Cricket 1897

36 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. M a r c h 25, 1897. Remember what Turner and Perris meant in the early days of the tour of McDon­ nell’s men in 1888, what great things the pair did again in 1890. And now Turner can scarcely get a wicket, while Ferris seems to have dropped out of first-class cricket altogether. A pity, too. for “ the white-haired b o y ” of the Sixth Australian team was no mean batsman in later days; in fact, when he went back home I cherished hopes that he would astonish his old friends by his im­ provement in batting, He did not. One innings for South Australia he played, failing to score, and soon after gave up his idea of living in Adelaide and returned to Sydney, where he appears to have gone into retirement. Well, tempora mutantur, and the rest of it. Ten years ago it was Turner and Ferris, now it is McKibbin and Howell. To few men isit given to say, asthe great Or.G. and the greater W.G. might say: “ Men may come, and men may go, But we go on for ever! ” I see that Frank Laver, the well- known Melbourne batsman, is a member of the baseball team which Mr. Musgrove is taking to America. Three or four yeirs ago it looked almost a certainty that Laver and Reedman, the Adelaide man, would sooner or later find places in an Australian team for England. But younger players have forged ahead since then, and it is scarcely likely now that we shall ever see either of them here. Indeed, Charles McLeod, a player of unquestioned first- class ability, who was not far from getting a place in the last team, will have to put his best foot fore­ most if he is to have any chance when the next is chosen. For, unless there is an unexpected declination in the play of some of the younger members of the Ninth Team, there are hardly likely to be many places for new men to fill, and Howell and young Noble, even so far in advance, look to be making strong running for two of them. Our old friend “ Starting Price ” Jones is now a full-blown Queenslander, and was on tour for a long time with the rest of the Queensland team in New Zealand lately. I have not seen all the scores of the tour; but I have noticed several occasions on which S.P. has done well, and it may easily happen that with the change of colony a new lease of cricket life may have begun for him, as in Percy McDonnell’s case. Donahoo, a well- known Victorian player, who never quite came up to expectations in the trials he had for his mother-colony, is also a mem­ ber of the Queensland team n ow ; and perhaps after all the Bananalanders will not miss poor Percy Mac and Coningham the restless so much as one would have expected. They seem to have done very well in New Zealand—where, by the way, Fisher, the left-hand bowler of whom the Australian team thought so highly, did one great performance against them—and the experience gained during the tour will undoubtedly serve them in stead in future intercolonials. There are some real cricket enthusiasts in Brisbane, and one hopes to see Queensland forging to 1he front in the near future. Harry Graham is going to West Aus­ tralia, to follow his profession of dentist. Doubtless this by no means implies that he intends giving up cricket, unlucky though he has been of late. We may hear of his doing great things for Westralia before long. But it looks as though he would have very little chance of being chosen for a team for England again. Until South Australia managed to get return matches on with both of the other great colonies, even the Adelaide contingent scarcely had justice done them when teams were chosen ; and however good a man in Brisbane, Hobart, Perth, or Dunedin may be he has very little chance of getting a place. I say Dunedin ; but I am not quite sure that, strictly speaking, New Zealanders would be eligible for an Australian team. However, I have very little doubt that if one of them could prove himself good enough, no prejudice of this kind would prevent his being chosen. It is just in proof of their ability that the difficulty for men of the less famous cricket colonies lies. However good a man’s performances may be in club matches, it is not on them he is j udged, but on intercolonial form ; and when a colony plays but one intercolonial a season the first performance by one of her men is apt to be looked upon as a mere flash in the pan. My friend “ Point,” of the Adelaide Observer, gives the following as the com­ plete figures of the Australian team in all the matches of their tour; and though their appearance now may seem somewhat belated, doubtless many will find them of interest. There are several changes in the positions of the men as compared with those they held when the English part of the tour was completed. Gregory des­ cends from first place in the batting table to fourth; Giffen comes up from sixth to second; Iredale goes up a step; Hill down two; Trott takes Giffen’s place; and Darling is at the head of affairs. In the bowling Jones just scrapes in ahead of Trumble, andTrottand Giffen exchange places. But Trumble is the only man with 200 wickets to his credit; and Dar­ ling alone tops the 2,000 runs. THE AU STRALIAN ELEVEN AVERAGES. (All Matches.) (From the Adelaide Observer.) J. Darling G. G iffen........... F. A . Iredale ... S. E. Gregory... C. Hill ........... G. H. S. Trott... H. Donnan H. Trumble ... H. Graham J. J. Kelly ... C. J. Eady E. Jones .......... A. E. Johns ... T. R. McKibbin T. R. McKibbin E. Jones ........... H. Trumble ... G. H. 8. Trott G. G iffen ........... C. J. Eady H. Donnan B at TING. Inns. i out. R™ - Aver. High. score. .. 70 ... 1 ... 2,100 ... 30-43 ... 194 .. 62 ... 2 ... 1,825 ... 3033 ... 130 .. 68 ... 3 ... 1,698 ... 26 12 ... 171 .. 65 . 2 ... 1,643 ... 26-07 ... 154 .. 62 ... 4 ... 1,500 ... 2586 ... 130 .. 73 ... 6 ... 1,640 ... 24-47 ... 143 .. 50 .. 2 ... 1,057 ... 22-20 ... 167 .. 60 ... 15 ... 900 ... 20-00 ... 54 .. 46 ... 2 ... 767 ... 1743 ... 96 .. 61 ... 10 ... 702 ... 1712 ... 45 .. 39 ... 5 ... 482 ... 14-17 ... 42 .. 57 ... 7 605 ... 1210 ... 40 .. 16 ... 7 . 89 ... 988 ... 31 .. 49 ... 17 ... 259 ... 8 89 ... 28 Bow LING. Overs, Runs. Wkts. Aver. . 879 1,885 ... 155 .. . 12-16 .. 1,148 2,416 ... 181 .. . 13-34 .. 1,410 2,873 ... 210 .... 13-68 .. 521 1,409 ... 94 .. . 14-98 .. 1,162 2,865 ... 159 .... 18-01 423 1,066 ... 53 .... 20-11 130 275 ... 13 ... 21-15 “ Honour where honour is due.” Just as I set down the last of these figures I see that “ Point,” like the honest fellow he is, gives the credit of compiling them to “ Not out ” of the Referee. In my January article I referred, if I did not actually say, that Notts and Hampshire had never met on the tented field. Mr. Ashley-Cooper sends me the score of the one match in which they have met, somewhere in the forties, if I remember rightly, but I have mislaid his letter. I fancy the score is given in “ Scores and Biographies.” What a wonderful service to lovers of the game and its history that compilation of Mr. Haygarth’s i s ! Something of the sort sadly needs doing for Australia. Some time ago I had a letter from C. P. Moody (“ Point” ), of Adelaide, in whichheannouncedagreat find—thescores of two matches on even terms between Victoria and Tasmania, as far back as 1870 —whereas everyone appears to have believed that the two colonies met for the first time in the later eighties. And “ Point,” as some of the readers of this causerie will know, is perhaps, the most enthusiastic and best-informed of all students of Australian cricket history—- which goes to show, as I said, how much a Haygarth is needed in Australia, for if Mr. Moody was absolutely unaware of these matches for so long, how much danger there is that other matters of interest may be utterly lost ? “ Point’s ” own “ Australian Cricket and Cricketers ” is the nearest approach to a history of the game down under that has ever been published ; but I know well that “ Point ” himself recognises how far that capital little book is from being an Australian “ Scores and Biographies.” Some few of my readers may be interested in a detail or two about the two Victoria v. Tasmania games men­ tioned. The full scores were not contained in Mr. Moody’s hurried note but here are the particulars he gives : At Melbourne in 1869, Victoria scored 409; Tasmania, 18 and 131. Phillips made 115, Egglestone, 90, Kelly, 63, and Campbell, 52. Wills took three wickets for 16, and Cosstick six for one in the first innings of Tasmania. At Melbourne in 1871, Victoria, 129 and 11 for no wicket; Tasmania, 103 and 36. Reid six wickets for five, second innings of Tasmania. I don’t know who the Phillips was who made the century (then a much rarer happening than now) in the first match of the two, but one recognises some of the other names. Kelly was T. J. D. Kelly, the “ Little Wonder,” smartest of points and a very fine bats- man, who did great things for Victoria in his day, and who died a year or two back. Campbell was the old Oxonian with the queer front name—what was it ? —Dalmahoy, I think, who ran up the century for fifteen of the Bohemian Club against Lord Harris’s team. Cosstick— but anyone who knows anything about the earlier days of the Australian cricket knows of San Cosstick. Was it not he