Cricket 1898

THE FINEST BAT THE WORLD PRODUCES June 23, 1898. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 215 BUSSEY’S J3 .2 IB * u © > A d I © Q U Oi P M o © ^ ■§ 5 ® 5 1 CT* ® -** .t? J * t u 5 -S £ 3 08 3 ^ 0 c3 O © O-i M ® 1 I » Hi ® ® •ff* S to ° > x , 8 ?’^ 05 g f n | © rH 6 a <D •" 03 2 p i W © . “O o > o T3 a ce O w - 0 } +J . 35 E 03 ^ •E ^ o o ^ « u a > .. e t 4> o <U +J 3 2 O' 5 . 3 oo e *5 M •a s VO f*S 6 0 BUSSEY’S BETWEEN THE INNINGS. With rain day after day, with wintry temperatures, with matches everywhere aban­ doned or drawn, with such happenings as 38 runs for three wickets, being the full score of a game in which play was attempted on all three days, it was far pleasanter to be writing of the cricket cf years past than of that of to­ day ; but now that at last the belated summer has apparently arrived, now that matches are being fought to a finish, save where the making of too many runs preventeth, now that, in short, cricket has once more become a joy and not a penance, it is a pleasure to me to comply with the editorial suggestion that my account of ’Varsity days should be laid aside until the off-season once more arrives, and that I should take up my wonted tale of current cricket. What an enormous difference Captain Wynyard’s presence in the team makes to Hampshire is well shown by the match with Leicestershire. The Southern county’s performances in the championship during the three years past, since she regained her first-class status, have been by no means so bad as to justify any idea of deposing her. As a matter of fact, only six of the fourteen counties have won more matches than Hamp­ shire during that time, while two have lost more, and two others the same number. The following table may be of interest in this connection:— COUNTY CHAMPIONS HIP MATCHES, 1895-6-7. Lancashire Furrey ......... Yorkshire j Essex .......... I Middlesex Glouceste^hire Warwickshire Hampshire ... ( Somerset.......... ■<Sussex .......... ( Notts .......... Derbyshire ... K en t................ Leicestershire I rather fancy this table will be somewhat of a surprise to those who have been running down Hampshire on account of a few bad performances this season. Pl’yed Won Lost Dr’wn Peicent, of wins to game tinshd. . 69 . 41 . . 11 .. 17 ... 78 .. 78 .. 51 . . 15 .. 12 . . 77 .. 78 .. 43 . . 15 .. 20 . 74 .. 44 .. 17 . . 13 .. 14 . . 16 .. £0 .. 17 ... 13 .. 20 . 56 .. 54 .. 20 . . 21 .. 13 . . 43 .. 54 .. 12 . . 18 .. 24 . 40 .. CO .. 15 . . 24 .. 11 . . f8 .. 49 .. 12 . . 21 .. 13 . . 33 .. 16 .. 12 . . 21 . 20 . . 33 .. 50 . 10 . . 20 .. 20 ... 33 .. 48 .. 9 . . 19 .. 20 . . S2 .. 54 .. 10 . . 3) .. 14 . . 25 .. 44 .. 6 . . 28 .. 10 . 17 It struck me yesterday that it might be interesting to compare the run-getting of the present doleful season with that of a corre­ sponding period of one of the dry, hard wicket seasons which we have had in four of the past five years. I chose 1896, partly as a really representative dry season, but chiefly because I had at hand tables of the runs made week by week in that year. (I am not at all sure that the first few weeks of 1895 would not give an even higher average, though). I have worked out the figures up to June 11 of this year, and to June 10 of lb96, as nearly as possible a corresponding period. Here they are :— 1896—59 first-class matches (arranged and p’ayed). 1898- 55 tirst-class matches arranged ; 63 played. 1896—43,460 runs scored for 1,941 wickets—average per wicket. 22 3. 1898—26,165 iuns scored for 1,389 wickets - average per wicket, 18‘8. 1896—i8 centuries, including 243% 231, 229*, 210*, 203. and 201 * 1898—22 centuries, hight st 180. * Signifies not out. 1896—Partnerships of 100 or more runs for a wkt., 49. 1698— „ „ „ „ 22. 1893—Totals of 400 or over, 14 (including 887 and 525 for four wickets). 1898—Totals of 400 or over, 2 (634 and 500for 4 wkts). Mind, one doesn’t want to deny the fact that it is only fair that the bowlers should have a turn nowand again. But it is diffi­ cult to believe that even the bowlers, who are best suited by sodden wickets, can really enjoy such a season as this. The list of long partnerships (ICO runs or more) in first-class matches, which I have . been giving during the season ever since I had the pleasure of chatting week by week to the readers of Cricket , will be again furnished this season. I give the first batch hero, from the commencement of the season to June 15. In most cases I have been able to give (approximately) tho time occupied in tcoring the runs, an addition which will, I think, be welcome. THE LONG PARTNERSHIPS OP 1898 (to J une 15). , for 2nd wkt., F. S. Jackson and Tutnicl ffe, Yorkshire v. Gloucestershire, Bri-tol, May j D, 1 hr. 20 min. 6th, Brown and Tomlin, Leicestershire v. Lanca­ shire, Manchester, May 19, 1hr. 35min. 2nd, Wm. Gunn and Shrewsbury, Notts v. Sussex, Brighton, May 24 and 25, 4 hrs. 85 mio. 6ih, Coe and Knight. Leice*ter*hire v. M.C.C., Lord’s, May 27, 1 hr. 35 min. 1st, Brockwell and Y. P. T. Cranford. Fuirey v. Gloucestershire. Oval, Miy 26 and 27, lhr. 30rain. To h not cut (after fall of 4th w*t.), Abel an I D. L. A. Jephson, Surrey v. Gloucesershire, Oval, May 27 and 28 3 hrs. 6th, F. A. Philiips and Robson, Som rset v. Middlesex, lord’s, May 30, 1hr. 5 min 4th. Ch^ttertoa aud Storer, Derby v: Hants, Suuthimpton, May 30, 1 hr. 30 min. 2nd, Ateland Hay*ard, Surrey v. Notts, Not- tnwhfcm. M^y 30 and 31, 2 hrs. 8th, Butt and Cox, Sussex v. Glouce;t?r, Brigh'on. May 31,1 hr. 5 min. 3rd, W. Trask and S M. J. Wo.ds, Somerset v. Bus?ex, Eastbourne, June 4. 3rd. C. J. Burnup and G. E. Winter, C.U. v. M.C.C., Cambridge, June 6, 1hr. 15 min. 3rd, J. R. Mason and W. H. Patterson, Kent y. Gloucester, Graveserd, Juce 6 and 7, 3 hrs. 3rd, W. G. Grace ai d C. O. H. Sewe 1, Gloucester v. Kent, Grave end. Jure 7, 2 hrs. 9th,Haigh and Hirst. YorVsh re v. Surrey, Brad­ ford, June 7 and 8, 2 hr.-*. 50 min. 6th, A. E. Stoddart and A. J. Webte, Middle­ sex v. N ofs, Lord’s. June 8, 2 hrs. 15 min. 3rd, Chatt-rton and L. G. Wright. Derby v. M.C.C., Lord’s, June 9,1 hr. 35 min. 1st, Carpenter and t£. G. Owen, Essex v. War­ wick, Leylon. June 9. 2 hrs. 25 min. Isf, W . G. Grace and R. W . Rice. G1 ucester v. Notts. Fristol, June 9. 2 hrs. 20 min. 3rd, C. U. H. Sewe 1and W. Troup, Gloucester v. Not s, Bristol, June 9. 4th, C. L. Townsend and W. Troup, Glou cs'er v. N ofs Bristol, June 9-10, 3 hrs. 30min 1st. A Hearne aod J. R. Mison, K e.t v. Sussex, Catford. June 9-10,1 hr. 55 min. 10, l/«rd Hawke aod Hunter, Yorlshire v. Kent, Sheffield. June 13. 2 hrs. 5t3, Abel and Shrews'ury, Ilversv. Gtnlemcn, Oval, June 14, 1 hr 15 min. 4th, Bai er v. Cuttell, Lancashire v. Warwick, Birmingham, June 14, 1 hr. 15 min. J.N.P. 108, 118, 211, 108, 145, 256, 153, 155 115, 114, 119, 108, 213, 121, 192, 111, 128, 140, 106, 162, 225, 187, 148. If 4, 107, FOREST HILL (2) v. LONDON AND WEST­ MINSTER BANK (2).—Pljyel at Forest Hill on June 11. F orest H ill (2). H. H Lemay, b Bow­ man ........................ 7 P. Gibbon, b Thomson 9 L. J. Strife, not out ... 13 Extras .. C.Phillips,bH C.ossley 67 C. Moore, Ibw, b Stone 8 M. Reichert, b Stone 2 C. G. Hill, c Brook, b Thomson.................58 J. G. Trotter, not cut 21 Vernon Smith, b H. Total Crossley .................17 B. Batchelor and C. B. Squires did not tat. L ondon and W estm inster B ank (2). . 15 220 S. "owman^Eatchelor 0 C. J. CroBsley, c Selfe, b Squires .......... 5 G. Ra» y. b Squires ... 11 H. E Thomson, b Squires ................. 0 E.G.Keeping,bcquires 6 A. J. Richardson, b Batchelor................. 3 T. H. Prit hard, b Batchelor................. 7 F. W. Stone, not out... L. P. Brook, b Batche­ lor ........................ H. Crossley, b Vernon Smith ............... F. F. Gardner, c and b Vernon Smith... ... Extras................. Total 47