Cricket 1896

116 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. M ay 7, 1896. I have been tempted to quote so much be­ cause, with all their faulty technique and their almost absurd pompousness, the verses are animated by an admirable spirit. I like the honest pride in Australia’sbrilliantsuccesses, the generous recognition of the spirit in which they were accepted by the British public, and the true ring which some of the stanzas have. But why, oh why, did not someone impress upon ‘ ‘ Wattle Blossom” the necessity for the labour of the file ? If only he (or she ?) had cut out seventy-five per cent, of the adjectives; had reflected that to talk of “ the cold blood of Britain,” though it might not be meant offensively, was not very complimentary; and had entirely sup­ pressed the last verse but three, which is simply absurd, the verses would have deserved a place in the literature of cricket. But—for such is the unfortunate way of authors, great and small—little doubt is there but that “ Wattle Blossom” thought that unlucky verse the pick of the basket. Still he (or she) might have reflected that, even after that seven runs defeat at the Oval, the answer to (whose query was it? I fear I have studied Wisden more closely than Shakespeare of late years) “ Stands England where she did?” would still be “ Yes ; ” and that even if the valiant Caractacus hadmade a century against the bowling of Ostorius Scapula and Julius Agricola (I have no doubt whatever that my history is somewhat mixed), Britain’s cricket fame could scarcely have been said to have been hoary when Australia arose from ‘ *the depths of the deep,” seeing that geologists assure us that the Far South Land is the oldest of all the continents. Altogether, one can’t rank “ Wattle Blossom” with Adam Lindsay Gordon and Henry Kendall, Brunton Stephens and “ Banjo of the Sydney Bulletin. Scarcely. Turning to the third of the three Guides, that for 1882-3, even more features of interest present themselves. Here is our old friend, Goorge Eugene Palmer, making 204, not out, for South Melbourne v. Williamstown. Here are Harry Musgrove and George Giffen, playing on the same side (a team called the Mascottes, presumably a scratch eleven) in Adelaide, and each scoring centuries, Mr. Musgrove 133, George 117, both not out. Here is an instance of the “ three centuries in an innings,” which is not included in the tolerably long list I have in my M.S. book :— Ballarat v. Corio: Percy Lewis 136, R. Coulsell 123, W. H. Figgis 107, not out. Ballarat scored 427 for three wickets. And here is South Melbourne making 529 for six wickets against St. Kilda—J. Slight 279, J. Rosser 192, the former the member of the 1880 team, to whom reference has already been made. And here is Harry Musgrove’s average for East Melbourne: 16 innings—2 not outs, 426 runs, 30*42. No “ slouch” with the bat, in his time, was the Australian manager, you see! And here are the brothers Trumble. playing for the Kew Asylum Club—if I thought it necessary to say that they were not inmates, I might have to sedulously avoid “ Long Hugh ” whenever I meet the present team, and I don’t want to have to do that. But enough; I must not linger longer over these old guides, lest I wear out my readers’ patience. I only wish I could make Mr. Gaston understand the keen pleasure with which I opened that parcel bearing the Brighton docket. Now to other matters. I am very sorry to hear that Graham’ s rheumatism is so bad that he may not be able to play in the first few matches. The loss of so fine and dashing a batsman— and one of the few men, too, with former experience of English wickets may tell heavily against the Colonists. I hardly thought that any such luck as seeing the Cantabs oppose the Australians at Sydenham was possible, since the date falls within term- time. Besides, the match would have been shorn of half its charms if played away from Fenner’s. The team which Lord Sheffield has got together for the opening match is a powerful one; and, perhaps, it was a good thing to show the Colonists that, apart altogether from the men of Stoddart’s famous combination, England could put into the field a team strong at all points, and not un­ worthy to uphold the cricketing honour of the Old Country. Clement Hill’s last performance before leaving for England, was a very fine one. He was playing for North Adelaide, against Port Adelaide, and was sent in with this injunction from his captain : “ Make a century before you go to Eng­ land, Clem.” And he did it; scored at the rate of a run a minute for 50minutes, and then put on 56 more in 35 minutes. Twenty fourers—“ chainers,” in Australian parlance —were included in the score. I, for one, shall be greatly disappointed if Hill does not do big things before this tour is over. I thank Mr. A. W. Armitstead for his reminder of the big beating given by Lancashire to Somerset, last year. Though one be ever so careful, one makes omissions sometimes; and I am afraid one or two of my lists are not quite up to date. There were so many exceptional performances last year. I fear I rubbed Mr. Lacy the wrong way. In general, I think, I am anything but a logic-chopper; and, as Mr. Lacy has found it so easy to pick holes in my logic of two weeks since, perhaps it would have been as well if I had not departed from my usual custom then. I am afraid that there is sarcasm in Mr. Lacy’ s encouragement to me to keep on giving my figures ‘ ‘ from my point of view” ; but it is not sarcasm of the kind that hurts, for I don’t think it is meant to hurt. And in any case, I am likely to continue giving my figures. More by token, here are some more of them. A correspondent asked me, a few days ago, “ How many instances are there in first-class cricket of three batsmen reaching three figures in the same innings? ” If he had read “ Between the Innings” in the February or March number of Cricket (I forget which), he would have noticed that I said there were fourteen. But for his information, and for that of others who may feel interested in the subject, I will give the list, in chronological order. The side for which the century-makers were play­ ing is placed first. THREE CENTURIES IN AN INNINGS IN EIRST-CLASS MATCHES. N ew S outh W ales v. V ictoria , Sydney, February, 1882.—Total 775.— W . L. Murdoch 321, T. W . Gar­ rett 163, S. P. Jones 109. M.C.C. and G round v. F ourth A ustralian T eam , Lord’s, May, 1884.—Total, 424.— A . G . Steel 134, Barnes 105,* W. G. Grace 101. Y orkshire v . C ambridge U niversity , Cambridge, May, 1884.—Total, 539.—Bates 133, Hall 116, Grim- shaw, 115. A ustralia v . E ngland , Oval, August, 1884.— Total, 551. —W. L. Murdoch 211, P. S. M’Donnell 103, H. J. H. Scott, 102. N on -S mokers v . S mokers , East Melbourne, March, 1887.—Total, 803 (for nine wickets).—Shrewsbury 236, Gunn 150, W . Bruce 131. Y orkshire v . K ent , Canterbury, August, 1887.— Total, 559—Ulyett 124, Lee 119, Hall 110. N otts v . S ussex , Nottingham, August, 1887.— Total, 570.—Gunn 205*, Shrewsbury 135, Barnes 120. C ambridge U niversity v . S ussex , Brighton, June, 1890.—Total, 703 (for nine wickets).—F. G. J. Ford 191, G. MacGregor 131, C. P. Foley 117. S omerset v . Y orkshire , Taunton, August, 1892.— Total, 592.—H. T. Hewett 201, L. C. H. Palairet 146, W. C. Hedley 102. N otts v . S ussex , Brighton, June, 1893.—Total, 674.—Shrewsbury 164, Gunn 156, Barnes 102. E igh th A u s tra lia n Team v. O x fo rd U n iv ersity and Cam bridge U n iv e rsity , P a st and P re se n t.— Total, 843—W. Bruce 191, A . C. Bannerman 133, H. Trumble 105. Mr. A. E . S toddart ’ s T eam v . SouTn A ustralia , Adelaide, April, 1895.—Total, 609.—Ward (A .) 219, F. G. J. Ford 106, Brown (J. T.) 101. N otts v . S ussex , Nottingham, May, 1895.—Total, 726.—Gunn 219, Bagguley 119, R. H. Howitt 110. E ssex v . S omerset , Taunton, July, 1895.—Carpen­ ter 153, C. McGahey 147, A. P. Lucas 135. • Signifies not out. Apropos o f the b ig scoring in tw o or three o f the matches during the last Australian season, I have been looking up the instances in first-class cricket in which 1,200 or m ore runs have been made in a match ; and unless I have inadvertently om itted one or tw o— which I don’t think— the follow ing is a com ­ plete lis t:— MATCHES OF 1,200 AND MORE RUNS. Wkts. Total, down. Match. At Year. 1514 ... 40 ... Australia v. England ... Sydney ... 1894 1412 ... 30 ... N.S.W. v. Victoria ... „ ... 1882 1410 ... 28 ... Sussex v. Oxford Univ. Brighton 1895 1402 ... 40 ... Sussex v. Camb. Univ.... „ ...1891 1364 ... 34 ... Australia v. England ... Melbo’rne 1895 1353 ... 40 ... Victoria v. N.S.W................... ... 1895 1344 ... 32 ... Sussex v. Somerset ... Brighton 1895 1339 ... 39 ... Sussex v. Camb. Univ.... „ ... 1890 1332 ... 37 ... M.C.C. v. Camb.Univ.... Lord’s ... 1894 1307 ... 36 ... S.A. v. Victoria ......... Adelaide 1884 1306 ... 29 ... S.A. v. Stoddaitfs X I .... „ ... 1895 1295 ... 36 ... Middlesexv.Yorkshire... Lord’s ... 1889 1294 ... 25 ... Non-Smokers v.Smokers E. Melb. 1887 1263 ... 40 ... Viet. v. Stoddart’sX I. ... Melbo’rne 1894 1259 ... 28 ... Sussex v. Middlesex ... Brighton 1895 1227 ... 40 ... M.C.C. v. Sussex ..........Lord’s ...1895 1217 ... 24 .. Middlesex v. Ox. Univ. Prince’s ... 1876 1215 ... 34 ... S.A. v. Stoddart’s XI. ... Adelaide 1894 1211... 35 ... S.A. v. Victoria .......... „ ...1893 1210 ... 28 ... Yorkshire v. Lane. ... Bradford 1887 1207 ... 37 ... Kent v. Oxford Univ. ... Maidstone 1895 1205 ... 40 ... Middlesex v. Notts. ...Lord’s ...1893 1201 ... 31... N.S.W. v. S.A................Sydney ... 1896 Besides these, there are a hundred or so of 1,000 runs or over, about two-thirds of them falling between 1,000 and 1,100, and one- third between 1,100 and 1,200. E xcept that K ennington Oval, admittedly one of the fastest grounds in England, does not appear in the list I have given at all, there is a good deal of valuable evidence here as to what are the easiest grounds. S ix of the 23 matches were played at Brighton, four on the A d e­ laide Oval, three each at M elbourne and Sydney, and four at L ord’s (how different from the olden days, when it used to be said that a man who could score runs at L ord’s could score runs anywhere !). So Albert Trott has been accepted by Middlesex, and will be at once enrolled on the ground staff of the M.C.C. as well. This will be good news for Jack Hearne and Raw- lin, who have had all too much bowling work to do for years past; and the latter, relieved from the necessity of keeping up an end almost throughout the innings of Middlesex’s opponents, may now be expected to make more runs. But I am talking as though Trott’s qualification were a thing of to­ morrow, whereas he cannot play for his adopted country until May, 1898. But, perhaps, before then the rules of county qualification will have been altered. It is time they were. I don’t agree with one county’s buying cricketers from another;