Cricket 1898

FINEST BAT THE WORLD PRODUCES 180 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. JtrsE 9, 1898. BUSSEY’S t w BUSSEY’S BETWEEN THE INNINGS. A QUARTER OF A CENTURY’S UNIVERSITY CRICKET, {Continuedfrom page 164.) 1884. From first to last, Cambridge’ s record was a strong contrast to Oxford’s brilliant run of successes. At the end of an innings each against Mr. C. I. Thornton’s England X I., they led by 191 (J. E. K. Studd 44, De Paravicini 39) to 115 ; but then they allowed the scratch team to run up 324 in their second innings, Bates (113) and A. J. Webbe (68) adding 164 for the fourth wicket by splendid cricket, and as they could only reply with 132 were beaten by 113 runs. Tom Emmett, who had so olten wrought havoc on Cambridge batsmen, had thirteen wickets in the match for 93 runs. Jn the match with Yorkshire which followed the Cantabs were utterly outclassed. J. A. Turner’s 63 not out, in the second innings, was the only score of over 30 for them in the match, though Bainbridge, with 18 not out and 29, also did fairly well. The county, with one man absent, ran up no fewer than 539, Bates making 133, Hall 116, Grimshaw 115, Peel 57, Peate 40, Ulyett, YVardall, Emmett, Hunter, and Harrison 10 among them, extras 68 ! Bates and Hall put on 219 runs for the third wicket, Grimshaw and Hall 105 for the fourth, and Grimshaw and Peate 81 for the seventh. Peel’s 57 only took an hour to make. Bates was missed three times, but neither Hall nor Grimshaw gave a chance. It was Greatorex, who was not considered a bowler, who summarily finished off the Yorkshire innings by taking three wickets for 4 runs, l'rior to 1884 there had been no instance in English first-class cricket of three batsmen all making centuries in one innings. On May 22, W. G. Grace, A. G. Steel, and Barnes did this for the M.C.C. against the Australians; less than a week later Hall, Bites, and Grimshaw followed suit in this match. Emmett had six for 34 in Cambridge’s first innings; and Yorkshire won by an innings and 203 runs. The match against the Gtntlemen was dis­ tinctly the Light Blue’s best performance of the season ; but, had it not been for the fact that the scratch team had a man absent in the second innings, the result might easily have been “ lost by a wicket ” instead of “ won by 12 runs.” However, the victory was won over a splendid side ; and perhaps it is scarcely fair to minimise its value. The first innings of Cambridge realised 266 by some very level batting. C. W . Wright and P. J. De Paravicini, for once in a way, playea up to their form of previous years, making 61 and 53 respectively; Studd scored 35, Knatchbull- Hugesson 32, and Greatorex 29. The Gentle­ men replied with 267, of which the Hon. A. Lyttleton and I. D. Walker scored 186 between them, the other nine batsmen (in­ cluding C. T. Studd, A. G. Steel, A. J. Webbe, C. I. Thornton, J. G. Walker, and G. F. Vernon) making 66. Lyttleton scored 103,Walker 83, and both played in splendid style, adding 173 while together. The second innings of Cambridge was also remarkable for the large proportion of the runs made by two men. The runs from the bat totalled 169 ; of these J. E. K. Studd and H. W. Bainbridge actually scored 146 between them, the captain making 82 not out, with only one chance late in his innings, and Bainbridge scoring 64. (It is worthy of note that these two gentlemen made only 50 runs fewer than the next four batsmen on tho Cambridge side in 1884.) Topham bowled very finely when the Gentle­ men went in, and took, seven of the nine wickets which fell at a cost of only 61 runs, considerably less than half the total. Wright was at his best behind the wicket, too, catching three and stumping one, and only allowing three byes. C. T. Studd took thirteen of his old comrades’ wickets for 147 runs. A very small-scoring match was that with the M.C.C. On a bowler’s wicket, C. W . Bock, the Tasmanian, making his first appearance for Cambridge, actually had five wickets for 6 runs in the club’s first innings. For the club, Barnes had six for 15 in the match, and Woof eight for 41. Scotton and Barnes won the match for the M.C.C. by eight wickets, making 43 and 28, both not out, in the last innings of a game in which the first three totals had been 68, 38 and 45. It was not to be hoped that the weak Light Blue teamwould stand any chance against the Australians, and in scoring 204 in their first innings they did quite as well as their friends expected. To Bainbiidge (61) and Studd (59) the chief credit was again due. They added no fewer than 111 for the third wicket. Marchant hit up 34 towards the end of the innings. For the Australians, ‘Mur­ doch batted four and a-half hours for 132, and never made a bad stroke. Bonnor (44) and he put on 85 runs for the fifth wicket; and Palmer, who scored 68 and carried his bat, helped him to add 103 for the seventh. The total was 378. In their second innings the Cantabs were practically helpless against Palmer and Spofforth, whose figures for the match were eleven for 133, and eight for 84, respectively. Only de Paravicini (25, not out) and Wright (24) made double figures; the total was but 93, and the Australians scored their first victory over a Cambridge team by an innings and 81 runs. The match with Surrey at the Oval was lost by 148 runs. Bainbridge (80 and 23) and Studd (54 and 13) again made more than half the runs from the bat for their side; of the rest, only Marchant, with 25 and 27, did anything good. In Surrey’s first, Walter Read (82) and M. P, Bowden (64) put on 121 for the third wicket; in the second, seven wickets fell for 107, but then Lohmann (69) and Wood (52) put on 95 for the eighth. Barrett had thirteen wickets for 136 runs. The M.C.C. put a strong team into the field at Lord’s, and the Light Blues went under by an innings and 29 runs. A marvellous all round performance by W ilfrid Flowers*was the chief factor in their defeat. The Calverton pro., on a none too easy wicket, actually scored 122 while his partner made 35! Eighteen fours were included in his innings, and he did not give a chance until he had passed the century. Prior to this he had taken six wickets for 20 runs in the Cantabs’ first inn­ ings ; and he followed up his batting feat by getting eight wickets for 60. Only one other batsman made 30 runs in the match, in spite of the fact that the losers had two inn­ ings each. D. G. Spiro scored 47 for the M.C.C., and this won him a place in the Cambridge team, though one cannot help thinking that it would have been better judg­ ment on JVlr. Studd’s part to have chosen either E. O. Powell or T. Greatorex, ea h of whom scored 24 against much deadlier bowl­ ing than Mr. Spiro had to face. Powell, by the way, averaged 51 per innings for Hamp­ shire later in the season. The teams in the ’Varsity match were :— Oxford: E. W. Bastard, J. H. Brain, E. H. Buckland, L. D. Hildyard, T. R. Hine- Haycock, M. C. Kemp, K. J. Key, B. E. Nicholls, T. C. O’Brien, H. V. Page and H. O. Whitby. Cambridge: H. W . Bainbridge, P. J. De Paravicini, Hon. J. W . Mansfield, F. March­ ant, C. W . Rock, C. A. Smith, D. G. Spiro,