Cricket 1895

“ Together joined in Cricket’s manly toil.” — Byron. B e s t ' d THURSDAY, JUNE 6 , 1895. p r i c e a d . ( From a Photograph by Hawkins d- Co., Brighton. I gave his name, and I was right. But who has caught him out most often ? There I was floored. Guess who cares to ; none of you will be right. It was HarryPhillips, the Sussex old stumper. Then we have, arranged under their respective counties and in alphabetical order, the names of all cricketers that have played against W . \V., and with him as well. And this detailed plan has been followed in all his doings in representative matches at how he was out— e.g , bowled 205 times, caught 263 times, l.b.w. 25 times, hit wicket once, stumped 22 times, with full lists of each bowler and fielder that has been fatal to him. I wonder if anybody could say correctly the name of the bowler that has taken his wicket most frequently. When Mr. de Lugo asked me, I at once said to myself, who has played the longest against W. W. ? W. G. certainly. home, and in his tours in Australia. It is a wonderful production, which I am proud to possess. And if I were but a man of leisure nothing would give me greater pleasure than to word out W. G.’ s career on almost parallel lines. Perhaps W. W.’s latest historian might be induced to turn his attention to the greatestof all cricketers, and add to so full a summary as the aforementioned, W . G.’ s totals month by month in every year. Walter Read’ s match was dis­ appointing. The da\&have gone by* apparently never more to re­ turn, when a single county can meet the full strength of England on even terms. There was asenti­ mental interest in this match; in that it revived many a pleasant memory. Surrey v. England has from time immemorial figured on the official list of first-classmatches. It was first played in 1792, and was repeated with an occasional break up to 1831; sometimes one match a year was enough, but frequently two, three, and even four were crow'ded into one season. Each side in turns had odds, and each side played given men. So strong were Surrey in those days that they often lent England one of their best men. Fifty-one matches were played between 1792 and 1831, and they were all played out, Surrey winning just one less than the) lost—25 to 26. Since the present Surrey Club was formed (1845), the same match has been fre­ quently arranged, although the last of the series, previous to last week, took place as far back as 1866. Between 1848 and 1866, Surrey won 7 out of 17, lost 4, whilst 6 were drawn. Surrey’s largest scores have been 453 in 1792, and 368 in 1864; England’ s highest being 242 in 1797, 503 in 1862, and 521 in 1866. But few batsmen have immortalized them­ selves in this match by scoring an innings of a hundred. Tom Walker did twice, whilst his brother Harry, and Beldham did once each. Lord Frederick Beauclerk was their only opponent to accomplish this feat. Since 1845, Caffyn is the only Surreyite to notch a century—102 in 1858 —per contra, V. E. Walker scored 108 in 1859, and withal took all the Surrey wickets in their first inn­ ings. Tom Hayward scored 117 in 1862 (the first match I ever 6aw at the Oval), and lastly, W. G. started his immortal career by an inn­ CRICKET NOTCHES. B y t h e R e v . R . S. H o lm e s . I have been asked a question I was expect­ ing. It is a question which my two corres­ pondents are as well able to answer as my­ self, seeing that the same sources of informa­ tion are at the disposal of all of us. It runs thus—“ did W. G. ever start the season so well before?” Answer—No, never. He has never previously scored a thousand runs in the month of May. The year 1871 has been quoted as his best season, when his total runs in first class matches were 2739, with an average of 78. But in the May of that year he scored only 598 runs, in July 6*23, in August 836. In­ deed, only once before has he in aTiy month topped his most recent performance, viz., in August 1876, when in ten completed innings he scored no less than 1,250 runs, 839 of which came in three successive innings. But there is a splendid oppor­ tunity for some concientious com­ piler to do for W. G. what my good friend Mr. de Lugo has done for W . W . W. G.’s cricket career has been the happy hunting ground for statiticians of all kinds, but there is ample room still for one more book on the lines of “ The Surrey Champion, 1873-94,” a 12mo volume of 95 pages, filled with figures only, there not being a single line of biography proper. It is much to be regretted that this work, the very best of its kind that has ever been done, has been drawn up and presented for private circu­ lation only. I hope my esteemed friend will be prevailed upon to put it upon the market, as every cricket enthusiast should possess a copy. Like the Author’s previous work “ Surrey at the Wicket,” to which I have had occasion to put on record repeated obligations, it was printed in Madrid, and so far as I can see, after very careful reading, it is faultlessly accurate. Here are a few of the items it con­ tains. The Surrey matches come first of course, and W. W .’s scores are given in full with dates, and the manner of his dismissal. Then follow his yearly averages against each of Surrey’s opponents, and his averages on each ground. The centuries from his bat follow. We next have the catches he hasmade ;