Cricket 1898

June 16, 1898. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 205 TESTIMONIAL . A CUSTOMER writes — “ The Merryweather Garden Hose supplied nearly ten years ago is still in use, and is most satisfactory.” LargestMakers of High-Class Hose in theWorld. Write for Price List and Sample, also Pump Catalogue, Free by Post. Ask for Catalogue of Garden Pumps and Fittings, 40 pages, 500 illustrations, post free. The ends of the Hose are sealed , protecting the canvas pliesfrom rotting , giving the Hose quadruple life. Made on the same lines as the Hose used with their celebrated Fire Engines. M E R R YW E A T H E R ’S, 63, L ons A cre , L ondon , W.C. C r ic k e t : A WEEKLY RECORD OF TEE GAME. 168, UPPER THAMES STREET, LOUDON, E.C. THURSDAY, JUNE 16th, 1898. $ a tn lto n # o s s t p . The abstract and brief chronicle of the time.— Hamkt. I n the present era of small scores arid fine bowliDg analyses, it was distinctly refreshing to see a total of 634 made by a county which does not profess to be powerful at this time of the year. But the Notts bowling is not what it used to be, and it is terrible to think of what the team may have to undergo in the way of fielding if the wickets becjme hard for any length of time. Whether it was wi-.e of Gloucestershire, in these days when so much importance is attached to the position of a county in the Championship tables, to play their innings with seriousness to the bitter end, is a question which will be answered by many in the negative. On the other hand, the chances of getting out twice a team so notoriously good at playing fir a draw as is Notts are so small that Dr. Grace may well have thought it advisable to let his men make as many runs as they could while they were about it. T h e chief partnerships in the Glouces­ tershire innings against Notts produced runs as follows :— Dr. Grace and Mr. Rice ..........106 ... 2 hrs. 20 rain. Mr. Troup and Mr. Sewell ... 162 ... 2 hrs. Mr. Troup and Mr. Townsend 225 ... 3 hr.i. 30 min. T h e r e were two or three interesting points about the Gloucestershire innings. During the partnership of Dr. Grace and Mr. Rice for the first wicket no less than eight bowl* rs were tried, although tie score was only just over h hundred when it ended. Mr. Troup made 160 iu eight hours and ten minutes, an average of 22 04 runs per hour, at a time when the bowlers were tired. While he was at the wicket 503 runs were made. Attewell bowled 82 overs for 146 runs and six wickets—a remarkable record in such a high-scoring innings. T h e appearance of Mr. Montezuma in the Sussex team has inspired a corres­ pondent of the Isis to wiite the following amusing pcern:— From the West and South and East Sussex finds her ranks increased. In the East and S^uth and West Never ending in her quest. From Australia, so I’ve heard, Och, Sure she drew the Oirish Murdoch. Then she turned to distant “ Injy,” Found her there a Banjitsinbji. Now the New World doth illume her, Mexico sends Montezuma. Two very interesting letters have reached me from Newport (Monmouth) relating to an incident which occurred iu the course of a match between two teams in the district. As there are just enough discrepancies in the letters to form what iu a legal case would be considered en­ tirely satisfactory evidence, I append them both:— “ One of our batsmeu cut a hall past point. The ball, travelling high, dropped into the overcoat pocket (which was bulging and open) of a youngster standing in the front of a knot of spectators, between thirty and forty yards away. The captain of the opposing team(who was fielding point) ran for the ball, and when it was discovered, took it out of the youngster’s pocket. The umpire was appealed to, and decided against the batsman, giving him out. I may mention that the boy, into whose pocket the ball dropped, was inside the boundary, which was fixed at a bank about ten yards behind where the boy had been standing. Was the umpire justi­ fied in giving the batsman out under the circumstances ? Or, according to No. 33, Laws of Cricket, was the ball ‘ lost ball?’ The ball being stopped by a spectator, a non­ fielder, would it not be considered 1dead ? ’ C. J. HARMAN.” “ The visiting team were fielding, when a lad clad in a loose blouse wandered across the field of play. Almost before he was noticed one of the batsmen lifted a ball which lodged in the lad’s blouse, without injuring the lad. One of the fielders ran and took the hall out of the garment and appealed for a catch, the appeal being answered against the batsman, who had to retire. Some discussion then took place between the umpires and the rival captains, with the result that the batsman was allowed to resume his innings. Was the umpire right in giving the man out ? or was the batsman not entitled to five runs for the stroke, seeing the obstruction would not have been there had it not been for the presence in the fielding side of the lad’s father ? • w il l ia m w il l ia m s . ” To this it may be replied that the laws do not take boundaries into consideration at all, and questions which arise in con­ nection with them have to be settled by precedent, or by the umpires. The umpire would certainly be justified in giving the batsman out, on the ground that the boy was not a part of the boundary (in this case), according to any method of reasoning. At the same time, the captain of the fielding tide did a graceful thing in allowing the batsman to continue his innings. The ball was not lost, and it was not “ dead.” The suggestion of one of my correspondents, that the ba'sman ought to have been allowed five runs because the obstructing boy was the son of one of the fielding side, is distinctly ingenious. C o ll a p s e s iu school teams are com­ mon iu the extreme, but as it is only about once or twice a year that a side is disposed of for nothing, the innings of Hockley House School against Bickerton House School may be desciibed as a curiosity. Both schools are in Southport. Bickerton House School declared at 10j for three wickets, and their opponents then proceeded to the wickets, with the following result:— R ockley H ouse . Gillibiand, b 8. Taylor Lane, b J. Turcer ... Wood, b S. Taylor Bradshaw (I), b 8. T»ylor ............. Henderson, b S. Tay­ lor ... ............. Collister, b 8. Taylor... Bayles, not out Mitchell, b S. Taylor.. Ziegler, b 8. Taylor ... Bradshaw (IT), c Tur­ ner, b 8. Turner ... Taylor, b J. Turner ... Extras ............. T o ta l............. D u r in g the past season a batsman named W. Morgan has scored 1,700 runs in club cricket, at Ballarat (Victoria), all with the same bat. This remarkable bat was made by Morgan himself. W i t h reference to the question asked in last week’s “ Gossip” by Mr. !L. P. Monk, whether a bowler had ever been known to run a man out by throwing at the wicket when the ball was played back to him, Mr. B. Coliingwood writes : “ I was playing some few seasons back for the West Kent Wanderers v. Tower Hamlets, at Victoria Park. Whilst bowl­ ing, a ball was returned pretty hot, which the batsman expected to pass me. He made a few yards, but picking it up pretty clean I had a shy at his wicket, and luckily hitting it, he was run out. The veteran, Charles Absolon, was play­ ing for the W.K.W. at the time, fielding slip. A n o t h e r correspondent also informs me of two similar instances. Iu the match between Bobertsbridge and Wind­ mill Hill, on the private ground of Mr. H. Curteis, on July 6, 1887, ha say.-, C. Butcher, who was bowling, threw out E. B. Hadley and H. Gorringein succes­ sion. They went in first, and had made 39 and 23 when they were thus run out. Mr. E M. Stone also relates that, when playing for Morden (Blackheath) C.C. at Tufnell Park in 1863 he, in the same manner, threw out a player who had been giving the fielding side a lot of trouble by stealing short runs. Other correspondents have written, giving similar examples, none of them referring to first-class matches.