Cricket 1895

14 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OE THE GAME. J a n . 31/1895. (J T o r r c s s p o n iJ n u e . IN KESPONSE. T o th e E d ito r o f C r i c k e t . Sra,—Would it not have been as well if Mr. Holmes had been a little more explicit as to how I displayed my “ lack of knowledge and good sense ” in my letter to you last month ? The charge is so vague that I am at a loss what I have to defend myself against. Presuming that he refers to my strictures on his attacks on certain cricketers, I have to remind him that the Gentlemen against Players match has never been called the Amateurs against the Professionals, and has never been com-idered as such, and therefore there is no necessity to define these terms. We do not want the ethics of the football field or cycling track in the cricket-field. An amateur, in ordin­ ary parlance, means an inexperienced person or a diletante, and not one who follows sport without payment. Thus we hear of amateurs in literature and art, but that does not mean that they work for nothing—provided they can get any­ thing. Artists, literary and professional men, journalists, and fighting men do not lose cast by being paid for their work ; why should cricketers ? It is the merest snobbishness to refuse to call a man a gentleman because he cannot afford to play cricket unless he is paid for his time. No such snobbishness obtained in the old days when Alfred Mynn.^Felix, and many wnother good man was paid, as Grace and Eead are now. Cricket is an occupation that lasts continuously for months, and not, like athletics, only a few hours in the year. There is no analogy between them, and there is no sense in importing the ways of one into the cther. A man might well be able to afford to run a few races in the year for mere horn ur, and yet not be able to play cricket all the season without payment. I am certain that Mynn, Felix, Grace, and Head would have been better off if they had never touched a bat, but would tbe cricket world, or the world at large, have been any better ? Pray leave off carkiug Mr. Holmes, you are capable of better things. But perhaps Mr. Holmes refered to my chaff at 1 hat wonderful scheme of the M.C.C. Well, Sir, I await with confi­ dence the end of the ensuing season, when he will be making up his championship tables, and wrestling with tbe problem— what are these points proportionate to P He will then find that “ lack of good sense ” is quite as valuable as “ consumate wisdom.” I notice that your correspondent H. R. Brand writes petulantly concerning my corrections of his “ statistics” for the last thirty years. If he does not like being corrected he has his remedy. So long as he only offers opinions he may rest assured that he will be allowed to pose to himself undisturbed as the receptacle of all wisdom; but when he comes to deal with facts he is on a different footing. I now find that he merely copied the notoriously carelessly compiled tables in Mr. Grace’s book, making the necessary additions to them in some oases, but not in all. This can be proved in many instances. Take one: he gives E. Lock­ wood’s figures as 492 innings, 11,694 runs. These are Grace’s figures, but hi< tables only go back to 1871, and your corres­ pondent was evidently unaware that Lockwood had then been placing for several years, and so made no alteration to them. It is also proved by the figures which first caught my eye—those of Maurice Read. By some strange accident Read’s name was altogether omitted from Mr. Grace’s tables, and your correspon­ dent, perceiving it, apparently made a guess, and put his runs down at 8,500. It must have been a guess, for he could not possibly have arrived at them by any process of compilation, inasmuch as they are 3,000 short of the truth. I repeat that your correspondents tables are worthless, as being full of errors of orn- mission and commission. It has always surprised me that the cricket journals do not undertake this kind of work them­ selves, instead of leaving it to irrespon­ sible amateurs. There is that dreadful word again ! I wonder whether H. E. Brand considers himself an amateur or a professional statician.—Yours faithfully, Barmouth, Jan. 3, ’95. G. L a c y . T h e Annual General Meeting of the Surrey County C.C. will be held at the Oval on Thursday, May 2nd. T h e frontispiece of Wis'len’s Almanack for this year is five young batsmen. The five are Messrs. A. C. McLaren and C. B. Fry, Brockwell, J . T . Rrown and Hay­ ward. The Almanack is fuller and better than ever. J a m e s L il l y w h it e ’ s A n n u a l for 1895 has as its frontispiece the South African Team which visited England last year. Among the miscellaneous articles, in addition to the usual statistical matter, is an analysis of the team and their doings by Mr. J . N. Pentelow. A t e s t im o n ia l is to be presented to Mr. A. J . Gaston, of Brighton, in recog nition of the services he has rendered to Sussex cricket. Mr. J . G. Blaker, The Romans, Stamford Avenue, Brighton, is the hon. sec. V ic t o r ia a n d N e w S o u t h W a l e s .— The details of the two first days’ cricket in this match, begun on the Melbourne Club Ground on Saturday, Dec. 22, have reached us. Victoria, who went in first, made 1 75 and 54 for one wicket. New South Wales fared badly on the second day after rain, and were dismissed for 66 , of which Iredale contributed 24. T h e S t o ic s held a successful smoking concert at the Cafe Monico, on Friday, under the presidency of Mr. O. R Borradaile, the secretary of the Essex County C.C. CRICKET NOTCHES. THE COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP. N.B. 1 8 7 3 -1 8 9 4 . B y the R ev . R . S . H olmes . I .— B A T S M E N . A . I nnings of 100 R uns . —* means not out. a means all through the innings. 1. —D errysiiire :— 1881 D ocker , L.C. ................. v. Kent ................................... 107 1882 F oster , T. ................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 101 2.— G loucestershire :— 1884 B rain , J. H. .. ........... v. Surrey................................... 143 1883 C ranston , J. ................. v. Lancashire........................... 127 1889 ................. v. S ussex................................... 130 1889 ................. v. Surrey................................... 111* 1890 ................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 101 1890 ................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 152 1893 F erris , J. J. ................. v. Somersetshire ................... 106 1885 G ilbert , W . E . ................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 102 1882 G race , E. M. ................. v. Lancashire........................... 122 1873 G race , G. F. .................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 165* 1874 .................. v. S ussex................................... 103 1875 ................... v. burrey................................... 180* 1873 G race , W . G. ................... v. Surrey ................................... leo* 1874 ................... v. Sussex................................... 179 1874 .................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 167 1874 .................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 127 1875 .................. v. Notts .................................. 119 1875 ................... v. Yorkshire ........................... 111 1876 .................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 318*« 1876 .................. v. Notts ................................... 177 1876 .................. v. S ussex................................... 104 1878 .................. v. Notts ................................... 116 1879 .................. v. S u rrey................................... 123 1879 .................. v. Notts ................................... 102 1880 .................. v. Lancashire ......................... 103 1881 ................... v. Notts ................................... 182 1883 ................... v. Lancashire........................... 112 1885 .................. v. M iddlesex.......................... 221*a 1885 .................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 1H2 ,885 ................... v. Surrey ........................... 104 1887 .................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 183*« 1887 .................. v. Notts .................................. 113*« 1887 ................... v. Middlesex .................-. ... 113 1887 .................. v, Kent .................................. 101 1887 .................. v. Kent .................................. 103*a 1888 ................... v. S ussex................................... 215 1888 .................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 148 1888 .................. v. Yorkshii’e ........................... 153 1889 .................. v. M iddlesex.......................... 127*a 1889 ... .......... v. Middlesex ........................... 101 1890 .................. v. Kent ................................... 109*a 1880 M idwinter , TV. ................... v. Surrey................................... 103 1876 M oberly , W . O. .................. v. Yorkshire ........................... 103 1877 .................. v. Notts ................................... 101* 1884 P ainter , J. .................. v. Surrey................................... 183 1888 ................... v. Middlesex ......................... 150 1890 .................. v. Sussex................................. 119 1891 ................... v. Notts ........................... 101 1884 P ullen , "W. W . .................. v. Middlesex ......................... 161 1886 R adcliffe , O. G. .................. v. M id dlesex........................... 104*a 1889 ... ........... v. Kent ................................... 101*a 1891 .................. v. Lancashire......................... 116 1892 .................. v. Kent ................................. 117 1873 T ownsend , F. .................... v. Sussex................................. 136 1886 ................... y. Surrey................................. 106 NEXT ISSUE FEBRUARY 28.