Cricket 1894

MAR. 22, 1894 0RICKET k WEEKIiY RECORD OF TH® GAME. 41 been furnished me, this time from a very different part of the globe, though the two oceurrenees must have been very nearly coincident. The second “ curio ” comes from Kimberley, and the heroes were the representatives of the local club. The opposition was furnished by the Beaconsfield Club, and a long outing they had of it. Kimberley monopolised the wickets the whole of the first afternoon (January 27) and to some purpose, scoring 338 for the loss of only two wickets. On February 3, too, they had most of the fun to themselves, so much so thac Beacons­ field only had time to make 35 runs for the loss of three wickets. T h r e e scores of a hundred, moreover, are so rare that it will be of interest to re­ produce the Kimberley innings in full. K im b e r l e y . A. Walahc, c and b Beswick ... .............192 J. Powell, b Prince ............. ............. 8 C. Glover, c Maxwell, b Beswick .............140 B. Powell, not out ............. .............134 J. Doig, lbw, b Maxwell ............. 8 B. Harvey, c Maxwell, b Beswick ............. 10 L. Baker, b Faulkner ............. ............. 15 Knysche, b Maxwell ............. ............. 40 Bacbmann, c Sullivan, b Harger ............. 12 D. Francis, c Faulkner, b Harger ........... 1 Extras ............. ............. 17 Total ............. ............. 577 Glover, I may add, is one of the fifteen selected for the South African team which is to visit England this year. A n incident of the rarest occurrence, at least in our variable climate, marked the course of the recent Intercolonial match between Victoria and New South Wales at Sydney. While the two batsmen were running, the ball was fielded and struck the wicket when thro sn in, knocking the stumps out of the perpendicular. Curiously enough neither bail was dislodged, as they fitted too tight into the grooves on the heads of the stumps. The bails stuck out in the air, one adhering to the leg stump and the other to the middle, and they had to be whittled down to bring them to the proper dimensions. This is one of the cricket “ things we read about, but very seldom see.” T h is same m m.h of January, by-the way, seems to have been prolific in cricket curiosities everywhere. A corre­ spondent in Johannesburg has furnished me with particulars of what he claims to be a record for South Africa. In any case, the performance is another illustra­ tion of the uncertainty of cricket. The match was between the second team of the Wanderers and eleven Juniors. The latter, who were 35 runs behind on the first innings, made i very different show when they went in again, enforcing the closure after H . Malraison (109) and Trotter (69) had scored 173 without the loss of a wicket. The Wanderers, with one absentee, were all out at their second knock 20 minutes before time was up. After all, therefore, the Juniors, after being in a minority of 35 runs, won with­ out losing a wicket in the second innings. On this latter fact my correspondent bases the claim for a South African record. I t will be intelligence of interest to his many friends to know that Prince Christian Victor is just now at home on leave from his regiment, the King’s Royal Rifles, now in India. This reminds me that the Royal Cricketer’s score of 205, to which I referred in C bicket of Oct. 20, 1893, ia not the Indian record, as 1 then suggested, though “ near it, very near it.’ It is, in fact, one run behind it, having been beatenby H. C. King’s 206 for Madras against Bangalore in December, 1885. Many thanks, all the same, to the good friend in the Far Ea3t who has kindly set me right on the matter. T he completion of the Intercolonial matches shows Moses so far to the front in the New South Wales averages as to revive the feeling of regret that he has not yet been visible in the flesh to the frequenters of English criaket grounds. W . L, Murdoch played one good innings, to wit, 64 (not out), against Victoria, and this sufficed to place him fourth among the batsmen. Turner and Coningham of the older hands bowled with success, as the statistics which follow will show :— BA.TTINO AVEBVGES. Inns. Notout. Runs. Aver Mcses ........................ ... 0 ... 214 . . 42.. Callaway ................. ... 1 ... 22) .. 33.2 Iredale ........................ ... 0 ... 183 . . 26 Murdoch....................... ... 1 ... 94 .. 23 2 Donnan ........................ ... 1 ... 45 ... 2?.l Newell ........................ ... 2 ... ICO . . 20 Macpherson................. ... 0 ... 55 . . 181 Mackenzie ................. ... 0 ... 81 . . 16.2 G regory....................... ... 1 ... 46 . . 15.1 W. Moore ................. ... 1 ... 88 . . 14.4 Garrett ........................ ... 0 ... 59 . . 14.3 Youll............................... ... 0 .. 23 . . 11 L. M oore...................... ... 0 ... 8 . . 8 Turner ........................ ... 0 .. 29 . . 54 Bannerman................ ... 0 ... 11 . . 2.3 Pierce ........................ ... 0 ... 7 . . 2.1 BOWLING AVERAGES. Wkis. Runs. Aver. Coningham ................. ... 12 ... 151 ... 12 7 Turner ........................ ... 3 ) ... 372 ... 12.12 Newell ........................ ... 22 ... 401 ... 18.5 Bannerman ................. ... 1 ... 25 ... 25 Callaway........................ ... 5 ... 165 ... 33 Garrett ........................ ... 3 ... 136 ... 451 Pierce .............................. 0 ... 67 ... — Iredale ........................ ... 0 ... 16 ... — Y ou ll............................... ... 0 ... 15 ... — Will you kindly answer the following ques­ tion regarding a “ no-ball ? ’’[writes a cricketer ip Pietermaritzburg (Natal), : Rule 16 says that the striker may hit a no-ball, and what­ ever runs result shall be added to his score ; also tbat no balls shall only be scored as such when runs have not been made from the bat. The question is this: is an additional ball to be given by the umpire for the one called no­ ball but not scored as such (in consequence of the striker hitting it for one or more runs ? The point came up in an important local match on the 27th of January, when tbe fifth ball of an over was “ no-balled ” but hitfor one. The umpire then called over, his decision being that as the ball was not scored as a no - ball but counted one to the batsman ( vide Law 16) it could not be regarded as a “ no- ball ” and did not come under Law 13, which provides that neither a “ no-ball ” nor a “ wide ball ” shall be reckoned as one of the “ over.” The over was scored in the analysis thus | . - i an ooular demonstration that five balls had been given. Opinions are divided here on the point, some saying that the umpire was right, and others that the sixth ball should have allowed. The “ no-ball” does not count under any circumstances, and another ball must be legally delivered to complete the over. If the “ no-ball ’’ is hit, and runs are made, they go down to the batsman’s score, I t may perhaps interest readers of C r ic k et [writes a correspondent located in Dunedin, under date of Jan. 23] to know that < n the 5th inst. a record for the first wicket was made in New Zea­ land. A team representing the northern provincial district of Auckland was play­ ing Canterbury at Christchurch, on Lan­ caster Park, the best cricket ground in the colony. Auckland was disposed of for 157, and Canterbury went in about 3 p.m. The score mounted rapidly, and it was not until the last over of the day that the first wicket fell, the total being 306 :— I j . A. Cuff, at King, b Lawson ........... 176 J. D. Lawrence, not out............. 123 Sundries................... 7 T o t a l................ 306 The highest recorded in Australia for a first wicket is, I may add, 347, scored by T. W . Garrett and Lee for the University against the Albert Club (Sydney) on February 23, 1889. Oddly enough, only the day before the accomplishment of the above feat even a better performance was recorded at Warwick Park, Sydney, in a match between the Clifford and Swifts Clubs. Taylor and Duffy opened the batting for the former, and when they had scored 320 (Taylor 218, Duffy 102) with­ out the loss of a wicket, the innings was closed. The Swifts only scored 30 and 60, so that they were beaten by an innings and ten wickets, with 230 runs to spare. T he South African team it is now settled, barring accidents, of course, are to leave Cape Town on April 11 for Eng­ land. This arrangement will give them three weeks or a month for practice on English grounds before their first match, which will commence at Sheffield Park on May 25, and not May 24 as previously stated. The committee of the Private Banks C.C. have very kindly offered the use of their excellent ground at Catford Bridge to the team for practice. The information that I have myself from the Cape is so far encouraging that it describes the selected team as a useful combination in every department. That, of course, we shall be able to decide for ourselves before very long. T he news of George Lohmann’s steady restoration to health will be tidings of comfort and joy, of course, to C ric k e t readers everywhere. In any case it is particularly satisfactory to know that there is every reasonable probability of a thorough cure being effected. At the same time it is very doubtful indeed if he will run the risk of revisiting England, at all events for two or three years. Towards the autumn, I have reason to believe, he contemplates a trip to Australia, where, naturally, he will have every chance of doing something for himself. There should indeed be keen competition among the leading clubs of Australia to secure the advantage of his services, say in cricket tuition. T h e death of John Selby last Sunday week has removed one of the most useful all-round members of the formidable eleven which represented Notts with such