Cricket 1895

A pril 18, 1895. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 69 the home jranks ; and only the absence of Blackham, who had been hurt in the big game at Sydney, prevented the side from being absolutely Victoria’s best. From the other side Moses was absent; and neither Charles Richardson (who, indeed, did not play again for his colony), M‘Kibbin or Farquhar, of these who had played against the Englishmen were given places, the veteran Garrett, OamphinandMcPherson cominginto theteam. The play was much interrupted by rain ; and the result was an easy victory for the home eleven by 163 runs. New South Wales actually went down for 66 in their first innings, Iredale’s 24 being top score; while 101 of their second of 194 came from the bat of little Syd. Gregory. The one big innings for Victoria was Worrall’s 96 ; but Laver, Bruce, Charles M‘Leod, Harry and the two Trotts all batted well for smaller scores. Bob M‘Leod and Albert Trott were to the fore in the bowling line, with 6 for 37 and 5 for 55 respectively. Turner (8 for 129), Callaway (5 for 84), and Howell (5 for 115) did nearly all the bowling for the losers. This match over, the second test game began on the same ground. Bruce and Tramble replaced Reedman and Jones; the Queenslander, Coningham, took Charles M‘Leod’s place ; and Jarvis kept wicket in­ stead of Blackham, whose hand was still very bad. The result of the game was a decisive victory for the Englishmen by 94 runs; and its great feature was Stoddart’s splendid 173. Iredale’s 68 and Harry Trott’s 95 were also grand innings; and there was some good bowling on the last wicket of the first day by Turner (5 for 32) and Richardson (5 for 57), and on the firm, true pitch that succeeded when play recommenced by George Giffen and Brockwell, the latter of whom had a good deal to do with the English victory, getting rid of Trott, Giffen and Darling in a very few overs when an Australian success looked very probable. Now came the first match of the season between South Australia and New South Wales, played at Adelaide. For once in a way George Giffen did very little with the bat in this game, but he took eight wickets in each innings at a total cost of 186, and thus did his share towards his side’s victory by four wickets. The biggest score in the match was made by A. H. Jarvis, who had the most tantalising luck, being only two off bis century when his last partner was bowled. This was the more annoying as he has never yet reached three figures in a first- el tss match, but has previously played an innings of 96, not out. The other principal scorer for the winners was H. Blinman, whose 37 and 67, not out, represented per­ formances better than anything he has pre­ viously done. For the losers Moses (13 and <7) did best; Donnan scored 24 and 48, not out; Tom Garrett played a first innings of 48, Gregory a second of 42, and Frank Ireland made 25 in each attempt. Callaway, though he was expensive, bowled very well in leed, and his good form secured him a place in the third test match, on the same gr mnd, the next great game of the season. Callaway, Albert Trott, Harry and Worrall for Turner, Coningham, Trumble and Lyons were the changes made in the Australian Harry owed his selection mainly to bis innings of 70 for his colony against the Englishmen, Worrall his to his big score against New South Wales. Lyons had not * iown anything near his usual fine hitting orm; but perhaps it was hardly wise to leave him out, and it was not assuredly good judg­ ment to omit Turner, whose comparative <*ck of success with the ball so far had ,<Mn*n a much greater degree due to ill-luck than to any real falling off. The changes did not matter much, however, for Australia had the easiest of victories. Albert Trott, who scored 110 without losing his wicket in either innings and took eight wickets for 43 when the Englishmen went in a second time, was unquestionably, the hero of the game ; but Frank Iredale also did splendid work, play­ ing a fine second innings of 140 ; and Bruce and Harry Trott with the bat, Giffen and Callaway both with bat and ball had a good share in the 382 run’ s victory. MacLaren, Stoddart, Brown and Brockwell alone did much for the Englishmen, who were beaten at every point. Between this and the fourth test match came the return between Victoria and New South Wales at Sydney, and the one match between Tasmania and Victoria at Hobart. These games were played on the same dates; but we are inclined to think that this arrange­ ment will scarcely be adhered to next season, for, although the team sent to the island colony was really a very good one, Tasmania easily beat it. The match will be long remembered for a great performance by the young batsman, C. J. Eady, who was spoken of as likely to form one of the 1893 team, and who will almost certainly come to England with the next combination. He accomplished a feat previously only credited to three batsmen (W. G., Stoddart, and George Brann) in first-class matches, scoring 116 in his first innings, and 112, not out, in his second. His batting overshadowed everything else in the match ; but there was more than one other notable feat. Dan M‘Leod, a brother of Robert and Charles of that ilk, made a splendid debut for Victoria, playing a fine second innings of 107. Roche scored 25 and 77. Warne, a most promising player, who has been making century after century in Melbourne Club and Pennant matches, played a second innings of 69. Percy Lewis, an old intercolonial player, George Stuckey, a brother of H. Stuckey, Philpott and Vautin (who, we believe, has appeared in former matches on the Tasmanian side) also batted well for Victoria ; while the Tasmanian crack, Kenny Burn, made 48 and 28, not out; A. Douglas played a second innings of 61 ; Gatehouse scored 45 and 19, and Maxwell 55. Windsor, Bingham, and Watt bowled well for the losers ; Dan M‘Leod took six wickets in the first innings of Victoria. Meanwhile the older comrades of the beaten men were administering a thrashing to New South Wales at Sydney. The match was a much closer one than the first between the two colonies, however, the Melbourne men only winning by 55 runs. They were 93 runs to the bad when an innings each had been con­ cluded ; but then Harry Graham (61) and Frank Laver (65) batted finely, putting on 123while together, and the total of the second innings reached 247. The brothers Trott then dismissedthe Sydney men for 99 ; Harry, who seems to have improved greatly as a bowler, taking 5 wickets for 31, Albert 4 for 39. Frank Iredale, with 86 and 22, and Gregory, with 69 and 24, were considerably the highest scorers for the losers ; but Dunnan (40) and the veteran captain, Garrett, with 36, also played well in the first innings. M’Kibbin, who had ridden forty miles on horseback and travelled all night by rail in order to get down to Sydney in time for the match, bowled very finely in Victoria’s first, taking five wickets for 36. Turner had seven in the match for 104, and Howell three in the second innings for 25. Bruce did not play for Victoria, but Blackham reappeared in the team. There were frequent interruptions owing to rain, and to these the Xew South Welshmen were inclined to assign their defeat. Graham’s good play in this match no doubt had much to do with getting him a place in the fourth test game. On the same ground Moses, who had been asked to play at Adelaide, but could not accept, was also included, and Turner regained his place. Harry, Worrall, and Callaway were the three to stand down. The match resulted in a heavy defeat of the Englishmen. Mr. Stoddart won the toss, and, as the wicket was slow and bad, sent in his opponents. Six wickets were down for 51, but then Graham’ s free hitting turned the scale, and in the end the total reached 284. Rain on Saturday and again on Monday morning, followed by a powerful sun, spoiled the wicket completely. The Englishmen could score only 65 and 72, and they were beaten by an inning 3 and 147 runs. A very good New South Wales eleven travelled to Brisbane to meet Queensland. Moses and Garrett did not make the journey, but their places were not ill filled by S. P. Jones, of Anglo-Australian fame, and A. C. K. Mackenzie, a batsman who has not yet quite j ustified all the good things that were said of him when he first appeared. M‘Donnell won the toss for Queensland, andtook first innings; but the total only reached 106—Bradley (44), M‘Donald (30), and the captain (15) alone scoring doubles. The visitors replied with 163, Jones (32) and Mackenzie (37) making a capital start; while Donnan (35), Iredale (20), and Gregory (17) also showed good form. In the second innings of Queensland five men scored doubles, but only M‘Donnell and Bradley made over 20, The total was 107 ; and New South Wales made the fifty or so required to win for the loss of four wickets. The great feature of the game was undoubtedly the splendid bowling of M‘Kibbin, the Bathust colt. He had five wickets for 19 in the first innings of Queensland. In the second, with Turner trundling at the other end, he took nine for 68. It had been previously arranged that Queensland should be helped by some of the New South Wales men in the match which had originally been intended as a return between the colony and the Englishmen. The combined eleven was composed of six New South Welshmen and five Queens­ landers ; and, except that Denman should certainly have had a place, it was as good a team as could be chosen from the twenty-two engaged in the match just ended. It was beaten by no fewer than 278 runs, however, getting all the worst of the wicket in both innings. Frank Iredale, who scored 70 and twice carried his bat, batting better than he had ever before done on a bad wicket, was alone conspicuous among the Australian bats­ men. For England, Mr. MacLaren scored 37 and 106; and Mr. Stoddart, Ward, and Peel all batted well. Richardson took nine wickets for 77, the Brisbane wicket again proving to his liking. At the beginning of the season it had looked to be odds on South Australia’sretain­ ing possession of the Sheffield Shield. At the time when they met Victoria in the return at Melbourne, the Adelaide men were an undefeated team. They had triumphed over the Englishmen, had easily beaten Victoria, and had won, though not by a heavy margin, against New South Wales. But now their downfall was at hand. They had come to Melbourne without Blinman, whose place was taken by a player named Green. But, good man as Blinman undoubtedly is, the Victorian victory was far too pronounced to be ascribed in any way to his absence, bei )g by no less a margin than 10 wickets,