Cricket 1895

A u g . 1, 1895. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 307 CRICKET NOTCHES. By the Rev. R. S. Holmes. I have again to convey my warmest acknow­ ledgments to several kindly correspondents, some of whom direct attention to matters in which cricketers generally are, or ought to be, interested. As they are all strangers to myself, I shall not be accused of anything more than chivalry if I bespeak a very thoughtful consideration of the remarkably able letter from a young lady at Manchester. Only last week I spoke of the intelligent interest shown by ladies in cricket; this letter then arrives very opportunely. True, it is severe on W . G., who is certainly big enough to take care of himself. If it does put him in the pillory, he may console himself with the reflection that he has just been immortalized by a place in the famous metropolitan wax­ work exhibition. 1. From Hull. A question: “ Supposing Yorkshire had applied the closure in their recent match,with Sussex, would they, in case of need, have been entitled to bat a second time? or does the act of declaring, cause a team to forfeit any more batting in that match ? ” If the ‘closure is applied in the first innings of a match, it does not prohibit a second innings, should that be necessary. The closure extends no farther than the inn­ ings in which it is made. 2. Bath. Information; “ You recently asked in * Cricket Notches ’ when a county last applied the closure against Surrey. Somersetshire did in 1891 at Taunton and won the match, that being the first defeat Surrey had sustained that season. A match not easily to be forgotten by a Somersetshire man.” 3. Surrey. A suggestion. From one who hopes “ I am not making a fool of myself. Cannot a return match be arranged between Surrey and All England ? Surrey could not be expected to be in their best form so early in the season, not having had very much first- class practice. In the second place, England were not fully represented, some of the Aus­ tralian team not having returned.” I am afraid not, owing to the list of fixtures being full already. This was not a satisfac­ tory test match, but the early season applies equally to England as to Surrey. It has occurred to me that as Hastings seem able to command the services of the representative cricketers, its first fixture—beginning next year—might be a match between England and the champion county of the season. I question very seriously whether any county to-day can meet England with a prospect of success; still, the match might be arranged for next year at least. Anyhow, it must be played during the year in which the county has made good its claim to the chief place among the counties. To postpone such a match to the opening of the following season is to knock all the meaning and interest out of it. 4. Banbury, West Australia. Simply a good natured reference to this columu, along with a kindly reference to Lohmann’s re-appearance in the Surrey eleven, and a mention of the most recent doings of W . G. “ We all thought he was on the down grade, but after this we shall not be surprised if he runs up an innings of 400 or 500. You are right in saying that Australia possesses more great batsmen than ever before. If we only had Turner and Ferris at their best again ! though we have some very promising bowlers in McKibbin, A. E. Trott, Jones, C. McLeod, Eady and Howell, several of whom you will doubtless see in England next year.” 5. Shropshire, a guide f«»r umpires in l.b.w. cases. “ Being a round-the-wicket bowler, and interested in youi remarks on l.b.w., I have calculated the following results. Note that the ball is supposed to be delivered from a point four feet to the side of the middle stump, i.e., eight inches beyond the return crease, which seems to be an ample margin. 1. A good length ball, pitched four yards from the striker’ s,wicket, on the straight line between the middle stumps, will miss the off stump by five inches. 2. A similar ball pitched on the leg stump will miss the off stump by about half-an-inch; if pitched on the off stump it will miss it by about ten inches. 3. It is quite possible to get a bats­ man l.b.w. with a good length ball pitched on the middle and leg, or on the leg stump, as the ball will only have to break back an inch or two. 4. A yorker, pitched on the leg stump, will hit the middle, pitched on the middle, it wiii hit the inside of the off stump. Therefore the batsman is out. Of course a local umpire cannot remember all this, but if he can take in the fact that a batsman may be out to a good length ball pitched on the middle-and-leg and breaking an inch or two towards the bowler’s bowling arm, it would be something to be thankful for. It, when umpiring, I saw a ball hit batsman’Nleg, which would have hit his bat if his leg had not been there, I should give him not o><t on ihe ground that if the ball had to go througn his b.tt in order to hit his wicket, it would not hit the wicket. By so doing 1 should be guilty of a mistake,’ according to your notches of the 11th. Lastly, I should be infinitely obliged if you would who has a right to object to a sixth ball of an over. Can the batsman ? Suppose he does, and the umpire rules that only four balls have been bowled, in spite of the scorers being iea«ly io swear tnat it is “ over,” what happens tn. n ? I have known six balls deliberately given in local cricket to finish off a game. It appears that if a batsman does not appeal, and gets out, he has to bear it afterwards with or without a grin.” To which I -an nl\ answer, “ the umpires are the sole j udges of t'air or unfair play . . all disputes shall be determined by them. ” The same writer corrects my figures for W . G.’s batting in the Gentlemen v. Players match. He m ikes his aggregate to be 5,791 for 115 complete-l innings—or an average of 50-35 runs an innings. “ Whit surprised me most was t » find that W. G. had taken 228 wickets in these matches.” He has also worked out the tigur- s of all the leading bats­ men in this match, which 1 have not space to reproduce now. Let me say that the figures I gave ♦ere not my own compiling. For once I relied upon somebody else for statistical tables—T. A. Penteiow, who has taken this match under is especial protection, and I have at present no reason to question the accuracy of his results. It does seem strange, however, that there should be such serious differences or d screpancies, W. G ’s total being, if Mr. Penteiow is right, 4,991, not 5,791. Some day I will draw up the averages for myself. 6. Manches er ; W. G. indicted as follows : “ In the Lancashire v. Gloucestershire match this week, I am surprised to find a Glouces­ tershire nominee, Louis Hall, standing umpire. May I ask if there has been any change in the rule forbidding this? It was still in force at the time of the Secretaries’ Meeting last December.” (And is so still, I believe.—R.S.H.). “ Of course, no umpire would be willing to act contrary to the evident wishes of such a power in cricket as Dr. Grace, especially if nominated by his county club. In this match the umpires failed to give satisfaction with regard to play on the Wednesday: Lancashire, with five wickets in hand, wanted forty-five runs to win. As there had been rain in the night, the result was open, though we had all confidence in Tyldesley, McLaren, Briggs, and Smith, There was no lain after half- past five on Wednesday morning, and at 11.30 the umpires decided that play might begin at one. By one o’clock Mr. McLaren and the others who had to bat had dressed. Tyldesley, the not out, had his pads on. None of the Gloucestershire men had changed. Don’t you think that was a pretty strong hint that the Gloucestershire captain did not want to play? At one o’clock it was decided that the wicket would be quite fit after lunch. When the time came, the Gloucestershire men had still not dressed. It was then announced that play would begin at four, and, to fill up time, a single-wicket match was arranged between the two wicket-keepers on the practice-ground. Dr. Grace, who was to umpire, and the three Gloucester professionals, did dress then ; the other seven amateurs came and watched in their ordinary clothes, although it was announced that play was to begin as soon as the single-wicket match was finished. Of course, as you know, play did dot begin at four. At a quarter to five the rain came on, and the match was drawn. People who have known the ground for years—members, players and ground- keepers—said that it was quite fit to play on, and that many a county match had been been fought out on a worse wicket. As one old man—a turf-attendant —said, “ Eleven hours without a drop of rain, on a ground like ours—that speaks for itself ! ” The wicket was in much better condition than that on which our men had to bowl on the third day of the Middlesex match three weeks ago, when Mold was not put on because he could get no foothold. The draw was particularly hard on us, as we had lost the toss and had the worst of the wicket all through; and still more, because our captain and his men are very keen, and would rather have played the match out, even at the risk of a loss, than have it left undecided. You, who have had such an objection to drawn matches, will sympathize with that feeling, which was evidently not shared by Dr. Grace and his men. We take no pleasure in ‘ moral* victories, nor do we care to be saved from defeat by rain. I should alike like to know if it is not practically a breach of Law 43 when one captain goes out wi»h the umpires to inspect the pitch, and when they come to consult him without insisting on the presence of the other captain. I heartily agree with your remarks on the captaincy . . . . I must apologize for troubling you with this long l e t t e r ......................” It has been a sincere pleasure to me to receive it, and I feel sure that such parts of it as I have just given will be read with pro- foundest interest. I regret that I oannot publish the name and address of the authoress, although they are both given in full. I shall leave W .G . to respond for himself. Perhaps he will, like the “ Old Buffer,” rather enjoy having his knuckles rapped by a lady’s fan. Anyhow after the above exposure I fear one must write him down “ a sad dog.” If I get a chance I shall show him the original letter at Bradford to-day. Last week’ 8 cricket I pronounced the mo 3 t interesting of the whole season, if we except the provoking run of misfortune experienced at Old Trafford. Perhaps we had everywhere more rain than seemed necessary either for cricket or agriculture, but at any rate for the present the reigu of the batsmen is over, and