Cricket 1896

98 CRICKET I: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. A pril 30, 1896. think that modem right-hand bowlers are too much alike in bowling over the wicket with the off-break, and I feel now that Canon McCormick was not far wrong when he said in Wisden that a tip-top round-the-wicket right-handed bowler was the great need of the game at the present time. We saw what a right-hand bowler with a leg-break could do last year in young Townsend, who took 100 wickets in a few weeks.” “ And what do you think of modern wicket-keeping ? ” “ While I think that modem wicket­ keepers—MacGregor, Blackbam, Storer, and many others—are brilliant in the extreme, I am not one of those who believe thvt splendid wicket-keeping came into existence only with the appearance of Blackham. To have seen MacGregor keep wicket to Woods, or Blackham to Spofforth, is an experience which one can never forget, but it is a question whether it was not as fine a sight to watch Pinder taking Emmett and Freeman on bad wickets. There is nowadays so much bowling over the wicket, that the task of a wicket-keeper is in one respect easier than in the days when many men bowled round the wicket, for the view of the ball was much more impeded then. I do not forget, however, that the old wicket­ keepers had a long stop behind them. Mr. Burbidge once told me that in gather­ ing the ball when it was thrown in from the field, he thought Tom Lockyer superior to any other wicket-keeper. He was a man with very long arms, a physical peculiarity which was of the greatest use to him.” “ And modem batting p” “ As far as one can tell from long experience in comparing cricketers of one period with those of another, I do not think that the big cricketers of the nineties are appreciably better than those of the eighties and seventies and sixties. I could give you several examples which would tend to prove this, but one may be sufficient. The only time that R . A. H. Mitchell ever played against Spofforth was in 1882, when he had long dropped out of first-class cricket. He made 32 runs, and, to my mind, it is a perfectly fair inference that if he had been the R. A. H. of 1865, he might just as easily have made a hundred. The style of batting has altered in some respects with the “ off-theory ” bowling, and thereisfar more pulling; but there are still men, notably Lionel Palairet, who have as taking a style as any of those who were formerly held up as examples— C. F. Buller and Richard Daft for instance. I remember that Southerton, not loD g before he died, told me that he thought Mr. Buller the best bat next to ‘ W .G.’ he had ever met.” As a small boy Mr. Pardon used to play cricket pretty regularly. “ But,” he said, ‘ ‘ my sight was not good enough for me to ever hope to be able to play well. But from the time that I was eight years of age, I have been familiar with first-class cricket and cricketers. My brother Charles, who was Captain of a local club, used to take me to the Oval, and long before I ever thought of writing for the Press, I could have passed a pretty stiff examination in contemporary cricket, and knew some­ thing about the history of the game. My personal knowledge of first-class cricket goes back for thirty years, in fact to the time when the famous old Surrey eleven was beginning to decline.” “ Do you remember what was the first big match you saw P” “ It was Surrey v. Yorkshire at the Oval, in 1863. All the old Surrey men were playing except C. Gr. Lane. In the same year I saw part of the Surrey v. England match at the Oval. I remember that when we reached the ground during the luncheon hour, the Surrey scare was about 120 for one wicket, Mortlock and H. H. Stephenson being the not out men. Immediately afterwards, in the first over of George Bennett, four other wickets fell. As far as my memory serves me, I believe that Stephenson was stumped, Caffyn run out, E. Dowson (the father of the young Harrow bowler of last year) bowled, and George Griffith caught. E. M. Grace was playing',in this match, and K. A. H. Mitchell, then in his prime.” ‘ ‘ And did you see many of the exciting matches which took place at the Oval in the ensuing years P” “ Practically, I saw at least a part of every great match for several years. One of the most notable incidents that I re­ member was seeing Surrey make 468 against Notts in 1864, the only fime I ever saw Jackson bowl. I remember that Tom Lockyer, in making his score of 108, not out, drove him down to the Tavern, which was considered a very big thing to do. In 1868, I saw the great stand made against Surrey by H. A. Richardson and W. B. Money; and one other fine innings was I. D. Walker’s 165 in Gentlemen v. Players. I was looking on at the famous Surrey v. Notts match, in the same year, when Southerton got Notts out for about 50. It was a revival of the match after it had ceased to be played, because of a row in 1865, and the Notts men were for the most part playing Southerton for the first time, with the result that they batted as if they were small boys at a private school. *•Perhaps you can remember a few more matches ? ” “ Well, in 1871 I saw two very memorable things. The first was the innings of 57 (not out) made by C. E. Green when he won the Gentlemen v. Players match for the Gentlemen three minutes before time. It was, I think, one of the best things he ever did, and he did a great many. The second thing was the dismissal of W. G., 1. b. w. to J. C. Shaw from the first ball bowled in H. H. Stephenson’s benefit match. In the second innings he made the first 142 out of his 268 in two hours and twenty minutes. The first time that I saw him bat was in Gentlemen v. Players in 1868, his fourth year in first-class cricket. He made 19, and was then, I think, caught by Coward, a Lancashire player. “ Did you neglect Lord’s altogether at this time p” “ I never went there until 1869, and did not see the University match until 1873, when I had just begun press work with my eldest brother. Since then I have never been absent from the match, and have seen all the great innings and exciting moments—Ridley bowling the last few overs of lobs, which won the match for Oxford in 1875; the downfall of the Oxford team in 1878 for 32 against A. G. Steel and P. H, MortoD, and so on. “ What do you think are the best per­ formances you have seen at Lord’s P” “ There are so many ! ” “ But among them, I should place the stand made in 1877 by Fred. Grace and W. S. Patter­ son for the last wicket in Gentlemen v. Players, when they made the 46 runs re­ quired to win. I don’t think a single ball passed Fred. Grace’s bat. Then there was the wonderful bowling of Spofforth in the next year, when he and Boyle got out the M.C.C. for 33 and 19 —it was a melancholy experience. Another great performance was W. G .’s innings of 165 against the Australians for the Gentlemen in 1888. He made 50 in the last half hour of the first day. It was the second time he had played against Turner and Ferris. But, perhaps, the two most astonishing things that I ever saw at Lord’s, were O’Brien’s effort to win the Middlesex and Yorkshire match when he made 100 (not out) in eighty minutes, and Lyons’s innings of 149 three years ago for theAustralians against the Marylebone Club.” “ When did you begin to do Press work p” “ In 1872. My eldest brother, Charles Frederick, who died in 1890, was associa­ ted with Mr. Kelly King in writing about cricket for the London Press, and, but for them, probably neither my younger brother Edgar nor I would have ever written for it. When we began to write we were a body of young men who had no idea of what our agency would extend to. Now we are largely connected with the London Press, and very intimately with the Press Association. For many years past my brother Edgar and Mi-. C. S. Caine have been associated with me, and also Messrs. Herbert Jewell and H. Y. Jones. We chose the name of ‘ the Cricket Reporting Agency ’ because the Post Office authorities would not allow us to have telegraph passes unless we could give them a definite name.” ‘ ‘ To what do you attribute the enor­ mous increase of late years in cricket Press telegrams all over the country p” “ Partly to the efficiency of the Postal Telegraph arrangements. There is now a special staff at the biggest matches, and offices at most of the leading grounds, ex­ cept Oxford and Cambridge. The Post Office work is admirable all round in con­ nection with cricket. But the enormous development of the supply to the pro­ vinces by the Press Association is chiefly due, in my opinion, to the visit of the first Australian team.” W. A. B e t t e s ' w o e t h . C RICKET Report Sheets, lOd. per dozen,post free. Order of Going-In Cards, 7d. per dozen, post free. West’s Pocket Scoring Book, 1/2 each, post free.—To be obtained at the Office of Cricket, 168, Upper Thames Street. London, E.C.