified perhaps by one uncertainty, as to whether the bowling was of that infinite variety which is so successful on English wickets. Of batting there was rather an excess than a lack, that was certain. And if there was one department in which they were bound toex'cel it was in the fielding. In that one branch the team, so we were informed by one of their best all round players, and one of great experience, were, undoubtedly, the best that had ever visited England. A careful analysis of the results will show how far these estimates were justified. In some respects it will be universally admitted they were fully realised. So far as batting was concerned, notwith­ standing unaccountable collapses, they were, on anything like a run getting wicket, undoubtedly a very dangerous side. There were some disappointments, of course* On his recent Australian form George Giffen ought to have been the most reliable batsman. Instead he was a comparative failure, and, indeed, except on a few notable occasions, he hardly ever came up to his great reputa­ tion at home. To the fast bowling, in particular, he never shaped at all well, and in fact it seemed as if he did not care to stand up \yhere the ball came along at an ex­ treme pace as in the case of Richardson, Lock­ wood, and Mold. At the same time the severe work of the practically continuous cricket seemed to have a greater effect on him than on some other members of the side, and at times he looked very tired. Another batsman who came with the blushing honours of a home-made reputation on him certainly did not realise expectations. On the faith of more than one abnormal score in Melbourne, the English had been led to expect a batsman of great resource in R. W. McLeod. Such an estimate, as it proved, was al- a'together wrong. Instead of a dashing player, as most left-handed men are, his style was very unattractive,. Of variety there was indeed little, and although on some occasions he was of use at a pinch he was a watchful cricketer rather than a bats­ man of many parts. Otherwise there was little to find fault with in the batting. With Lyons, Bannerman. Bruce, Gregory, Trott, Trumb’e.G.Giffan, McLeod, Graham, Turner, and Blackham, there was, on the contrary, a very strong combination. It was an eleven, in fact, any one of whom might fairly be counted on for a good score even to the very last. Generally, too, the failures were few. Just at the outset, Bruce, on paper the finest batsman in the colonies, was by no means himself. When he did settle down into form, however, he gave the English cricketers a taste of the graceful style and punishing power which have so deservedly contributed to his undoubtedly great popularity. Yet it can hardly be said that he came quite up to expectations. In their different styles Lyons and Bannerman were of infinite service. Lyons on several occasions, notably at Lord’s in the first match against M.C.C. and Ground, was seen at his very best. Through­ out, indeed, he proved himself to be one of the finest hitters of the day, and on the whole he added to his reputation as a punishing batsman without a superior. Bannerman’ s watchful cricket, if at times wearisome, was generally of use. Trott. too, showed himself to be a sound and reliable batsman. Of the players who had been before, the greatest advance was shown by Trumble. If in the early part of the tour he was only moderately successful, he sub­ sequently showed himself to be a much improved batsman. Several times, indeed, he played particularly good cricket, and towards the last he was one of the most useful rungetters. The greatest successes of the tour in batting, though, were of the two young players, Gregory and Graham. Gregory had already proved himself to be a really promising batsman in 1890. The bene it of the three years’ interval was shown in a considerable increase of skill, and his confident and plucky cricket on several im­ portant occasions proved invaluable to the side. Last, but not least, reference must be made to Graham’s brilliant debut in English cricket. The inclusion of so young and com­ paratively an untried player it was thought was open to some little doubt- How thoroughly he justified hi3 place in the team the records will show. For a first trial in England, on grounds and under conditions to which he was quite new,Graham’ s consistent success was remarkable. Nevertheless he illustrated in his personallthequalities foragreat batsman,fcicf, resource, variety, and power. As he is quite young it is superfluous to predict an excep­ tionally brilliant future for him. At all events he has two great essentials to success, nerve and judgment, and it is rarely, indeed, that these qualifications have been so prominent in a player so new to important cricket. In bowling we have already said there was too much of the same type. Fast bowlers are of little or no use comparatively on Australian grounds, and hence the article is scarce in the Colonies. The want of a little variety was at times very evident. Owing to a severe attack of influenza Turner was not able to play in some of the earlier matches, and as it was we question whether he was ever really quite fit Even then he seemed to have lost some of his pace, at all events, at times he appeared to be much slower. Still, on the whole, he bowled with all his old judgment, and on certain wickets when the ball got any help fi*bm the ground he was as dangerous as ever. George Giffen’ s bowling, too, showed no great deter­ ioration. He had the same command over the ball, was as accurate in his pitch, able to get the same useful amount of work on, and on several notable occasions came up to his best standard as a bowler. Trumble, too, did good service many a time and oft. His great height, under any circumstances, is bound to make him effective, and as he makes the most of his opportunities and uses his head well, he considerably improved his reputation as a bowler by his perfor­ mances during this tour, Trott’ s leg breaks were in some rare ins*ances of use, that is the best that can be said of them. McLeod, too, hardly realized expecta­ tions as a bowler. There was apparently no great amount of devil in him. Still he kept a good length, and occasionally was of service as a change. The want of the team in this department was undoubtedly a bowler of some pace, as a contrast to the rest. Bruce bowled occasionally, and in a few instances with success. Little use was made of Coningham. As a left-handed bowler he would have pre­ sented a complete change, and Mr. Cohen, the manager, has a good opinion of his capacities as a bowler. Nevertheless the fact remains, that he was not deemed of much account by the selection committee, to judge by his very rare trials. On paper, the side ought to have been an exceptionally fine side in the field. With Blackham at the wicket, Bruce, Trott, Bannerman, Gregory, and Graham, all of them brilliant exponents of the art of saving runs, there was at least the neucleus of some­ thing out of the common. Still, though Trott, Bruce, Graham, and Gregory ail acquitted themselves well, Bruce, Gre­ gory, and Graham in particular, faulty fielding had much to do in influencing the result of several important matches against the team. Blackham’s hands prevented him taking the wicket with quite the same success as he might otherwise have done. Good as he still is, though, it could hardly be expected that he would still retain all the old skill which kept him for so long without a superior. As his understudy at the wicket Jarvis was undoubtedly good, and though an utter failure as a bat, in his capacity as a wicket-keeper he was distinctly the right man in the right place. This brief analysis will show that it was mostly in their out cricket that the play of the Australian team was disappointing. At the same time, if they were hardly equal to the best of their predecessors, say those of 18*52, they were certainly rather above the average than below it. In this glance we have systematically avoided any mere recapitulation of figures. The most notable features of the tour will be found in the exhaustive summary which follows In one respect both sides, the Australians as well as the English cricketers who opposed them, will have reason to look back on the tour with satisfaction. There was no hitch of any kind to mar the good feeling which ought to, and does, exist among cricketers, even when the competition is keen, and the issues at stake apparently large. In its best and highest motive, the develop­ ment of cricket and the interchange of friendly relations between the players of tbe old world and the new, the last visit of the Australian team has been an undoubted success. In the attainment of this object the tact and good judgment of the manager, Mr. Victor Cohen, have been a very important factor. The duties he has had to carry out necessarily involve a great deal of routine work, and require a considerable amount of good temper and forbearance. In this capacity Mr. Cohen has shown himself to be quite equal to the best of his predecessors. This is, to those who have had any actual acquaintance with the working of previous teams, of itself no small praise. AUSTRALIANS (A LL MATCHES). BATTIN G AVERAGES. Times M ost in Inns. not out. Runs. an Inns Aver, H. Graham ... 55 ... 3 .. 1493 ... 219 .. 28.30 J. J. Lyons ... 58 ... 2 .. 16 '5 ... 149 .. 28 87 G. H. 9. Trott 61 .. 2 ... 1496 ... 145 .. 2o.?i AC.Bannerman50 .. 1 ... 1929 ... 131 .. 25 4 G. Giffen ... 55 ... 1 ... 1260 ... IK) .. 23.38 W. Bruce ... 61 .. 5 ... 1314 ... 191 .. S. E. Gregory 55 .. 4 ... 1 '96 ... 112 .. 23.2* H. Trumr>Je 52 ... 12 .. 874 ... 105 .. 21.34 R. W . M ’Leod 48 ... 11 .. 638 ... 47*.. 17.9 w . F. Giffen 22 ... 4 .. 248 ... 62 .. 13.14 JM ’C Blackham 33 ... 12 .. 588 ... 42 .. 13J5 C. T.B.Turcer 45 ... 5 .. 535 ... 66 .. 13.15 A. Coningham 24 ... 3 .. 2% ... 46 .. 1'.8 A. H. Jarvis .. 2L ... 5 .. 79 ... 17*.. 4.1 AUSTRALIANS (A LL MATCHES). BOWLING AVERAGES. Overe. Mdns. Runs. W kts. Aver C.T. P. Turner 1148 .. . 450 ... 220i ... 160 ... H .122 A.Coningham 260.4 ... 85 ... 612 ... 38 ... 16.4 H. Trumble 977.1 ... 336 ... 2016 ... 123 ... 6.48 G. Giffen ... 1063.3 ... 302 ... 2619 ... 148 ... 17.118 G. H. S. Trott 385.1 ... 86 ... 1148 ... 60 ..r ia s £225 W. Bruce ... 316 3 .. . 87 ... 795 ... . 35 ... R. W.M’Leod 558.1 .... 215 ... 1141 ... 47 ... 24.13 J. J. Lyons... 29 .. . 6 ... 94 ... 2 ... 47 S. JE. Gregory bowled in three innings 13—1, 54—1; and H. Graham in one, 4—0,22—0.