Cricket 1896

A pril 9, 1896. G E IC K E T : A W E E K L Y RECORD OF THE GAME . 55 to take part in a club match and bis recall by the executive of this club gave rise to a great deal of unpleasantness. To still further reduce their chances they lost the toss and had to field out while Lord Hawke and his men completed a record score for the district. O’Brien and Lohmann were dismissed c >mparatively cheaply, but a stand by Hayward, with Fry and Hill as partners effectually disputed any hopes that may have been expected by their dismissal. The latter stayed till lunch, when, with the total 127, he returned one tamely to Roe. His otherwise brilliant sixty-four included nine 4’s and three 3’s. Hayward was then fifty-four, not out, with three wickets down. On resuming Hill and Hayward augmented the figures to 249, when, after batting a trifle over three hours, Hayward’s grand innings of 122 came to a close by a catch in the long field by Routledge. No chance marred the display, the chief hits of which were a 6, fifteen 4’s, five 3’s, and eleven 2’s. Hill, who completed his fifty in an hour and a half, was bowled by Sinclair at 291. He gave two chances at sixteen and thirty- seven. Woods left 13 later; and when stumps were drawn for the day, the total stood at 355 for seven wickets. On the following day (March 3), Wright and Bromley-Davenport advanced the figures to 461, making 154 for the wicket, when the latter was grandly caught for a merry eighty-four, in which were sixteen 4’s. Wright was the last to leave at 482, his seventy-onebeing characterised by caution and including nine 4’s and five 3’s. The South African innings opened well, and 70 was put on the board by Sinclair and Lieut. Poore for the loss of one wicket, when Lohmann going on beat the latter first ball for a useful twenty. Sinclair was as it proved top scorer, leaving with the total four for 77. Few of the others played Lohmann with any degree of con­ fidence, and though the hundred appeared with half the wickets still in hand, the sidewereall outeventuallyforlol. Shep- stone, a very fair all round player, shaped well for his twenty-one. Llewellyn rendered him some assistance, the ninth wicket adding 31. Lohmann came out with the splendid analysis of nine wickets for 28 runs—on a batsman’s pitch, too. Following on, Routledge was finely caught in the slips before a run had been scored, and before the close of play Poore and Frank Heame had also been sent back with the total 68 for two wickets. On the following morning, Sinclair and Halliwell faced the bowling of Woods and Lohmann, and in the former’s first over, Sinclair was out to'a doubtful catch off a a bad stroke, it being questionable whether the ball was held sufficiently long. With these two parted, the resistance offered was but feeble. Halliwell saw 100 go up for 5 wickets, but 16 later was well taken at mid-on for a capital forty-one, in which were a 5, and six 4’s. None of the others did anything against Heseltine (5 for 38) and Lohmann (3 for 43),“and the last batsman leaving with the total 134, South Africa thus suffered a crushing defeat by an innings and 197 runs. Score Rnd analysis:— L ord H awke ’ s T eam . Sir T. C. O’Brien, b G. Rowe ................. 0 G. Lohmann, c F. Hearne, b Sinclair .. 2 Hayward, c Smith, b Rowe.........................122 Mr. 0. B. Fry, c and b Rowe ....................64 Mr. A. J. L. Hill, b Sinclair ....................65 Mr. S. M. J. Woods, c Rowe, b Sinclair... 32 Lord Hawke, lbw, b Sinclair .................. 4 Mr. C. W. Wright, b Frank .................71 Mr. H. B. Bromley- Davenport, c John­ son, b Rowe ..........84 Mr. C. Heseltine, lbw, b Rowe ................. 0 Butt, not out .......... 8 B 22,lb 4,w 1,nb 3... 30 To al .. ...482 South African XI. First innings. T. Routledge. b Woods ... 14 J. H. Sinclair, c and b Loh­ mann ...............................40 Lieut. R. M. Poore, b Loh­ mann ...............................20 F.Hearne,c Butt,bLohmann 0 E. A. Halliwell, c O’Brien, b Lohmann........................13 C. L. Johnson, b Lohmann 3 G. H. Shepstone.b Lohmann 21 F. Smith, b Lohmann......... 4 W. Frank, c and b Lohmann 5 C. Llewellyn, c Heseltine, b Lohmann ........................24 G. A. Rowe, not o u t .......... 0 W 2, nb 5 .......... 7 T otal.................151 Second innings, c sub, b Heseltine 0 c sub b Woods .. 29 b Heseltine..........10 c Heseltine, b Lohmann ... 16 c Lord Hawke, b Heseltine ... 41 runout . .. 7 cFry, b Lohmann 9 not ou t................11 c Hill,b Lohmann 2 c Lohmann, b Heseltine.......... 4 b Heseltine.......... 0 Lb 3, nb 2 ... 5 Total......... 134 BOWLING.ANALYSIS. L ord H awke ’ s T eam . O. M. R W . O. M.R. W. 49 9115 5 1 Llewellyn 14 3 71 0 35 6118 4 Johnson... 28 12 57 0 11 ‘3 352 11 Shepstone 20 8 39 0 Johnson delivered three no-balls and Sinclair one wide. Rowe. . Sinclair Frank S outh A frica . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W . O. M. R. W. Heseltine .......... 9 0 29 0 .......... 16 ‘2 3 38 5 Woods................. 20 2 74 1 ........... 6 1 27 1 Lohmann ..........14 2 6 28 9 ........... 17 4 43 3 Davenport.......... 3 0 13 0 ........... Hayward ... 4 1 21 0 Heseltine delivered one wide and three no-balls> Davenport three no-balls, and Woods one wide and one no-ball. The following sores of a hundrel were made for and against Lord Hawke’s Team:— FOR. C. B. Fry, v. Pietermaritzburg (15), January 18 153 C. B. Fry. v. Cape Colony (13), January 1 .........148 A. J. L. Hill, v. South Africa (11), March 21 ... 124 Hayward, v. South Africa (11), March 2 ..........122 Sir T. C. O’ Brien, v. Pietermaritzburg (13), January 18 .....................................................118 A. J. L. Hdl, v. Midlands District (22), Feb. 5... 102 AGAINST. Lieut. R. M. Poore, Pietermaritzburg (15) v. Lord Hawke’s Team, January 1 8 .................112 Lieut. R. M. Poore, Natal (15) v. Lord Hawke’s Team, January 25 ...................................... 107* * Signifies not out. In a match between a second of Mel­ bourne and East Melbourne on Saturday Feb. loth on Melbourne Grtmmar School ground, four of the latter were stumped off successive balls from Thomas. The New Zealand Cricket Council has decided to send a team to Australia next season, provided that the terms offered by the Australasian Association are satisfactory, and that £200 is collected in New Zealand towards the expenses. G ROUND MAN for Cricket and Lawn Tennis Field.—Apply by letter only, giving references, “ St. John’s, Bowes Road, Palmer’s Green, N. YORKSHIRE. MAY. .4, 5, 6. Manchester, v. Lancashire. 4 and 5. Worksop, Colts v. Notts Colts. 7, 8, 9. B.rmingnam, v. Warwickshire. 11, 12, 13. Taunton, v. Somerset. 13 and 14. Hull, N. & E. Riding v. West Riding. 14, 15, 16. Bristol, v. Gloucestershire. 18, 19, 20. Bradford, v. Sussex. 21, 22, 23. Lord’s, v. Middlesex. 25, 26, 27. Sheffield, v. Australians. 28, 29, 30. Leeds, v. Kent. JUNE. 1, 2, 3. Nottingham, v. Notts. 4, 5. 6. Cambridge, v. Cambridge University. 8, 9,10. Sheffield, v. Surrey. 11, 12, 13. Bradford, v. Essex. 15, 16, 17. Leeds, v. Australians. 17and 18. Wakefield, West Riding v. N. &E. Riding. 18,19, 20. Leicester, v. Leicestershire. 22and 23. Bi-rnsley, v. Durham. 25, 26, 27. Derby, v. Derbyshire. 29, 30 and July 1. Bradford, v. Australians. JULY. 2, 3, 4. Sheffield, v. Derbyshire 6, 7, 8. Leeds, v. Warwickshire 10, 11. Huddersfield, v. Notts 14,15. Leyton, v. Essex 17, 18. Southampton, v. Hampshire 21, 22. Leeds, v. Lancashire 24, 25. Dewsbury, v. Somerset 23, 29. Sheffield, v. Gloucestershire 31, and Aug. 1. Oval, v. Surrey (G. Lohmann’s Benefit) AUGUST. 3, 4. York, Gentlemen v. Players of Yorkshire , 7, 8. Harrogate, v. Hampshire 11, 12. Sunderland, v. Durham , 14, 15. Scarborough, v. Leicestershire , 18, 19. Bradford, v. Middlesex , 21, 22. Brighton, v. Sussex , 25, 26. Catford Bridge, v. Kent to September 5. Scarborough Festival GLOUCESTERSHIRE. MAY. 1 and 2. County Ground, Bristol, v. Colts. 7, 8, 9. County Ground, Bristol, v. Somerset>hire. 14, 15, 16. County Ground, Bristol, v. Yorkshire. 18, lti, 20. Gravesend, v. Kent. 21, 22, 23. Oval, v. Surrey. 25, 2">, 27. Brighton, v. Sussex. JUNE. 4, 5, 6. County Ground, Bristol, v. Australians. 8, 9, 10. Birmingham, v. Warwickshire. 15, 19, 20. Lord’s, v. Middlesex. 25, 26,27. County Ground, Bristol, v. Lancashire. 29, 30, July 1. Taunton, v. Somersetshire. JULY. ,9, 10,11. County Ground, Bristol, v. Warwickshire. 20, 21, 22. Nottingham, v. Nottinghamshire. 27, 28, 29. Sheffield, v. Yorkshire. 30, 31, Aug. 1. Manchester, v. Lancashire. AUGUST. 3, 4, 5. County Ground. Bristol, v. Sussex. 6, 7, 8. Clifton College, v. Middlesex. 11,12, County Ground, Bristol, University and Public Schools v. XI. of the County. 13, 14,15. County Ground, Bristol, v. Nottingham­ shire. 17,18, 19. Cheltenham College, v. Kent. 20, 21, 22. Cheltenham College, v. Australians. 24, 25, 26. Clifton College, v. Surrey. TH E AU S T R A L IAN CR ICKET COUNC IL. The Council met on Saturday, February 8th, at Sydney, and adopted the report of the committee appointed to select an Australian Eleven to proceed to England. The names of the team were approve!. It was decided to request the Selection Committee to pick a fourteenth man. The meeting was held in private, but it is understood that there was a general agreement that the fourteenth man should be either Lyons or Albert Trott. An executive committee was appointed, con­ sisting of the manager, the captain for the time being, and H. Trumble. The resignation of Mr. John Portus, secretary of the Council, was accepted with regret, and Mr. John Cresswell (S.A.) was ap­ pointed to fill the vacancy.