Cricket 1895

70 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. A p r i l 18, 1895. thus exactly turning the tables on the Adelaide men. Harry Trott and Frank Laver were the men who won the game. The former not only scored a splendid innings of 152, but also took seven wickets for 111 runs. Laver played in fine, steady style for 78, he and Trott putting on as many as 195 for the third wicket. After them, Albert Trott who scored 41 and took five wickets for 64 did most. George Giffen only made 24 in his two innings; and the one bright spot in the game from a South Australian point of view was the return to the form of Lyons, who played a brilliant second innings of 135. Of the rest Darling, Clement, Hill and Fred Jarvis alone did themselves justice. This match brought the wins scored by Victoria since the match was first played in even-handed terms to ten against South Australia’s nine. It also brought to a very interesting state the com­ petition for the Sheffield shield. Victoria had beaten South Australia once and New South Wales twice, thus winning three matches out of four. South Australia, with a game still to play, had two wins and a loss. If she could beat New South Wales, she would tie with Victoria, in which case a deciding match might have been thought necessary; if, on the contrary, New South Wales could win, Victoria would take the shield. At Sydney, South Australia was minus both Blinman and the elder Jarvis; and so their substitutes, Bennett and Noel (the latter an old intercolonial player), only made ten runs between them, these changes undoubtedly weakened the tide. Except that Moses and Garrett replaced Sam Jones and the schoolboy Trumper, the New South Wales team was identical with that which beat Queensland at Brisbane. The first innings of the home team, which realised 239, was chiefly remark­ able for the fine batting of Tom Garrett, who scored 82 ; with one exception, we believe, his highest score in an intercolonial. The reliable Donnan also batted well for 58 ; and the two cracks, Iredale and Gregory, made 26 and 33 respectively. The Adelaide men went 65 better, Dyer and Darling contributing 141 between them; and Reedman, Clement Hill, Lyon*, Fred Jarvis, and the brothers Giffen all making useful scores. The second innings of New South Wales was a a cry good one. I1 rank Iredale looked very much like making a third century, but was caught by Darling off the great George when nine short of three figures ; little Gregory carried his bat for 66 ; and the two seniors of the team, Moses and (1arrett, made 34 and 27 respectively. But the great surprise was the batting of Howell, who scored 62, more than he had made in his previous ten innings for his colony. The total was 336, so that Giffen’s team wanted 2 ^% to win. For a time it seemed certain they would get the runs. Their captain and Darling played up in fine style; and the hundred went up with only two wickets down. But Darling was run out, and George stumped; and the rest could do nothing with M’Kibbin, who took eight wickets for 66 runs (14 in the match for 189), the innings closing for 160, and New South Wales winning by 111. The Sheffield shield thus went to Victoria, who had won three matches and lost one: South Australia had won two and lost two ; NewSouth Wales had won one, and lost three. The Queensland and Tasmania fixtures do not count in this competition any more than the games with the Englishmen. The intercolonials were now all over, and there remained but three games with the Englishmen, it having been arranged that Victoria should have a return match, for the benefit of the V.C.A., which was in financial low water. First of the three was the great game of the season, the fifth test match. The selection of the team for this was a very delicate matter. M’Kibbin could not be left out after his splendid bowling against Queens­ land and South Australia; and Lyon’s 135 against Victoria was certain proof that he was in form again. The selectors, as for the other matches, were Giffen, Blackham, and Turner. The latter thought that he ought to play in preference to Lyons ; but his colleagues were of another opinion, and finally it was decided that Moses and Turner should stand down for Lyons and M’Kibbin. It was said after the match that Turner ought to have been placed, but it must be remembered the Melbourne wicket has never suited his bowling, and certainly Lyons, who scored 70 in the match did his share. It is not necessary to go into details about the match here. Suffice it to say that it was the crowning success of the Englishmen. Though only Bruce, Graham, Albert Trott and Iredale failed to score well for Australia, even M‘Kibbin doing far more with the bat than couldhave been expected of him, the old country won by the substantial margin of six wickets, thanks to the magnifi­ cent play of Brown, Ward, MacLaren, Peel and Stoddart. From the return with Victoria Stoddart had to stand down owing to illness; but neither Worrall, Harry, Grahamor Blackham appeared for the colony, their places being taken by Wame, Peryman, H. Stuckey and Johns, the last named a very promising wicket-keeper. Yet the colony won by seven wickets, a result largely due to the good generalship and fine bowling of Harry Trott. 'Hie Victorian captain sent in the English­ men to bat on a bowlers’ wicket, and himself took eight of their wickets at a cost of only 63 runs—about the best performance he has ever done with the ball. Bruce’s dashing batting (he scored 114 for once out), and good all-round play by Albert Trott and Charley M‘Leod were the other principal factors in the win. On the English side Mr. Francis Ford showed his true form, and Brockwell batted much better than he had done for some time before. Then came the match with South Aus­ tralia, memorable for the 206 for once out of Clement Hill, who is celebrating hiseighteenth birthday on the day he beganhis great innings of 150 ; for the triple century in the English innings—Ward 219, Brown 101, Ford 106 ; and for the fine conclusion to the tour, which Ford and Brockwell made by hitting off the forty and more runs required to win in less than twenty minutes. Bar Hill, the brothers Giffen were chief scorers for the Colony. George finished a splendidly successful season by scoring 78 runs in the match, and Walter a terribly unsuccessful one by a capital first innings of 81—fifty per cent, more than his total for the other nine innings in which he played. The Englishmen’s score of 609 is a record against Australian bowling; and there is no doubt that Giffen’s five wickets for 309 in one innings is a world’s record—though not one of which the bowler can be particularly proud, save as it proves his really wonderful powers of endurance. In the batting tables which follow every man who took part in the season’s cricket is included those who played fewer than four innings being given in a*supplementary table which ranges themaccording to their Colonies. It will be noticed that there is very little to choose between the averages of the English Captain andhis Australian rival. Had Giffen scored twenty more runs in his last innings at Adelaide he would have headed the list. When the immense amount of work he did iii the bowling line is taken into consideration— he took a larger number of wickets than any other two Australian bowlers, and more than two-thirds of the number takenby Richardson and Peel together—it must be conceded that his all-round form just now is such as only one cricketer has ever surpassed. Clement Hill and Blinman owe their ave­ rages almost entirely to one match each, but the former is a player likely to do great things in the future. MacLaren, Ward and Brown, Iredale, Darling, Albert Trott and Gregory have averages ranging from 47 to nearly 39, and it would be very difficut to say which of the seven is the best bat. All of them are comparatively young men, a fact which augurs well both for English and Australian cricket. Blackham, kept out of several matches by his injured hand, has nevertheless an excellent average, and three of the older men, in the persons of Garrett, Bruce and Foote, all did splendid service. Dyer, Charles McLeod and Laver are three very promising bats among tne younger generation. Donnan was very consistent, his average being only fractionally short of half his highest score. Lyons only played one really big innings, being “ off colour’ ’ at the beginning of the season, and Graham was handicapped by ill-health. Mr. Ford scarcely showed his true form till the last two matches. Brockwell never quite played up to his English standard. Peel was far from being as consistent as in 1887-8, but he did splendid service on one or two occasions. Moses only showed his best form in one match. The figures of the rest must be left to speak for themselves. BATTING AVERAGES. (Only those who played in four or more innings included). not Highest Inns. out. Runs. Aver. score. A . E. Stoddart ... 18 . . 1 .. 870 .. 51-17 ... 173 G. Giffen ........... 20 .. . 2 .. 902 .. 50*11 ... 161 C. I li l l................... 9 ... 2 .. 335 .. 47-85 ... 150* A . C. M'Laren ... 20 .. 3 .. 803 .. 47 23 ... 228 F. A. Iredale 23 .. 3 .. 882 .. 4410 ... 140 J. T. Brown 21 . 2 .. 825 .. 43 42 ... 140 A . Ward ........... 20 .. 0 .. 916 .. 41*63 ... 219 H. Blinman 6 .. 2 .. 165 .. 41*25 ... 67* J. Darling ........... 20 .. 2 .. 709 .. 39-38 ... 117 A . E. Trott........... 16 .. 4 .. 472 .. 39-33 ... 85* 8. E. Gregory ... 23 .. 1 ... 854 .. 3881 ... 201 J. M. Blackham 8 .. 3 .. 172 .. 34*40 ... 74 W . Bruce ........... 13 .. 2 .. 365 .. as-18 ... 80 T. W . Garrett ... 8 .. 1 .. 221 .. 31-57 ... 82 G. H. S. Trott ... 21 .. 1 . . 600 .. 31-50 ... 152 L . H. G a y ........... 11 .. 5 ... 186 .. 31-00 ... 39* H. Dyer ........... 10 .. 1 . . 278 .. 30-88 ... 102 C. M ‘Leod ......... 12 .. 3 . . 266 ... 2945 ... 52 H . Donnan........... 32 .. 1 .. 316 .. 28-72 ... 58 F. Laver ........... 11 .. 0 . 295 .. 26-81 ... 78 J. J. Lyons........... 18 .. 1 . . 455 .. 26-76 ... 185 F. G. .T. Ford 2(» .. 1 . . 508 ... 26 73 ... 106 W . Brockwell ... 22 .. 1 . . 504 .. 24-00 ... 81 H. Graham........... 11 .. 0 . . 262 .. 23-81 ... 105 F. Jarvis ........... 10 .. 1 . . 199 ... 22*11 ... 35 A . H. Jarvis 14 .. 3 . . 242 ... 22-00 ... 98* J. Harry ........... 11 .. 0 . . 234 ... 21-27 ... 70 J. E. Reedman ... 14 .. 1 . . 274 ... 21-07 ... 83 11. Peel.................. 21 .. 1 . . 421 ... 21*05 ... 73 J. W orra ll........... 9 .. 0 . . 184 ... 2044 ... 96 H . Moses ........... 7 0 . . 143 ... 20-42 ... 77 P. Lewis ........... 5 ># 1 . . 78 ... 19-50 ... 46 J . Briggs ........... 20 .’. 1 . . 360 ... 18*94 ... 57 W . H. Lockwood 14 ... 2 ... 224 ... 1866 .. 39 A . C. K. Mackenzie 4 .. 0 . . 68 ... 17 00 .. 37 P. S.M ‘Donnell... 6 .. 0 .. . 98 ... 1633 .. 22 R. W . M 'Leod ... 10 ... 0 . . 159 ... 1590 .. 62 N. Bradley........... 5 ... 0 .. 76 ... 15-20 .. 44 W . F. Giifen 10 ... 1 .. 1:35 ... 1500 .. 81 R. M ’Donald 6 ... 0 .. 87 ... 1450 .. 30 A . Coningham ... 8 ... 0 .. 109 ... 13-62 .. 43 H. Philipson 15 ... 1 .. 187 ... 13-35 .. 59 H. Trum ble.......... 8 ... 2 . 75 ... 1250 .. 30 W . H o w ell......... 11 ... 1 .. 119 ... 11-90 .. 62 S. T. Callaway ... 15 ... 0 .. 171 ... 11-40 .. 41 H. Stuckey........... 6 ... 1 .. 56 ... 11-20 .. 28 R. M itchell........... 4 ... 0 .. 42 ... 1050 .. 25 W . A. Humphreys 7 ... 3 .. 42 ... 1050 .. 18* H. Freeman 4 ... 0 .. 38 ... 9-50 .. 16 C. T. B. Turner... 16 ... 2 .. 127 ... 9-07 .. 26* J. J. K e lly ........... 11 ... 2 .. 78 .. 8-88 .. 24 T. R. M ‘Kibbin... 11 .. 3 .. 69 ... 8-62 .. 23- E. Jones ........... 11 ... 1 .. 84 ... 8*40 .. 26 T. Richardson ... 10 ... 5 .. 113 ... 8*07 .. 20 V. Trumper........... 4 ... 1 .. 22 .. 7 33 .. 11 *>. Austin ........... 4 ... 2 .. 12 ... 6 00 .. 10* W . M ‘Glinchy ... 4 ... 0 .. 24 ... 6*00 .. 15 A. Newell ..! ... 6 ... 1 .. 21 ... 420 .. 12