Cricket 1895

18 CRICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. F e b . 28, 1895. sin as a captain in command of a side which does include other first-class trundlers. But, judging from recent matches, I fancy he has lost the convic­ tion which he apparently held of old— that his side could not be doing well in the field unless he were bowling at one end—for, though he has bowled a good deal this Australian season, he does not appear to have hesitated to take himself off when necessary. I am not posing here as a “ censor morum” and I shall not trouble myself to account for or try to explain away the fact that Giffen, the W.G. of that far South land, is scarcely as popular as his English prototype. It is as a cricketer, rather than from a social point of view, that I am writing of the man who, though he must be placed below our own grand old Cricket King, is certainly one of the finest all-round players the world has ever seen. Giffen’s earliest match of really first- class importance was the first contest on even terms between his colony and Victoria, played on the East Melbourne Ground in November, 1880. In this he was responsible for a very good second in n in g s of 63, the first of many good scores against the “ cabbage garden” colony. But his reputation as an all-round player was already good, and in the next Australian season he was chosen to form one of the great 1882 Anglo-Australian team. I may here remark that his first innings in a big match against an English team—at Melbourne, for Australia against Shaw’s Eleven, at the end of ’81—had resulted in a well got score of 30. He was not long in making his mark in England. In his first match he took in the second innings of Oxford University seven wickets for 78 runs; in his second he made 74 against Sussex, and helped Murdoch (who scored 286) to put on 118 for the sixth wicket. Then against Cambridge University he made 59, and against Derbyshire 47. Five wickets for 16 runs in Yorkshire’s first innings at Sheffield was his best bowling performance of the tou r; but after the first few weeks he was scarcely at his best in either department, and at one time had to stand down from several matches in succession. His best all-round show was in one of the most important matches, that v. Gentlemen at the Oval, when he made 43, and took 8 for 49, 3 for 60; his highest score, 81, was against Liverpool and District, practically a Lancashire Eleven minus Mr. Hornby. Altogether his first trip to England, though it did not serve to place him at once among the great players of the day, was very far indeed from being a failure. He scored 873 rnns with an average of eighteen, and took 32 wickets at an average cost of 22 runs. The Hon. Ivo Bligh’s Eleven toured Australia in 1882-3, and, though Giffen made no sensational scores against it, he batted well on nearly every occasion, and secured an average of 23 for the seven innings in which he met the English bowling. In the next Australian season he did one of the greatest feats of his ii feat no other Australian has performed in a first-class match, though Turner has done it while playing for an up-country eighteen or twenty-two against the Englishmen—for, playing for Murdoch’s Fourth (1884) Team against Combined Australia at Sydney, he took every wicket of the Combined Eleven in their second innings, and that at the small cost of 66 runs. The first six or seven matches he played in England in 1884 did not add greatly to his reputation, though in the opening game against Lord Sheffield’s Eleven he took 10 wickets for 121, he and Palmer bowling unchanged, and against Derby­ shire had six for 56. But in the eighth game, v. Lancashire, he outdid all previous performances credited to him. A score of 113 (his first century in a big match), six wickets for 55, and the hat trick; here, surely, was an exceptional all-round show ! Scoring 22 and 25 and taking 10 wickets for 110 v. Notts, were the best things he did in any match during the next three or four weeks. Late in July he played a very good innings of 63 against England at Lords. And towards the end of the tour he was in great form, his last twelve innings being:— 48—32—91—80—28—34—8—38—20—6—84—38. The 48 and 91 were both made v. Gloucestershire, in the second match against whom he had 6 wickets for 58. In the Smokers v. Non-Smokers match at Lord’s, ever memorable for the way in which the giant Bonnor punished Spofforth’s bowling, he was not successful. Ir elusive of that game he scored during the tour 1073 runs in 52 completed innings, and took 82 wickets for 1633, both batting and bowling figures being marked advances upon those of 1882. His most notable performance in 1884-5 was a score of 47 for Murdoch’s Team against Shaw’s Team on the famous Adelaide Oval, where in the following season he played a grand all-round game against a very strong Victorian Eleven, scoring 20 and 82, and taking no fewer than seventeen wickets at a cost of less than twelve runs each. The slow wickets on which he had to play in the earlier part of the Melbourne Club Team’s tour in 1886 did not suit his batting, and it was some time before he made a good score. Meanwhile, however, he had been bowling well, and in the seventh, eighth and ninth matches had performed in this fashion with the ba ll: y. Derbyshire, 7 wickets for 41 and 9 for 60. v. Cam bridge University, 8 for 56. v. Lancashire, 8 for 23 and 8 fo r 42. Forty wickets in three matches for 222 runs! The match against the players at Nottingham towards the end of June, found him for the first time in his true batting form. He scored two fine innings of 72 and 78 ; and in the very next match—v. Middlesex—made 77 and 52. Thereafter he was seldom dismissed without a fair score to his name, though his worst achievements were in two of the matches when doubtless he would most have wished to shine, v. England at Manchester and Lord’s. In each of these he made but three and one. But at the Oval, when everyone else except George Palmer failed, he played a plucky second innings of 47. The biggest and best of all his scores during this tour was his 119 v. Cambridge University, past and present, at Leyton. But he also made 73 v. Sussex; 59 and 39 in that disastrous game v. Surrey, which was so severe a blow to the partisans of Australian cricket; 59 v. Mr. C. J. Thornton’s eleven at Chiswick Park ; 53 v. an eleven of England at Stoke ; 52 v. the South at Brighton; 30 and 43 v. Gloucestershire at Clifton ; 42 v. Liver­ pool and district; 34 and 24, not out, v. Notts.; and 36 v. eleven players, at Brad­ ford. His bowling had no other such glorious run of success as that early in the tour ; but throughout he was really the main­ stay of the side in the trundling depart­ ment. He finished up the tour at the head of both bowling and batting averages—a distinction unique in the annals of Australian teams in England— having secured 1,453 runs with an average of all but twenty-seven, and taken 159 wickets at a cost of seventeen each. In the Australian season which followed he began that long run of brilliant successes with both bat and ball which has had no parallel in the history of the game “ down under.” To describe each of these great doings—or even to mention each—would take up too much space; and I have thought it best to give in tabular form his doings during the present and preceding seven Australian seasons. But first, breaking in some­ what upon the chronological order of my remarks, let me speak of the 1893 Aus­ tralian tour. Giffen’s absence from the teams of 1888 and 1890 (with both of which he was at first expected to come) was accepted as a fair excuse for some at least of the short­ comings of these sides; and naturally a great deal was expected of him when he did come in 1893. That he scarcely fulfilled expectations is now a matter of history. Yet his record would have been considered a splendid one for almost any other man. Very seldom indeed does an English player score a thousand r u n s and take a hundred wickets in one season of first-class cricket. I cannot recall more than four or five who have ever done it. Giffen scored 1,220, with an average of over 23, and took 142 wickets at about 18 each. Yet it must be allowed that he was disappointing. A grand score of 180 v. Gloucestershire and seven wickets for 12 runs in the same match gave rise to the highest expecta­ tions, which were intensified when he scored 171 against Yorkshire a little later. But the only other really long score which came from his bat was 82 v. Surrey, a plucky and good innings, but far from perfect. However, on several other occasions he did great things by means of smaller scores; and it cannot be denied that his steady and nervy batting had much to do with the victories gained over Sussex, Somerset and the Second Class Counties Eleven at Birmingham. And his bowling was of the greatest possible ) use in the hard wickets, often keeping NEXT ISSUE MARCH 28.