Cricket 1897

Nov. 25, 1897. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OP THE GAME. 457 o f that team gave a number o f addit ional matches, so that the decrease would not appear to be in any way due to general smaller scoring. Twenty years ago the attainment of a four-figure aggregate of runs in first-class matches was almost enough to make a roan famous for life in the cricket world ; ten years ago the distinction was still an uncommon one; but to-day, with the enormous multipli­ cation of fixture? and the universal im­ provement in wickets, it is far more easily won. Nevertheless, it is still a great distinction ; and there is not a man in the list for 1897 who is not a really fine batsman, though there may be a consider­ able difff rence of degree between the best man in it and the worst. There were, as I have already said, 29 “ four-figutists” in 1897; 39 (includ­ ing seven Austral'am) in 1896; 28 in 1895; 11 in 1894; 21 (including seven Australians) in 1893; 9 in 1892; only 4 in 1891; 9 (including four Australians) in 1890; 5 in- 18S9; and 6 (including three Australians) in 18SS. Thus in the past ten seasons 161 such totals have been registered. No fewer than 93 of these are shared among only 21 players. Here are a few particulars of the doings of these 21 front-rank men. Dr. W. G. Grace scored four figures in every year of the ten, except 1891 ; over 2,000 in two seasons. Robert Abel, in every year but two (1890 and 1893); 2,000 in 1895, 1896 and 1897. William Gunn, in every year but two (1888 and 1895, his total 920 in each of these seasons); over 2,000 in 1893. Arthur Shrewsbury. Albert Ward, A. E. Stoddart (over 2,000 in 1893), and P. S. Jackson, each five times. W. W. Read, G. H. S. Trott, W. L Murdoch, W. Newham, Frank Sugg, and J. T. Brown, each four times. K. S. Ranjitsinhji (2780—a record total in 1896), William Brockwell, L. C. H. Palairet, J. W. Tunnicliffe, J. R. Mason, Tom Hayward, George Davidson and William Storer, each three timfs, the last-named five all in 1895, 1896 and 1897. Had H. W. Bainbridge made but two more runs in his list innings in 1897 his name would have been added to the goodly list. Setting aside the seven Australians, those who reached the 1,000 in 1896 and failed to do so this year were H. W. Bainbiidge, C. J. Burnup, Chatterton, Killick, A. O. Jones, Sir T. C. O’Brien, L. C. H. Palairet. Peel, Pougher, Shrewsbury, A. E. Stoddart, S. M. J. Woods, and Captain Wynyard. In the cases of some of these the cause was undoubtedly partial loss of form ; but absence (in some cases due to acci dents, in some, to other causes) duringpart of the season handicapped at least half of the players mentioned. The names which appear in the 1897 list and not in that of 1896 are those of Baldwin, G. Brann, J. A. Dixon, K. J. Key, G. D. Jessop, C. McGahey, W. L. Murdoch, Tyldesley, Wainwiight and P. F. Warner. With the exceptions of tbe veteran skippers of Surrey and Suss<x, none of these had previously secured a four-figure aggregate in any season. Eight batsmen scored between 900 and 1000, so that the extra fixtures consequent upon an Australian visit would probably have caused at least eight further additions to the table. Tbe eight were: H. W. Bainbridge (998), Bean (980), A. C. MacLaren (974). Barton (971), P. Perrin (964), Lilley (945), Shrewsbury (944) and N. F. Druce (928). Barton surely deseives some sympathy, for had Hamp­ shire v. M.C.C. been ranked first-class (and I still fail to see why it should not have been) he would have figured in the list. Thirteen batsmen snored between 800 and 900 ; eleven over 700 ; fourteen over 600 ; and nineteen over 500. Thus ninety-four players scored 500 runs or more dun'ng the season. In 1896 the number who did so reached ninety-nine. Abel for the third year in succession topped the 2,000 runs—an unique fact, for not evenW.G. can showthree such consecutive totals. The Indian Prince failed to secure 2,000 this season ; tu t his aggregate was only 60 short of that number, and another innings would very likely have placed him with Abel. As it is, the little man stands alone as a 2,000 scorer in 1897. During the last three seasons “ the Prince” has scored 6,495 runs, “ the Guv’nor” 6,374, and “ the Doctor” 6,013 ! THE SCORERS OP 1,000 BUNS. 1 R. Abel. June 24. Surrey v.Warwksh.,Birmingham 2 K. S. Ranjitsinhji, July 3, Sx. v. Mdx..Eastbourne 3 J. T. Brown. July 13. Yorks v. Sussex, Sheffield 4 E. Wainwright. July 13, Yorks v. Sussex, Sheffield 5 G. R. Baker, July 21, Lancs v. Yorks, Bradford 6 G. Brann, July 22, Sussex v. Hants, Brighton 7 T. Hayward, July 22. Surrey v. Kent, Oval 8 F. S. Jackson, July 23. Yorks v. Somerset. Leeds 9 W . G. Grace, July 30. Gif s. v. Yorks, Uarrognte 10 G. H. Hirst, July 31, Yorks v. Glos., Harropate 11 A . Ward, Aug. 2, Lancs v. Kent, Cnnterbury 12 C. Baldwin, Aug. 2, Surrey v. Notts, Oval 13 J.W.Tunnicliffe, Aug.2,Yks.v.Wwk..Birmingham 14 J. R. Mason, Aug. 3, Kent v. Lancs. Canterbury 15 G. L. Jessop, Aug. 3. Glos. v. Sussex, Bristol 16 D. Denton, Aug. 5, Yorks v. Kent, Canterbury 17 W . L. Murdoch, Aug. 5, Sussex v. Smt.. Taunton 18 W . Brockwell, Ang 9, Surrey v. Hants. Oval 19 W . Gunn, Aug. 9, Notts v. DerVy, Nottingham 20 J. A. Dixon, Aug. 12, Notts v. Glos., Cheltenham 21 K. J. Key, Aug. 16, Surrey v. Kent, Beckenham 22 W . Storer. Aug. 18, Derby v. Leics.. Derby 23 J. T. Tyldesley, Ax;g. 19. Lancs v. Surrey. Oval 24 P. F. Warner, Aug. 19, Mdx. v. Notts Nottingham 25 F. H. Su?g, Aug. 20, Lancs v. Surrey, Oval 26 C. McGahey, Aug. 23, Essex v. Bants, Leyton 27 W . Newham, Aug. 25, Sussex v. Kent. Brighton 28 W . G. Quaife, Aug. 30.Wwk.v.Derbv.Birmingham 29 G. Davidson, Sept. 10, North v. South, Hastings Abel scored his 2000th run at Hastings on September 13, playing for the Players v. Gentlemen. J.N.P. (To be continued .) WESTMINSTER SCHOOL. Matches p layed. 11; w on , 4 ; draw n, 2 ; lost, 5. BATTING AVERAGES. No. Times Most of not Total in an inns. out. runs. inns. Aver. R. vV. N. Blaker... ... 15 ... 2 ... 605 ... 85 ..., 4f/53 R. E. M o r e ........... ... 13 ... 0 ... 338 ..,. 96 ... 26 00 F. Young .......... ... 12 ... 1 ... 226 ... 5S ..., 18*83 E. A. E. Cotterill ... 14 . ... 0 ... *20 . .. 50 ... 1571 U . R. Flack.......... ... 15 ... 2 ... 201 ... 38 ..., 1546 C. E. L. Johnston ... 9 ... 3 ... 78 .. 31 .. 13*C0 H. R. Lonsdale ... ... 12 ,.. 1 ... 136 .,.. 55 ... 12 36 W . C. Stevens ... ... 13 ... 0 ... 133 ... 46 .... 10'2'i B. H. W illett .. ... 11 ... 1 ... 70 ... 24 ..., 7 (0 S. M. Anderson ... ... 8 ,... 2 ... 39 .. 23*.. . 660 F. A. S. Gwatken ... 9 .. 4 ... 16 ... 5 .. . 3 33 Signifies not out. BOWLING AVERAGES. Overs. Mdns. Run?. Wkts. Aver. R. E. More .......... 292 1 . 97 ... 695 ... 61 .. . 11-39 F. Youngr ......... 52*2 .. . 6 ... 150 ... 9 ... 16 66 C. E. L. Johnston.., 17 . 3 ... £6 ... 3 ... 18 66 W . C. Stevens .. . 121 1 ... 19 .... 890 ... 19 ... 25-26 E. N. R. Blaktr .. . 44 2 .. .. 5 . 149 ... 2 .. 74 50 H. R. F lack .......... 104 . 16 ... 867 ... 3 .. .122-33 S. M. Anderson .. . 5 . .. 1 .. . 12 . .. 0 .. . — M R . STODDART’S TEAM IN AU STRA L IA . THE SOUTH AUSTRALIAN MATCH. (First of the tour.) REM ARKABLE INNINGS B Y 0 . H ILL AND RANJITSIN H JI. Played at Adelaide on October 28,29, 31, and November 1. Drawn. With an interval of but three clear days between the time of landing in Aus­ tralia and their first match the visitors could hardly have been expected to do themselves justice. But although their bowling on the first dny was not quite up to the mark their batting left nothing to be desired, while the fieliiing was good, and when the match was drawn (for even in Australia first-class matches need not be played to a conclusion) they had mucH the best of ft. The feature of 1he first day’s play was the splendid batting of Hill. He went in first wicket down before a run had been scored and just before the time for drawing stumps com­ pleted his second hundred,afteran innings which was in every way worthy of the highest praise. It is true that the bowlers, who had been able to get si little practice, were not as accurate as usual, but it would take some batting to make a hundred— not to say two hundred—against Richard­ son and Co., even if they had gone straight to the cricket ground and bowled immediately after such a long voyage. Except for Hill’s batting, there was nothing remarkable about the innings until Fred Jaivis came in. At that time five wickets were down for less than 200, and matters looked hopeful for the field, but when play ended there were still only five wickets down, whereas the score had advanced to 361. Thus the prospects for the morrow were not exhilarating for the Englishmen. Wh< n the game was re­ sumed on Friday the Eoglishmen had to do without their captain, who was ill with influenza. Contrary to all anticipation the innings was soon over. Hill was out before he had scored another run. Jarvis soon followed him, and the rest did so little that, after such a wonderful start, the innings only produced 409—that is to say, the last five wickets fell for only 48. As the first colonial batsman to fall was out for a duck, so MacL\ren, who accom­ panied Mason to the wickets when Mr. Stoddart’s team went in, failed to score. Then Ranjitsinhji, aided by a good deal of luck, and Mason made a stand which very quickly raised the score from 10 to 137, when Mason was l.b.w. for a very fine innings of 78. Hayward did but little. Wainwright, however, stayed with R in - jitsinliji uutil stumps were drawn, when 263 was up for three wickets, so that there was a fair chance that the Colonial score would be about equalled. Ranjit- sinbji was not out 137. On the following morning he continued to miike runs and continued to be favoured by good fortune until at last, when within easy rpach of his two hundred, he was very finely caught at short-leg. Scorer plajed a very valu­ able innings of 84, and J. T. Hearne shows d the spectators that 1e is not merely a bowler, and thanki to hi* 1 ng stanj with Stuer lie total excce.’ id th-t N E X T ISSUE, THURSDAY , D ECEM B E R 30.