Cricket 1893

APRIL 20, 1893 CRICKET: A WEEKLY EECOED OP THE GAME. 71 So we won the game that had been in such jeopardy, by two runs. I was the hero of the hour—-though I had made two duck’s eggs — and I didn’t think it worth while to tell them that I had caught the ball while m y eyes were tightly shut! P.C.8. SOMERSETSHIRE COUNTY CLUB. May 5, 6—Taunton, Colts M atch May 22—Lord's, v. Middlesex May 25—Brighton, v. Sussex May 29—Oxford, v. Oxford Univera:ty June 1—Nottingham, v. N otts June 7, 8—Crewkerne, v. 18 of D istrict June 15—Taunton, v. Yorkshire June 21, 22—W ells, v. 18 o f D istrict June 29—Tunbridge, v. Kent July 6—Yorkshire, v. Yorkshire July 10—Taunton, v. Kent July 13-O val, v. Surrey July 17—Taunton, v. Lancashire July 20—Taunton, v. Australians July 24—Liverpool, v. Lancashire July 28, 29—W ellington, v. 18 o f District Aug. 1, 2—Radstock, v.18 of District Aug. 7—Taunton, v. Middlesex Aug. 10—Taunton, v. Sussex Aug. 14—Cheltenham, v. Gloucestershire Aug. 17—Taunton, v. Surrey Aug. 21—Taunton, v. Notts Aug. 28—Taunton, v. Gloucestershire YORKSHIRE COUNTY CLUB. May 1—Sheffield, Yorks Colts v. N otts Colts May 8—L ords’, v. M.C.C. and Ground May 11—Gloucester, v. Gloucestershire May 18—Cambridge, v. Cam bridge University May 22 (W hit-M ond*y)—Sheffield, v. Australians May 25—Leicester, v. Leicestershire May 29—Leeds, v. Sussex June 1—Lords’, v. Middlesex June 5—Bradford, v. Australians June 8—Leyton, v. Essex June 12—Sheffield, v. Surrey June 15—Taunton, v. Somersetshire June 19—Leeds, v. Lancashire June 22—Halifax, v. Leicestershire June 26—Birmingham, v. Warwickshire June 29—Oval, v. Surrey July 3—Bradford, v. Notts July 6—Sheffield, v. Somerset July 10—Leeds, v. Australians July 13—Nottingham v. Notts July 17—Derby, v. Derbyshire July 20—Dewsbury, v. Warwickshire July 24—Sheffield, v. Essex July 27—Huddersfield, v. Gloucestershire July 81—Blackheath, v. Kent Aug 3—Hull, v. Derbyshire Aug. 7—Manchester, v. Lancashire Aug. 14—Bradford, v. Middlesex Aug. 18—Darlington, v. Durham Aug. 21—Sheffield, v. Kent Aug. 24—Brighton, v. Sussex S econd XI. June 17—Oval V . Surrey June 29—Leeds, v. Surrey July 14—Bradford, v. Lancashire July 28—Manchester, v. Lancashire LEICESTERSHIRE COUNTY CLUB. May 1, a—Leicester, Colta M atch May 11,12, 13- Oval, v. Surrey May 22, 23, 21—Leicester, v. Hampshire May 25, 26, 27—Leicester, v. Yorkshire June 1, 2,3—Leyton, v. Essex i™ 6 Brmingham, v. W arwickshire June 12,13,14—Leicester, v. Notts T,,n e -Leicester, v. Dublin University In n ! oo Leicester, v. Mr. E. D alt’s Eleven InSf O?’ Halifax, v. Yorkshire une 26, 27, 28—Leicester, v. Essex J®—Leicester, v. Australians Tnw on i ? ’ Birkenhead, v. Cheshire 22-L ord's, v. M.C.C. Jolv I ? ’ V ~ Leicester, v. Uppingham Rovers A n Jn»i'^ o8o S T ’ • Leice8ter, v. Derbyshire Annnt. in , L e i c e s t e r , v- Cheshire An»nof H ' 12~Leicester, v. Surrey August 14,15,16—Derby, v. Derbyshire AufSst 28 2q’ ^ -S ou th a m p ton , v- Hampshire gust 28, 29, 30—Leicester, y, Warwickshire IS FOOTBALL DW ARF ING CEICKET ? B r G. H . S h e p h e r d . Fifty thousand at Fallowfield, Man­ chester, to witness the “ Wolves ” and E\ erton decide the Cup ! “ Cricket never had anything to equal this,” I heard an enthusiastic footballer say, and the speaker could not be gainsaid. The Australians drew 30,000 at the Oval once, and that was considered an enormous “ gate.” Ten years ago such an attendance would have been deemed impossible. Few people could have at that time thought that football could have made such gigantic strides in gaining the public favour. The question indeed arises as to whether football is dwarfing cricket, and it will not be amiss to compare the two games from divers aspects. The daily newspapers contain longer reports of football than they do of cricket. In a small half­ penny London daily the other day there were seven columns devoted to football matches and notes and inter­ views. When a great match is over the irrepressible | reporter goes alike to the captains of the winning and losing sides, and asks the former how it was his side won, the latter how it was his side lost, and about a column is devoted to the reasons given pro and con. This wretched importuning is not accorded to cricket. One never hears o f a special reporter going up to Mr. W . G. Grace and saying, “ Well, you’ve been beaten, Mr. Grace, by Somersetshire, how do you account for it ? Do you think you were wrong in going in first, and if so, why so, and if not, why not, etc ?” One could well imagine the Leviathan’s responses if such a thing were attempted. In the North of England and Midlands the people have simply gone football mad. In the clubs, pubs, and streets it is on everybody’s tongue. Everything gives way to it. It matters not whether Mr. Gladstone is about to unite Ireland in bonds of perpetual peace or disintegrate the British Empire— the one question— the great question of all questions—is, “ should ‘ the Wolves’ have beaten E ve rto n ?” Do you ask if the local member is likely to be returned again to Parliament ? “ Never mind that, why was Smith put centre-forw ard?” That’s “ the question that wants answering.” Parliaments may vanish, and constitu­ tions be cemented or broken up, but the question of Smith must be answered before and above all. The cause of the popularity of football is not far to seek. It is as a rule more exciting than cricket. It is more quickly decided. Only the leisured classes can afford to sit out a day’s cricket match, whereas an hour and a half is sufficient to decide a game of football. The great matches are, as a rule, played on a Saturday afternoon, so that the masses are free to go in their thousands. In cricket, the match, starting on a Thurs­ day, may be all over by Friday night, or on Saturday there may be only a few runs for the winning side to knock off—which nobody will go to see. Then again there is— especially in the North of England— a great deal of bet­ ting over football. There are profes­ sional bookmakers who will lay the odds just as they do at a race meeting. In cricket this is happily not the case. There may be a friendly half-crown “ on ,” or the exchange of a “ weed,” or a brandy and soda between two spec­ tators backing the counties in which they first saw the ligh t; but money does not change hands in tens and hundreds as happens every week in the North of Eng­ land. The result is that there is a “ rou gh ” element coming into football which, sooner or later, is bound to be both offensive and dangerous.^ It is no unusual thing to hear of barriers being broken down by riotous crowds, and the playing arena being encroached upon so that some matches have had to be re­ played. Such a thing has never occurred at cricket, “ Professionalism ” at football seems to be attended with drawbacks and vices wholly unknown to the cricket world. In football, the club that can afford to pay the best salaries and give the largest secret gratuities gets the best team. In the first- class cricket counties the rate o f re­ muneration is practically uniform, so that there is no temptation for a player to abandon one county for another. In foot­ ball, a player can have one club for one year and another club for another year. In cricket, a stranger must have a two years’ residential qualification. In Yorkshire, the county players are mostly both bred and born in the county, and it would be well if this rule were adhered to by all the other counties. Otherwise the locality — the distinction o f county “ races” o f men is entirely lost as it is in football. Team “ A ” in Lancashire, composed of two- thirds Scotsmen, plays Team “ B ” in Warwickshire, mostly composed of Scotchmen. Where can there be any local “ patriotism ” about that? People want to see all Warwickshire men play all Lancashire men. As well might the coming Australian team divide themselves in two parts, one half assisting Lancashire, and the other halfYorkshire, and call the match “ Lan­ cashire v. Yorkshire.” This introduction of mercenaries is the very curse of foot­ ball. It was stated the other day that a celebrated Northern club was on the verge of financial exhaustion, and it will not be wondered at when it is estimated (the club in question publishes no accounts) that the expenses o f keeping it going were £12,000 a year ! Another dark side of football pro­ fessionalism leads to a common report that certain clubs do not always play to win, which suggests that betting again casts its evil shadow over the game. Ruffianism and blackguardism will have to be put down with a very strong hand if football is to sustain its good name and honour. In the meanwhile, though 20,000 people will go to Trent Bridge Ground to watch Notts County play football, when only 2,000 will go to see it play cricket, there need be no fears for the future of the more refined and cultured game. The Australians have arrived to wake us up, and the feverish excitement of fast and furious football give way to the longer and more enduring delights of cricket.