Cricket 1895

132 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE (»AME. 1VJ a y 16, 1985. F IRST -CLASS CR ICK E T IN A U S T R A L IA (1894-5). B y J. N. P entelow . ADDENDUM TO ARTICLE ON p. 68 OF “ CRICKET.” We give below the bowling- averages of the players who took part in first-class cricket in Australia in the season of 1894-5. Unfortu­ nately, the analysis of the match Victoria a t. Tasmania is not procurable. This makes little difference, however, since none of the players who bowled in that game, bowled in any of the others. Setting aside those who only sent down a few overs the first place belongs, not to Harry Trott, as, through a mistake in working out M‘Kibbin’s average, we stated in our original article, but to the Bathurst colt. His average of about 16^per wicket is a splendid one for Australian grounds, Harry Trott, Turner, and Bob M‘Leod have also done well; and the former, who has increased his pace somewhat, is evidently a greatly improved bowler. But, considering everything, we cannot rank any of these as superior to George Giffen, who, although freely punished sometimes, did an immense amount of work and did it well. Only Peel and Richardson came anywhere near him as to amount of work done; and his average is a run per wicket better than the best of these, while he has taken 24 more wickets than the {Surrey bowler, and 35 more than the Yorkshireman. Briggs, Callaway, Albert Trott, and Howell have been very useful, and Lyons’ small share of bowling met with some success; but the younger South Australians, Jones and Fred Jarvis, were, it will be seen, terribly expensive. BOWLING AVERAGES. (Two ormore matches.) Matches Bowler. bid.in. Overs. Runs. W. Aver. F. A. Iredale....... 3 15 28 3 9*33 S. Austin ........ 2 38*4 98 7 1400 T. R. M'Kibbin ... 6 256’1 733 44 1665 J. Worrall ........ 2 20 50 3 16*66 G. H. S. Trott .. 10 268 806 43 1874 R. W. M‘Leod ... 6 142*5 342 17 20 11 C. T. B. Turner ... 9 489*1 923 44 2097 J J. Lyons ........ 8 78*2 235 11 21*36 S. T. Callaway ... 8 2452 526 24 21 91 A. E. Trott ........ 8 323*5 777 35 22*20 G. Giffen............ 11 8095 2096 92 22*78 T Richardson ... 12 592*1 1616 68 2376 J. Briggs............. 12 372*4 1058 44 24*04 A. Coningham ... 4 186 412 17 24*23 W. Howell ....... 6 217*5 495 20 24*75 R. Peel ............. 12 641*2 1441 57 25*28 H. Trumble ........ 5 93*1 277 10 27*70 C. M‘Leod ........ 7 333*3 665 22 3022 W. M‘Glinchy ... 2 50 129 3 4300 W. H. Lockwood... 10 285*4 791 18 43*94 E. Jones............ 7 243 782 17 46*00 A. Newell ...... 3 89 191 4 47*75 W. Brockwell ... 11 119*5 336 7 48*00 W. A. Humphreys 4 112 314 6 52*33 H. Donnan ........ 5 69 180 3 6O00 F. Jarvis............. 6 218*4 661 11 6009 W. Bruce ..... 4 19 67 1 67*00 J. E. Reedman ... 5 33*3 109 1 109*00 F. G. J. Ford ... 7 44 159 1 159*00 S. E. Gregory ... 2 6 13 — — J. Harry............ 2 19 52 — — T. W. Garrett ... 4 39 69 — — The followingbowled in onematch only :— J. Carlton . — Creswick. W . Hoare . — Metcalfe . P. Noble . 25 2 14 2 6 J. Noel ........... 5 18 R. O’Brien ... 5 27 G. E. Palmer... 9 36 M. Pierce .. 24 109 A. E. Stoddart 3 31 And in Victoria v. Tasmania (analysis not pro­ curable) the following took wickets : E. E. Bean (3), J. Bingham (5), K . E. Burn (2), S. Howe (1), D. M ‘Leod (6), E. Maxwell (1), P. Roche (2), W . L. Sidebottom (1), T. W am e (1), J. W att (4), and E. A . Windsor (6). N ote . —There were two printer’s errors in the batting averages. Albert Ward played 22 innings, not 20; and Harry Trott scored 630 runs, not 600. SURREY v. LEICESTERSHIRE. Once again, and for the third year in suc­ cession, have Leicestershire defeated Surrey, and on this occasion after having had at one time by far the worst of the match. The champions had their last year’s team, save that Thompson was included in lieu of Lock­ wood, and quite justified his selection both as bowler and batsman, A first innings score of 255 to Surrey, followed by their success in getting seven wickets of the visitors down for 126, looked like an easy win for them, and some people boldly prophesied a rapid termination to the Leicestershire innings and even a possible one inning’s defeat. But finishing* the first hands 63 runs behind, Leicestershire, thanks to a fine bowling per­ formance by Woodcock, who with fast yorkers disposed of several of the best Surrey bats, were put on a much better footing, Walter Read alone making a long stay at the wickets, and the innings was all over for 100 runs from the bat and 13 extras, leaving 177 to get to win. De Trafford for the second time in the match was easily disposed of, and the opening of the batting was not brilliant, but Tomlin going in second wicket down, how­ ever, played very fine cricket, and with steady support from Pougher, Stone, and Chapman, knocked off the runs. To Pougher, Tomlin, and Woodcock, belongs the credit of a credit­ able victory by four wickets. Leicestershire is to be very heartily congratulated upon its debut in the County Championship, while the early defeat of Surrey will considerably increase the interest in that competition. Richardson and Brockwell probably had not quite got over their journey home from Aus­ tralia, and neither did much. W, W. Read scored well in each innings, and Thompson appears to deserve a further trial. The defeat ought to do no harm to Surrey cricket, but rather the reverse, in increasing the keen­ ness of the players and of public interest in the game at the Oval. Full score and bowling analysis :— S urrey . First Innings. Abel, c Stone, b Stocks ... 6 Hayward, b Stocks ........... 7 M. Read, c Tomlin, b Stocks 21 Brockwell, b Pougher.......... 8 Mr. W . W . Read, run out 32 Street, b Pougher..................86 Mr. K . J. Key, b W oodcock 0 Smith, c Whiteside, b W ood cock .......................... 8 Thompson, not out .......... 44 Richardson, c Whiteside, b W ood cock .......................... 20 W ood, b Hillyard.................. 10 B 8 ,1-b 1, n-b 4... 13 Total..................255 Second Innings, b Woodcock ... 8 b Woodcock ... 4 b Stocks .......... 8 b Woodcock ... 2 b W oodcock ... 40 b W oodcock ... 0 c Hillyard, b Pougher...........10 cStocks,bPougher 10 b Pougher........... 7 b Woodcock ... 7 not out ........... 4 B 10,1-b 2,n-b 1 13 Total.......... 113 LEICESTER8HIME. First Innings. Second Innings, Mr. C. E. De Trafford, b Richardson........................ 0 b Smith ........... 7 Mr. G. W . Hillyard,bSmith 13 b Richardson ... 18 Holland, c Read, b Smith... 35 lbw, b Smith ... 2 Tomlin, b Sm ith...............14 not out........... "106 Pougher, b Richardson ... 45 cAbel,bThompson 20 Warren, c Brockwell, b S m ith ................................ 5 b Hayward........... 1 Mr. C. C. Stone, c Wood, b Richardson ................. 5 c Richardson, b Abel................ 11 Chapman, c Brockwell, b Thom pson......................23 not out ............ 7 W oodcock, c Brockwell, b Thom pson.......................36 Mr. F. W . Stocks, c Hay­ ward, b Sm ith................. 3 Whiteside, not out ......... 2 L-b 7, w 4 ...........11 Byes ............. 5 Total.................. 192 Total ...177 Umpires: Clarke and Lilleywhite. BOW LING ANALYSIS. S urrey . First Innings. Second Innings. O. M. R. W . O. M. R. W . Pougher ... 25 7 73 2 .......... 10 2 25 3 Stocks .......... 33 10 93 3 ........... 9 1 29 1 Hillyard ... 10 1 1 28 1 ......... 2 1 2 0 Woodcock ... 13 3 48 3 ........... 17*3 4 44 6 W oodcock bowled a no-ball. L eicestershire . First Innings. Second Innings. O. M. R. W . O. M. R. W . Richardson .. 28 9 693 .............. 19 3 75 1 Smith ........ 33 6 715 .............. 25 13 38 2 Thompson ... 9*3 3 172 .............. 6 2 16 1 H»vward ... 6 2 70 .............. 8 1 20 1 Abel ........ 3 0 100 ............. 7 1 16 1 Street ........ 1 0 70 .............. 6 3 3 0 Brockwell 3 1 4 0 SURREY v. ESSEX. After making a fairly good score at the outset Essex were beaten at the Oval yester­ day by an innings and 124 runs. Mr. W, W. Read, who had hurt his leg in the Leicestershire match, was unable to play, otherwise, Surrey had its full strength with Lockwood again in the eleven, and as it was, Mr. Read’s absence enabled Holland, who had made such a promising first-appearance against Essex at the end of last year, to have another trial, with, as events proved, the best result. Essex, who won the toss, were at the wicket from twelve till half-past five o’clock. The batting generally was void of interest, though the wicket was very easy the rungetting only averaged about fifty runs an hour. Carpenter’s batting overshadowed all the rest. Mr. Higgins stayed a long­ time, but of the others no one except Freeman scored more than ten runs. Carpenter’s 145 was an admirable display in every way, His defence was excellent, and his hitting safe and hard all round the wicket. Surrey had forty minutes batting on Monday night and in that time made 37 for the loss of Hayward’s wicket. O 11 Tuesday morning things at first went well for Essex, and with Read and Lockwood both out and the score only 59, the chances were hardly in favour of a big score. Abel, who had been playing in his best style from the first, however, received excellent assistance from the colt Holland. The latter played with great con­ fidence as well as ease, and the partnership produced a display of very fine cricket. It lasted for two hours and three-quarters, and despite frequent changes of bowling runs came at the rate of ninety an hour. At first Abel scored the faster, but towards the finish Holland was making runs more quickly. When, at last, the latter was caught at cover slip, the total had been increased by 256, of these, Holland had contributed 123 by the best cricket. He has a great number of hits, and it is only necessary to say that his score, which included nineteen fours, five threes, and seven twos, was free from a mistake. Abel stayed till the score had been raised to 437, and was then caught at cover point. He had been batting for about five hours and without a mistake till just before he was out. His 217 is the highest score so far for hurrey, and it is not too much to say that he has never been seen to better advantage. He played all the bowling with the same con­ fidence and at times he scored very fast. Of Surrey’s total of 448, Abel and Holland contributed 340, and the next highest scoro was Street’s 21. After their long outing, Essex fared badly when they went in again on Tuesday night, losing four good wickets in the last sixty-five minutes for 48 runs. Yesterday, Lockwood and Richardson bowled with such success, that the six outstanding