Cricket 1895

178 OKJCKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. J unk C, 1895 ings of 224 not out in 1866. This too I saw; when he was unconquered on the first evening with some 190 (odd) runs against his name, I remember that a facetious reporter stated that the cheers he got on his return to the pavilion might easily have been heard as far away as the Elephant and Castle at Newington Butts. Yes, the last of the series was not a success. England were short-handed, and Surrey sig­ nally failed. I have not the shadow of a doubt that, supposing five matches could be played between the very same teams, Surrey would, if they extended themselves, win the rubber. But in these days of the so-called county championship, and with so heavy a programme to pull through, these off-matches are no longer regarded au serieux. As I expected, the “ Irishman’s rise” did come, and Pougher was the main cause of it. The fact is, the Surrey batsmen always find his bowling troublesome. Abel, for instance, has been heard to remark, that no other bowler bothers him so much. By-the-bye, what an interesting chapter might be written on the troubles of great batsmen, and why they have never taken the length of certain bowlers with whom lesser batsmen have had no special difficulty. Was W. G. ever troubled in this way ? He always relished fast bowling more than slow, does so still, witness Nepean’s lcg- curlies only last week. J. C. Shaw used again and again to get his wicket, twice in a month once (1871) before he scored ; but how he welted him even more frequently; why, in these two matches his second ventures yielded more than 200 runs apiece. But it is so ; the explanation, I take it, can be forth­ coming only from the batsmen themselves. Why will an inferior bowler dismiss a first- rate batter more easily than a higher class bowler can ? But to our muttons. Abel, W. W., and Brockwell scored 12 runs between them in the two hands. Brockwell cannot recall last week with keen satisfaction ; in three innings he scored 35 runs, with his bowling he took one wicket, and he missed a couple of catches, the first of which enabled Albert Ward to add 158 to his score, and the second Bainbridge improved to the tune of 120. But he’ s dead off colour just now, and I am exceedingly sorry. Mind you, it was my decided judg­ ment that last year he played above his form ; that is possible even a season through; but this year he has signally failed with the bat to do himself the smallest j ustice. But with a man who has a lot of really good cricket in him, things will soon take a turn for the better. Brockwell has the mournful satisfac­ tion of knowing that with two exceptions, none of his recent Australian chums are crowning themselves with glory. Both Stod­ dart and Brown, Peel and Briggs, are much bflow their mark. Of that team, Ward, with the bat, and Richardson, with the ball, are at present the only bright and shining lights. Ward had a very great week—163 against Surrey (Jackson’s 57 was the next highest), and 26 and 75 (not out) against Leicestershire, whilst 20 wickets represent Richardson’s week’ s work. W. G. (18) failed for once, but it didn’t matter ; his pit sence at the Oval must have been worth £1* 0 to his old rival. I hope in the event <f the proposed National Testimonial going forward—it may or may not ba necessary as a proof of our appreciation of the Champion’s supremacy—that all our county committees, should they decide to add their names to the subscription list, will bear in mind that this season alone, not to mention the past thirty, W.G.’ s presence in any match will be certain to draw the largest gates of the whole year. The sympathetic letter from the Prince of Wales,- which is in keeping with his Royal Highness’s fine tact, augurs a splendid success for the movement. Don’t let us discuss the form it should ultimately take on, until at any rate we have made the collection. I remem­ ber Lord Charles Russell’s speech when W.G. was the recipient of a testimonial as far back as 1879 : his lordship stated “ that their first intention was to buy him a medical practice,” but on second thoughts they had decided that as W.G. was old enough to act in his own interests, the money should be entrusted to his keeping. I shall have the greatest pleasure in withdrawing my modest offer of last week, or rather in increasing it eight­ fold as soon as some definite plans are decided upon. What plums can we pick out of last week’s cricket yield? Pougher’s bowling against Surrey—12 for 78—of course must be noted, and the Indian Prince’s useful assistance with four catches made in the slips. But Painter’s second performance with the ball was even more noteworthy. This helped to give Gloucestershire their thirdsuccessivevictory, a state of things that does us all good, carrying us back to the years 1876 and 1877 when the Western shire carried victory all along the line. In my last “ Notches” I recommended Painter’s getting a good trial with the ball. Why didn’t you put him on first in the Middlesex match, W.G. ? I told you to do so, and I know you read this column. Why, if Murch, Ferris and Townsend had been playing, would you not have felt it to be your duty to depend on them in the bowling depart­ ment ? The chances are that Painter would only have bowled when everybody else had failed. When he went on in the first innings, he took the last 4 wickeis ; whilst in the second, which he started, he had no fewer than 8. And the consequence is that for the first time in his career he is at the head of the general bowling averages of the country. Stick to him, is my earnest advice ; he might do equally as well at Brighton and the Oval this week, being practically a new bowler. As to your own part in this third victory nothing more remains to be said, friend W.G. “ As it was in the beginning ” of Gloucester­ shire cricket, “ is now,” whatever the future may bring forth. One cricketer firstbrought that county to the front, lifted it to th{G. highest place among the rest of the counties, and still has the lion’s share in its most memorable triumphs. Unlikelier things have happened in cricket than that Gloucestershire should be hailed as champion county of 1895. At any rate the wish is father of the'thought. Surrey and Yorkshire tied last week with a draw and a defeat apiece. But there was this important difference, that Surrey’s draw, which but for rain would have been a certain win, was in a county engagement. Warwick­ shire, their opponents, have yet to make their mark in thebest company; their batting needs little or no improvement. Their captain Ijas j ust notched his third century of the season, having previously quilted Essex and Derby­ shire bowling to the same tune as he- laid on to Richardson, Lockwood and Co. Walter Quaife is also playing more consistently than ever before, if we except the year 1887, when, playing under the Sussex flag, he was among the first half-dozen professional batsmen. As I said after watching them at the Oval, the Midlanders’ bowling is not up to the level of their batting. If it were they would give a good account of themselves against all comers. Essex played up gamely against Middlesex, and half way through the match held a trifling advantage—220 to *212. But it was hardly to be expected that Stoddart, who failed both times against Gloucestershire, would be “ ducked ” a second time by Mead or Kort- right. Both he (67) and Rawlin with an unfinished 54, largely helped in the five - wickets’ victory, whilst the latter played just as pluckily against the County of Grace. Indeed to him (83) and R. S. Lucap (70), whose partnership yielded 122 runs, Middlesex owe 153 out of their second total of 208. In this match the older hands could do nothing with the ball; J. T. took never a wicket, and 95 runs were scored off him; Nepean’s two cost 109; Rawlins’ couple 75; it was left to a comparative stranger, not unknown in these parts, a Yorkshireman by birth, hailing as he does from Skipton, it was left to the doctor—not the doctor, but Doctor Thornton—to do all the damage with 9 wickets for 52. It certainly looks as if his captain - an old and experienced general—would be well advised to toss him the ball first in preference to his regulars. I would draw attention to young Carpenter’s — I call him young, not patronizingly, knowing he is almost 26 years of age, but just to distinguish him from his father—recent capital double, 40 and 41 against the Metropolitan County. His father —old Bob Carpenter—was one of my earliest cricket idols, and it is an ever fresh pleasure to have a crack with him from time to time. Cricket is so rarely transmitted in the direct line that I am hopeful we shall have a characteristic exception in this instance. Of the Lillywhites, of course, everybody knows that cricket ran in their stock. One could name several families in which several, if not all, the members of the same generation acquired distinction on the tested field. But where are the once famous names to-day ? Memories only for the most part. The Hearnes have been with us for a couple of generations, though in their case nature has sprung the surprise she often delights in. Thus, the greatest of the brothers of the Iftst generation —old Tom—has a son who has long rendered good service to the game, but with his pen not his bat. The next brother, George, shorter than Tom by several inches, and never near top class form, spite of his occasional appearance in the Middlesex eleven —he has given us three sons, all of whom, George, Frank, and Alec, have done well by their adopted county, Kent. Whilst another brother, never known in cricket circles, is the father of the best bowler the family has ever produced, Middlesex’ right hand man for many years past. The mention of Kent “ minds me ” of their startling defeat of the Dark Blues, before whom Yorkshire, Somersetshire, and the Gentlemen had in turns gone under. 205 runs for the loss of only one wicket is a conspicuous feat, even in the present record- breaking season. It carries me back thirty- two years to a Surrey and Kent match at the Oval, when 192 runs were got at a similar cost, but by Kent's opponents . Jupp was then in his second season, and H. H. Stephenson, wh<>, one is glad to hear, isfat and flourishing in his old age, was then at his best. Mason’s proportion of the 205—142 not out—is quite out of the common. This is, I fancy, his second hundred only for his county, his firsi being 102 against Lancashire last year. Lancashire succeeded where Surrey and Notts alike failed, and Leicestershire have had to go down one. Three Red-Rose bar­ men carried off all the honours —Paul, whos-^ 77 not out form a refreshing contrast to his spectaclesagainst Sussex, andhis unproductive second against Leicestershire ; Ward, 75— also not out,—and Mold, 59. It is seldom that, after nine wickets have fallen for 5f runs, the last puts on 111. One likes the. e surprises. Don’t talk to me about the tail <f any county eleven ; the tail, so called, often