Cricket 1897

A p r i l 8, 1897. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 55 T H E A L L J A M A I C A M A T C H . (T w elfth o f T ou r. P layed at K in g sto n ,M arch 13, 15. M r. P riestley’ s T eam w on h y an innings and three runs. A ll J amaica . A. M. Byng, b W oods.......... 9 b Stoddart....10 B. L. Verley, b Stoddart ... 1 b Stoddart... ... 8 R. K. Herbert, run out ... 2 c Stoddart, b W il­ liams................ 1 A. V. Acton, b W oods ... 9 b W illiams...... 2 W.G.Farquharson, bW oods 2 b W illiams...... 3 C. F. Poole, e Bush, b Stod- c P a la i r e t , b dart ................................... 1 Stoddart........ 3 R. H. Drury, b W oods . . 0 c Barratt, b Stod- d a rb ................ 6 H.Castle, lbw, b W oods ... 0 n otou t........... ... 12 F. L. Pearce, lbw, bWoods 17 c Stoddart, b W il­ liams.......... ... 4 C. R. Chandler, not out ...13 c Bush, b W il­ liams.......... ... 7 R. K. Healing, b Williams 0 b W illiams...... 0 G.V,Livingstone,b Williams 0 b Stoddart...... 8 Byes ................... 4 B 8, lb 1 .. 9 Total ... ... 58 T o ta l......68 M e . P riestley ’ s T kam . *C.A.Beldam, c Chand­ ler, b Healing......18 J. Leigh, run out ... 7 A. Priestley, c Byng, b Chandler ........ 2 W .W illiams, b Yerley 18 Dr. Elliott, not out ... 36 R.P. Lewis, b Healing 1 B 6, lb 2 ............ 8 R . C. N. Palairet, Chandler................... 8 F. W . Bush, b Living­ stone .......................... 9 A.E. Stoddart, c Byng, . b Chandler ........... 9 R. Leigh - Barrett, c Verley ,bLivingstone 0 H. T. Stanley, b Byng 13 S. M. J. W oods, b Chandler Total .129 Stoddart.. Woods .. Bush......... Williams.. A ll J amaica . O. M. R. W . ... 17 9 20 2 ... ... 18 9 23 5 ... ... 4-4 1 6 1 . . . 2 0 5 2 .................. 18 L.-Barratt 1 M r. P riestley ’ s T eam . O. Byng ... 7 Verley ... 3 Farquharsonl O. M. R. W . 25211 29 5 8 4 8 0 M. R. W . 2 19 1 1 11 1 0 4 0 are the results of O. M. R. W ^handler... 23 8 39 4 Livingstone24 11 28 2 Healing ... 11’2 4 20 2 The following matches to date:— Jan. 13, 14—Bridgetown, v. All Barbados (lost by an innings and 41 runs). Jan. 15,16—Bridgetown, v. St. Vincent (won by an innings and 139 runs). Jan. 18,19—Bridgetown, v. All Barbados (won by three wickets). Jan. 21, 22, 23—Bridgetown, v. A ll Barbados (lost by 136 runs). Jan. 28, 29, 30—Antigua, v. Antigua (won by an innings and 96 runs). Feb. 1, 2—St. Kitts, v. St. Kitts (won by an innings and 192 runs). Feb. 6, 8—Bridgetown, v. Army and Navy, (Bar- 1 ados) (won by an innings and 11 runs). Feb. 12, 13—Port of Spain, v. Queen’s Park C.C. (drawn). Feb. 15, 16,18—Port of Spain, v. A ll W est Indies (lost by three wickets). Feb. 19, 20, 22—Port of Spain, v. All Trinidad (lost bv ten wickets). Feb. 25, 26, 27—Port of Spain, v. All Trinidad (return) (lost by eight wickets). March 13, 15—Kingston, v. All Jamaica (won by an innings and 3 runs). PRESENT D A Y CR ICKET . By G eorge L a c y . ( Continued from page 32.) That the batting is not so attractive I thiuk there can be no two opinions. Hits nowadays are almost confined to drives, snicks, cuts, and occasional pulls. The draw, the wonderful and varied leg play <>f Daft, Buller, Mortlock, Carpenter, Jupp, and hosts of others, and the sharp leg-hit are completely things of the past, and the square leg-hit is rarely seen. Even the cutting is not what it used to be. Most batsmen seem afraid of off- balls, asthough they doubted their ability to keep them out of harm’s w ay; and as for that lightning cut right off the bails, in which Caffyn and Tom Humphrey ex­ celled, I have failed to see an instance of it for a long time. For one hit in vogue now there used to be three, and those left have not improved in their aspects re­ garded as spectacles. In fact it is quite useless to gainsay that,batting is more monotonous than it used to be, and for my own part I often find it quite weari­ some to watch. Even when the scoring is fast the hitting lacks variety, being usually a succession of low drives, snicks which often look more lucky than dex­ terous, and occasional cautious cuts. If anyone could be found who would com­ pare favourably an over played by Shrewsbury to Richardson, or by Abel to Hearne, with one by Caffyn to Jackson, or by Daft to Willsher, all I can say is that our notions of attractive cricket differ. The fact is, that cricket has become less of a sport and more of a business. A cricket match is no longer a game, but a strife. Every man engaged wears a settled look of determination, and instead of the merriment of the past we see nothing but sober sedateness and fixity of purpose. I wonder how the antics of Tom Lockyer or George Griffith would be received to-day. Some in the crowd might roar, but one can easily fancy how our sagacious reporters would chide them for their frivolity, and loftily explain for their edification what was the whole duty of man upon the cricket-field. Instead of cracking jokes, or indulging in acro­ batic performances not strictly a part of the art of cricket, they are thinking of their averages, or perhaps worse, of that little bet they have got on, and would not dare to take a back over a comrade, or throw the ball from long-leg to long- off deep while waiting for next man in, for fear they should strain some of their highly trained muscles, or disparage the dignity of their cloth. But though the game is more of a business than it used to be, still I do not think that cricket is so keen, except on the rare occasions of very big matches. One sees more slackness in an ordinary county match nowadays than even in an A.E.E. match against a twenty-two in a most remote district of the country five and thirty years ago. One cannot con­ ceive of Caffyn, or Jack Lillywhite, or John Smith, or Daft, or Griffith, or Jupp as being otherwise than on the alert; but, although there are conspicuous ex­ ceptions, like Lohmann, most of our prominent professionals, aye, and amateurs too, often appear to think the whole thing an ineffable bore. I think this one of the worst symptoms of present- day cricket, and the cause of it is without doubt the influence of the pernicious County Championship. In this compe­ tition the stronger counties usually take it for granted that they are going to beat the weaker ones, and, regarding the whole affair as a business one, play in a lifeless manner which is a mere travesty of what cricket should be. True, sometimes, when the strong side is composed of com­ paratively new men they take advantage of the occasion and pile up a huge score, but in the field they become listless and slack. If they enjoyed the game more for itself, and regarded it less as a business, the cricket would be infinitely more attractive. But, as it is, their business is simply to win the match, and in playing some of the weaker counties they all say to themselves : “ Oh, bother. Jack, or Tom, or Bill is sure to make enough runs, I ’ll take it easy; ” and take it easy they do, not meaning to get out for small scores, but to get runs off the loose balls without putting them­ selves to any particular exertion. In this kind of cricket of course they are sure to come to grief, for even the worst bowling will always prove too good for careless play. If the game were played on its own merits, and for its own sake instead of forming one of a series the final result of which was the business of the season, a very different state of things would obtain. Even when the opposing side is a strong one, it is not always precisely keenness that is displayed, but'determina- tion of an almost'acrimonious'and trucu­ lent type, quick to take advantage, and quite devoid of that chivalrous bonhomie one would prefer to see. The ethics of league football are fast entering into the County Championship contest, and unless something is speedily done to stop this process the degradation of the game as a public spectacle*will be complete. The fact of the matter is that the County Championship has introduced a new andmischievous featureinto the game. The raison d'etre of a cricket match is no longer the display of excellent cricket, but the mere winning of the game, or of the championship. Now a game can often be won, paradoxical as it may sound, by bad cricket, when good cricket would, if not have lost it, at all events havepreventedthewinning of it. A match nowadays is often won by mere general­ ship, which could be displayed by a duffer who practically could not stop a ball of Richardson’s to save his life. The cham­ pionship contest has introduced all sorts of rules and regulations, methods of pro­ cedure, and ethics, which have not the remotest relationship to the arts of batting, bowling, and fielding, in which, in my humble judgment, cricket consists. Take the case of Mr. Shine in the Univer­ sity match. Although it failed in its intention, it was excellent generalship, but,, in my opinion, most execrable cricket. It would, I think, never have been toleratedbeforethe championshiphad degraded the game. I remember well what an outcry there was thirty-two years ago when Dr. E. M. Grace in quite a secondary match (I think it was Players of the South against Twenty-two Gentle­ men, or something of the sort) pitched the ball high in the air over the batsman’s (Jupp) head, so as to fall on the top of the wicket, but such a proceeding, repre­ hensible as it was, is quite venial when compared with the tactics of some of the fast bowlers of to-day, who try to intimi­ date a batsman by bowling at his legs, or bumping at his head. At cricket there should be a code of etiquette at least understood. ( To be continued.) C. LILLY WHITE & CO. are clearing a quantity of good Match Balls, the colour having slightly altered. Best Match, 3/9; Cat-gut Seamed, 4/3 ; Four Seamed 4/6; Treble Practice, 3/ each. Post Free. 1/6 discount on six. Only address. C. Lillywhite and Co., So tU, borough, Tunbridge Wells.