Cricket 1898

68 ORIOKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. A p r il 21, 1898. B owling . Overs. Buns. 'Wkts. Aver. W . Foord-Kelcey (O.) ... 257...826 ... 36 ...9’05 C. M. Sharpe (CO ....... 546-3 ...848 ... 66 ... 1284 T. W . Lang (O.) ..........264'2 ... 338 ... 24 ... 14-08 (Sharpe also took three wickets v. XI. of England— no analysis.) 1876. In spite of one very big performance b y the Oxford batsmen, one has no hesitation in awarding Cambridge first place in 1876. W ith five really fine batsmen (two of them, the Hon. Alfred Lyttelton and Mr. Douglas Steel, fresh­ men), three or four other men good for runs on occasion, one destructive bowler in the person of W . S. Patterson, with two or three efficient helpers of somewhat lower calibre, a splendid wicket-keeper in Lyttelton, and a smart fielding side throughout, the team, if not quite equal to the famous ones of 1878, 1879, and 1882, was really powerful, though perhaps but little stronger than that of the previous year. Its opening match was against a strong E'even of England, a match marked b y big scoring, 995 runs for 31 wickets. For the scratch team W . R . Gilbert carried his bat right through the first innings for 205, which remained for more than twenty years the record score on the Cambridge grou nd; and C. I. Thornton made 54 and 30. A. P. Lucas, who had a wonderful season for Cambridge in 1876, scored 105 and 53; the two crack freshmen were both to the front, Lyttelton with an innings of 78, Steel with 17 and 39, and five wickets for 65 when all the other bowlers had failed in the first innings; and S. C. Newton, of Somerset fame, who, though a senior, was playing in the team for the first time, made 9 and 33 not out. The second match, won b y 66 runs, m s a somewhat small-scoring game against the M.C.C., in which Patterson had ten wickets for 61, while Lucas and D. Q Steel were head and shoulders above the other batsmen with 13 and 54, 28 and 65 respectively. The game witb Surrey at Cambridge had to be abandoned, owing to rain, after the Cantabs had finished their innings for 307—Alfred Lyttelton 83, his elder brother 63, Patterson 55, the captain (Greenfield) 39. Then came a well-contested match, lost at last by the narr .w margin of three vk k ets (twelve a side playing) with the Gentle­ men, for whom A. W. Ridley, whose lob bow ling had won his last ’Varsity match for Oxford the year before, made 28 aud 105 not out. For Cam­ bridge Edward Lyttelton (72, not out, and 26), Alfred Lyttelton (16 and 41), and Lucas (34 and 24) did best with the bat; but that the scoring was pretty level is shown by the fact that there were nine double figures in Cam­ bridge’s second innings of 241, and seven in the first of 227. Patterson, on whom mi st of the attack devolved, had 11 for 152 this time. This was the only match lost. Against Surrey at the Oval, the Cambridge captain was at his best and headed the scores with 57 and 26 out of 192 and 133 ; Lucas scored 15 and 43, not ou t; and Patterson (eight for 84) and Luddington (seven for 56) bowled so finely that Surrey could only make 137 and 40, and were beaten by 148 runs. Against the M.C.C. at Lord’s, Cambridge won by six wickets after being eight runs behind on the first innings—a decidedly creditable peformance. To D. Q. Steel (56 and 44), A. P. Lucas (57, not out, second innings) and Patter­ son (eight for 108) most of the credit was due. T. S. Pearson’s 51 in the first innings was the highest score for the club, whose team included W .G . and the Notts cracks, Shaw and Morley. Meanwhile Oxford had been beaten by the M .C.C. at Oxford in a small-scoring match, from which A, J. Webbe was an absentee, by 55 runs, Shaw’s thirteen for 64 being the main factor in their defeat. A. W . Ridley (0 and 38) and E . F. S. Tylecote (31 and 15) did best against their old Alma Mater; T. S. Dury’s 29 was the highest for Oxford. The match against the Gentlemen was won in capital style b y ten wickets, the only side which had beaten Cambridge thus being the only side to succumb to the Dark Blues. The Gentlemen’s team differed in five instances from that which played at Cambridge, but there was very little difference in strength. A. J. Webbe scored 57 and 21, not o u t; F. M . Buck­ land made 42, not out, and took ten wickets for 107 ; T. S. Dury (36), A. W. Pearson (35), A. H . Heath and C. P. Lewis (each 33) all helped in the victory. Ten days later, against Middlesex at Prince’s, identically the same Oxford team did a wonderful bit of scoring, though time did not admit of their winning the game—indeed, it is not quite certain they would have won had it been played out, as the Middlesex men, too, were in scoring mood. The county had first innings and ran up 439, three batsmen (I. D. Walker, 110, Burghes, 104, and M. Turner, 82), making more than two-thirds of these. Oxford started with D. Campbell, the Australian, and A. J. Webbe. Campbell made 24, and was then out. A. H . Heath came in, and he aud Webbe put on no fewer than 152 for the second wicket; and then W tbbe had the hard lines to be caught, with his score at 98. Heath ran up to 71 ; but it was after he, Dury aud Pearson were out that the biggest stand of the innings was made, though runs came so fast that it was not the longest in point of time. R. B iiggs was joined by liis captain, Game; and the famous Surrey batsman was iu splenoil hitting form. For the sixth wicket, 165 runs were added; then Briggs (71) le ft; but Buckland (22) stayed some time with Game, and when both were out (the captain with 141 to his credit), Royle found valuable partners in Lewis and H. G. Tylecote. and carried his bat, at last, for 67. The scores of this great innings (with one exception the highest ever played by Oxford) w ere: 141, 98, 71, 71, 67, 26, 24, 24, 22, 14 and 10, which, with 44 by way of extras, mp.de up a total of 612. But even now the big scoring wa< not over, for C. E. Green and C. I. Thornton went in for the county and ran up 120 before the first wicket fell. Thornton scored 79, Green 43. When stumps were drawn on the third day, the second innings of Middlesex had reached 166 runs for 4 wickets. The enormous total of 1217 runs was scored in the three days’ play, up to that time a record in first-class matches. Another drawn game, with the M.C.C., at Lord’s, followed, the blank third day, as has so often happened, preventing the match from being played out. A. J. Webbe, with 95 and 49, again narrowly missed the century in his first innings. A. H . Heath played a second innings of 50. For the club, W . G. (67) and Clement Booth (78) put on 116 for the first wicket. With the advantage of first innings in the ’Varsity match, the Oxford men ought to have rendered a big account of themselves ; but their crack bat, Webbe, went for a single, and only Buckland (32) and Briggs (41) could do anything with the bowling of Patterson and Luddington. Two or three of the earlier light blue wickets went very ch eaply; but Lucas stayed in and made 67, Alfred Lyttleton played well for 43, and Patter­ son, going in No. 7, carried out his bat for a fine 105. Toe total was 302, or 190 ahead. Again the Oxford innings began badly. Webbe only made 16 (bis five innings, once not out, for Oxford in 1876 before the great match, had realised'321 runs); Heath, who had before this match scored 33, 71, and 50 in successive games, made a pair; Buckland failed this tim e; and very little was done until Game joined Briggs after the fall of the fifth wicket. Then, while Briggs played a fine steady game, the Dark Blue captain hit out as he well knew how to do, and the pair put on 116. B iiggs made 32, Game 109. Then Campbell helped with 43, and the score eventually reached the very respectable figure of 262. The 73 wanted to win were hit off by Cambridge for the loss of but one wicket, that of Alfred Lyttleton, who was out for 47 when the game was all but won. Lucas car ried his bat for 23. Patterson took 5 wickets in the first innings for 42 ; Lud­ dington had 9 in the match for 123. The teams in the ’Varsity match w ere: Cambridge- H . T. Allsop, W . Blacker, F. F. J. Greenfield, A. P. Lucas, H . T. Luddington, Hon. A. Lyttleton, Hon. E. Lytlle'on, S. C. Newton, W . S. Patterson, V. K Shaw, and D. Q. Steel. Oxford— R. Briggs, F. M. Buckland, D. Campbell, T. S. Dury, W. H G m e , A. H . Haath, C. P. Lswis, A, W. Pearson, V . F. Royle, H. J. Tylecote, and A. J. Webbe. PRINCIPAL AVERAGES. BATTING. Not H’st Inns. out. Runs. Aver. Score. A. .1. Webbe (O.) ... 7 ... 1 ... 337 ... 56’1 A. P. Lucjs (U.) ... 13 ... 3 ... 807 ... 607 W. H. Oaine (O.) ... 8 ... 1 ... 313 ... 44 7 Hon.A. Lyttelton (C.) 13 ... 1 ... 3:8 ... 34'0 D. Q. Steel (C.)........ 12 ... 0 ... 369 .. 30 7 Horr.E.Lyttelton (C.) 12 ... 1 ... 3:6 ... 287 R. Briggs (O.) ........ 8 ... 1 ... 194 ... 27-7 A. H. Heath (O.) ... 6 ... 0 ... 157 ... 26 1 W. S. Patttrson (C.) 11 ..1... 249 ... 24'90 ...105* F. M. Buckland (O.) 8 ... 2 ... 135 ... 22 5 V. F. Royle (O.) ... 7 ... 2 ... 109 ... 218 B owling . Overs. Runs. Wkts. Aver. W. S. Patterson (C.) ... 433 ...667 ... 45 ... 14-82 H. T. Luddington (C.) ... 211'1 401 ... 22 ... 1822 F. M. Buckland (O.) ... 393'2 481 ... 26 ... 18'50 C. P. Lewis (O.) ............ 283-1 5 1 ... 17 ... 29-47