Cricket 1896

D ec . 31, 1896. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 475 BETWEEN THE INNINGS. THE FIRST-CLASS SEASON OP 1896. (Continuedfrom page 460.) ( /) THE REPRESENTATION OF SIDES. o 'S <u o aj oj . +-> . d h 'O O e3oS O 0>cj CD S ft fc a a Aus. ... 34 ... 15 ... York. ... 32 . Surrey... 30 . Lancs.... 25 . Sussex... 22 , Glos. ... ?Q . Kent Wrwk. . Notts .. £omst... Derby .. Leic. Mdsx. M.C.C. Essex 20 . 20 . 19 19 . 18 . 18 . 24 . 23 . . 21 29 . . 25 21 . . 27 . 28 , . 23 . 17 ... 26 . 15 . 14 . 70 . . 20 . Players who took part in every match. Tunnicliffe. Baker, Briggs, F. H. Sugg, A. Ward. . Killick, W. Newham, Tate. . Board, W. G. Grace, C. L. Townsend, Wratball. . F. Marchant, J. R. Mason. H. W. Kainbridge, Diver, Pallett, W. G. Quaife. . Attewell, A. O. Jone^. . Tyler, 8. M. J. Woods. . Chatterton, Davidson, Hulme, YV. Sugg. . Baldwin, Barton, D. A. Steele, H. F. Ward. . Knight, Pougher, Tomlin, Whiteside, Woodcock. . H. R. Bromley-Davenport, J. T. Hearne, Rawlin, A. E, Stoddart. F. G. Bull, Carpenter, C. McGahey, Mead, H. G. Owen, P. Perrin, Pickett. C. U. ... 9 ... 18 ... N. F. Druce, W. M. Heming- way, F. Mitchell. O. U. ... 9 ... 22 ... H. D. G. Leveson-Gower. Altogether 404 players took part in the season’s first-class cricket-of course, to a very varying extent. For instance, Mr. J. Brown, of the Eastbourne Club, Captain Barton, of Hampshire/and Thomas, a Lanca­ shire wicket-keeper, each took part in one match without having an innings at all; while J. T. Brown played as many as sixty innings, and ten other batsmen went to the wickets more than fifty times. Eighty-five players took part in one match only. (!/) THE FIRST-CLASS GROUNDS. In the table which follows every ground on which a first-class match was played is included; but only those on which four or more games took place are given in their order as determined by average. R u n - g e t t in g o n t h e v a r io u s G ro u n d s . ° O 0 3 o os o fc a &s ..11, ..21 ... 9 11.. ...11.. 11.. ...10.. Ground. Hove, Brighton ... Derby ................. Edgbaston, B’ham Taunton................. Fenner’s, Cambridge... 5... 3. Southampton ..........8...10. Trent Bridge, N’ham...10... 7.. Aylestone Rd., Lcstr.. 8...11 . Park Avon., Bradford 5... 5.. Ash!ey Downs,Bristol 7... 6 . 01dTraffordjM’chstr...l3... 7... Lord’s ...................... 23. 16.., Leyton ...........................8 .. 3... Headingley, Leeds ... 4... 2... Kennington Oval ...18...15.. Parks, Oxford ..........4... 0... Marine, Scarborough.. 4 .. 0... Fewer than four matches:— Bramall Lane, Sheffield 3... 2... Central, Hastings ... 3... 1... Angel, Tonbridge ... 3... 1... St. Lawrence, Cantrbry 2... 4... Clifton College ......... 2... 0 .. Cheltenham College ... 2... 0 .. Aigburth, Liverpool ... 2... 0.. Eastbourne .................1... 2.. Bat and Ball,Gravesend 1... 0 . Sheffield Park ..........1.. 0... Blackheath .................1... 0... Christ Church, Oxford 1... 0.., U.S., Portsmouth ... 1... 0... Beckenham................ 1... 1.. Harrogate ................ 1... 1 .. Crystal Palace ..........1... 1... Dewsbury .................1... 0.. Huddersfield.................1... 0.. Mote Park, Maidstone 1... 0.. Bexhill Catford Bridge Wembley Park 1... 0.. 1... 0.. 1... 0.. 3 O « 3 10198.. . 7444. 8454. 6408.. 4261.. 6693. 7973. . 6543. . 8857.. . 5199.. . 8952.. .16988 . 5507.. . 2564.. 12301.. . 2841. . 1775. . 1891 . . 1644.. . 1780.. . 1865. . 1396 . 1(65 . . 906. . 462.. . 788. . 825 . . 921.. . 733.. . 741.. 839.. 595.. 527.. 496.. 567.. 452.. 437.. 449.. 339. rW a II .324.. . 263., .315.. .242.. 162.. ,.256.. . 319.. .262.. ,.168., .234.. ..405., ,770. . 255.. ,.119.. ..578 . .139.. .118., 101.. .. 96 .106.. , 66.. . 57., . 70.. . 70. . 11. . 31. . 34. . 40. . 33. . 35 . 40. . 30 . 30 . 30 . 36. . 30 . 36. . 40. . 40. SP as a as <! <I.S .31-4 . 30'1 .283...201 26-8.. 26-4 .26*4...88*7 .26*3 . 30-0 .26*1...17*7 .24-9...24*5 24 9...18 .22-9 1S-3 .22-2 . 19 1 .22 1... 20*1 21-9.. 21-3 .21-5...15*8 21*5.. 14-0 .21*2...225 .20*4...27*9 .150...153 .18-7...18-1 17*1...23*3 .16-7...220 .28*2...17*3 24-4. 17*6 .15-2...18-8 12-9...185 .420... — 25*4.. 35-3 24*2... — .28*0 ..11*2 .22*2...25 8 ,.21*1...17*8 .209... — 19*8...122 17-5... — , 16*6...27*6 ,.15*7...59*0 .15*0...31*0 .1*21... — ,.11*2 . 18*9 ,. 8 4... — It will scarcely surprise anyone to find the famous Hove Ground ranking first on the list—a position which it also occupied last year, though with a slightly smaller average. Last year Fenner’s ranked second; this season it comes fifth. Derby has been much more prolific of runs; Southampton, Leicester, and Leyton have also considerably heavier averages. In all, 189 matches were played; and 137,827 runs were made for 5,992 wickets, giving an average of 23 per wicket. (A) THE CLOSURE. Twenty-one times during tho season was the closure rule applied ; but in only *ix cases did it lead to a definite result. One is con­ strained to think that the law as it stands is not particularly effective, and that the time is ripe for an extension of the power. For my own part, I fail to see any really valid objec­ tion to the innings of a side being declared closed at any time during a match. Here is a list of the occasions on which the closure was applied in 1896. A p p l ic a t io n s o f t h e C lo s u r e . By. Against. At. Date. Result. O.U. ...Webbe’s X I Oxford ...May 20...O.U. won. Aust. ...XI. of South E’bourne May 23...A draw. Sussex...Glos..............Brighton May 27...A draw. Sussex...Somerset ...Brighton May 30 . A draw. ...Bradford June 9.. A draw. .. C’biidge June 17 . A draw. ...Brighton June27.. A draw. ...Derby ...June27...A draw. .. Lord’s .. June30...M.C.C.won ...S’hamptn July 1...Surrey won .. Leyton ...July 25...A draw. ...Brighton Aug. 1...A draw. .. B’ham .. Aug. 1...A draw. ...Leicester Aug. 5 . A draw. Yorks ...Surrey... C.U. ..M.C.C. O.U. ...Sussex... Derbysh Yorks... M.C.C. .. O.U. ... Surrey ...Hants... Derbysh Essex .. Notts ..Sussex... Warwk. Hants ... Essex ...Leicestrsh Notts ...Kent ......... Nttnghm.Aug. 12.. A draw. Yorks ...Leicestrsh ...Scarboro’ Aug. 15...Yorks wen. Mdlsx....Lancashire Lord’s ...Aug. 15...Mdx, won. Surrey ...Aust............Oval .. Aug. 19.. A draw. Lancs... Sussex........ Brighton Aug. 19.. A draw. Sussex...Middlesex ...Lord’s ...Aug. 26...A draw. Yorks .. Kent ........ Tonbrdg. Aug. 26...Yorks won. (i) THE PRINCIPAL BOWLERS, The following table, which gives the manner in which the principal bowlers (those who took 50 or more wickets) took their wickets, and the average number of balls each bowled to secure a wicket, should prove in­ teresting, I have thought for a long time that the number of runs per wicket alone is not a fair test of a bowler’s merit. The number of balls per wicket alone would, it is true, be still Jess so. A combination of the two should give a fair result, as it is obvious that the bowler who takes his wickets most cheaply and most quickly is the most useful man to his side; and thus the man whose average of runs and average of balls (or overs) gave the lowest figure would stand first, suppose the system is too complicated for general purposes ; and it is of little use one statistician taking it up unless others will do so ; but I am sure it has its merits. Mind, don’t claim that it is my own original idea; but I quite forget now where I first saw it advocated. How t h e B o w le r s ’ W ic k e t s w e r e t a k e n . Bowler. J. T. Hearne ... T. Richardson... J. Briggs........ A. Mold ......... H. Trumble ... W. Attewell ... R. Peel ......... E. Jones ......... G. Giffen......... C. L. Townsend G. H. Hirst ... E. Wainwright T. R. McKibbin F. Martin.......... 'd r* £ to s X *5 i . 1 % •a I r e . ? o £ A 3 g £i 43 j= O 02 hi M ff £ o PQ to O .257.. .132.. 10.. 107... 2... 6...0.. 39 .2J6.. 158.. 8.. 76... 0... 4...0...33 .1«5... 53.. 4.. 89...11... 7...1 . 52 150. . 82 4.. 62... 0... 2...0...38 .148. . 50. 13.. 75... 4 .. 6...0 . 38 135.. 70.. 13.. 42... 4... 6...0...51 128. . 89. . 4.. 73... 7... 5...0...49 121. . 63. . 1.. 57... 0... 0...6 . 36 .117. . 44.. 4 . 56... 3 . 10 0...36 .114. . 29. . 1.. 67...11... 5...0.. 36 .104. . 41. . t.. 58... 0... 1...0...48 .102 . 45. . 2.. 47... 3... 5...0...44 .101. . 42. . 3. 38 ..14... 4...0...32 ..101 .. 30 .. 6 .. 52... 4... 9.. 0...5 •a £ Bowler. W. M ead......... J. Hulmc......... G. A. Lohmann T. Hayward ... G. Davidson ... A. D. Pougher... F. G. Bull........ S. Haigh ......... F. W . Tate ... J. C. Hartley ... E. J. Tyler ... A. Woodcock ... H. J. Pallett ... S. Santall.......... G. L. Jessop ... A. Hearne H. Baldwin ... E. B. Shine ... A. Hallam W . H. Lockwood J. T. Rawlin ... F. H. E. Cunliffe F. P arris......... W. Wright C. J. Kortright T. Soar .......... W. G. Grace ... S. M. J. Woods 5 <v *o . . . 101 . O .. 7.. . 2 . .. 7.. * o « 44 40 93... 39 91... 47... 3. 90... 31... 6. 88... 27. 85... 31. 84... 57. 82... 51. 79... 16. 76... 15...11... 76... 34... 0... ft ..49 . 55 .41 36 45 7... 45. 5... 45 .. 2. 2... 24... 1. 4... 19... 3. 7 40...12. 4 42... 0. I* t * 2 •? 2 n tJ W 2... 6...0. 2...11...1. 3... 6...0. 1... 4...0...35 1... 7...0...71 3... 6.. 0...55 2...0 . 29 0...0...34 5 0...67 4...0...49 8...0. 57 0...0.. . 74. . 74. 74 . 73. 29... 3 .. 36... 3... 3 3.. 63 . 32... 2... 37... 2... 1.. 0...58 . 73... 31... 72... 34 .. 70... 21... . 62... 28... . 59 , P8... 21. 64... 42 53... 22. 52... 16. 51. . 18. 2.. 0 . 4.. 24... 1.. 15. 2 .. 31.. 3... 28 . 2.. 2 .. 33... 0.. 6 .. 30... 0.., 42... 0.. 0.. 0...0...47 5.0...43 3...0...70 2...0...45 5 . 0..47 1...0...45 28... 3... 0...0...52 30... 1... 4 . 0.. 41... 0.. 2... 32 .. 1.. 1... 11... 0.. 1... 30... 0.. 4... 27... 2. 1 . 0...64 2...0...50 0 . 0.. 35 0 . 0 . 50 3...0...53 2... 31... 0 .. 0...0.. 46 It will be oeen from this that the bowler to whom wickets fell fastest was Bull, the young trundler whose fine form has done so much for Essex this year. His slow bowling aver- ged a wicket in slightly less than every six overs. Next comes McKibbin, another slow bowler, who needed 32 balls per wicket; while Richardson’s expresses averaged 33, Haigh’s 34, and Kortright’ s 35. Hayward’s figure was also 35. All three of the other great Australian bowlers, though not getting down wickets as fast as did McKibbin, were well above the general average, their figures being 36, 36 and 38. Others under 40 were J. T. Hearne, C. L. Townsend, Mold, and F. H. E. Cunliffe. Per contra, Baldwin, of Hamp­ shire, needed 70 balls, and Davidson, 71. Of the better-known slow bowlers, too, Peel and Briggs averaged 49 and 52 respectively; and among the speed men, Woods averaged 46, Jessop 47, Woodcock 48, Hirst 48, and Tate as much as 67. Of those not included in the list by reason of their not having taken as many as 50 wickets, it may be mentioned that Spofforth (who, however, only played in three matches on bowlers’ wickets) had a wicket every 22 balls; Lilley averaged 31, W. W. Read 34, and W. M. Bradley, 39. And, turning to the averages at the end, we find that Wootton needed nearly 100 balls for every wicket, L. C. H. Palairet 90, and George Bean 80. Adverting to the other part of the table, one notices that Richardson, Haigh, Tate and C. J. Kortright bowled down a large majority of their wickets. All these, of course, are fast bowlers. Of the other “ speed merchants,” one is surprised to find that Woodcock had a majority of “ caught.” Jones, theAustralian, who bowled short for catches in the slips so often, bowled down only five more wickets than were caught off him. Mold’s figures were 82bowled, 66 caught—a smallermajority for the bowled than one would have expected. Others who had a majority of wickets bowled were J. T. Hearne, Attewell, Hayward, and G. L. Jessop. Two slow bowlers who stand together in the table-J. C. Hartley and Tyler—had only 16 of 79, and 15 of 76 respec­ tively, bowled. J. T. Hearne come3 first in number of wickets caught, but that is by reason of his majority in the total; the biggest proportion of “ caught” belongs to C. L. Townsend, J. C. Hartley and Briggs. The number of “ c &b ’s ” made by Trumble, Attewell, Tyler, and Jack Hearne is i somewhat remarkable. I have separated the N E X T ISSUE, T HUR SDA Y , J A N U A R Y 28.