Cricket 1898

70 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. A pril 21, 1898. B u ck la n d seven fo r 52, an d as th ese tw o sco re d m ore th a n a n yon e else an d to o k sixteen o f th e tw e n ty C am b rid ge w ickets, th e y m a y fa irly b e said to h a ve w o n the m atch fo r th eir side. T h e cra ck b ow ler on th e lo sin g side, P a tterson , h a d the v e r y g o o d figu res o f five fo r 41 in the first in n in g s o f O x fo rd . T h e team s w ere : C am brid ge: — L . B u ry , L . K . Jarvis, A . P . L u ca s, H . T . L u d d in g to n , H o n . A . L y tte lto n , H o n . E. L y tte lto n , P . H . M e llo r, W . S. P a tterson , H . P ig g , S. 8 . S ch u ltz an d D . Q . S teel. O xford : — P . M . B u ck la n d , H . F ow ler, A . D . G reene, A . H . H ea th , F . G . G . J e llicoe , A . W . P ea rson , J . H . S avory, H .G . T y leco te, E. W . W a llin g to n , A . J . W e b b e an d H . R . W e b b e. PRINCIPAL AVERAGES. B atting . Not H’st Inns. out. Runs. Aver, score. F.M.Buckland (O.)... 4 ... 1 ... 2f5 ... 88‘33 ...117* A. P. Lucas (C.) ...10 ... 0 ... 337 ... 33 70 ... 95 D. Q. Steel (C .)............11 ... 0 ... 342 ... 31 09 .. 158 A. D. Greene (0.) ... 6 ... I ... 134 ... 26 80 ... 93* L. K. Jarvis (C.) ...12 ... 2 ... 256 ... 25 60 ... 47 A. J. Webbe (O.) ... 8 ... 1 ... 176 ... 2514 ... 43 W . S. Patterson (C.) 11 ... 0 ... 219 ... 22 63 ... 57 B owling . Overs. Runs. Wkts. Aver. F. M. Buckland (O.) ... 90‘3 ... 143 ... 17 ... 8'41 H. G. Tylecote (O.) ... 202 ... 310 ... 30 ... 10’33 L. Bury (0.) ..............108 ... 213 ... 16 ... 13 31 W. S. Patterson (C.) ... 502'2 ... 581 ... 41 ... 14*19 H. T. Luddington (C.)... 230 ... 368 ... 19 ... 19-36 F. G. G. Jellicoe (O.) ... 2 ’5 ... 341 ... 17 ... 20 05 j . n . p . (To be continued.) A N IN T E R V I E W W I T H M R . S T O D D A R T . As Mr. Stoddart has announced his intention of not mentioning a word on the subject of “ barracking” when he arrives in England, readers of Cricket may be interested in the follow ing inter­ view which appeared in the Sydney Referee on March 9th. I t is said that Mr. Stoddart has never been interviewed in England, so that our contemporary is to congratulated. STODDART W ILL SAY NOTHING IN ENGLAND. “ Y ou understand,” said the English captain, “ that my remarks are intended for the people of this country,* otherwise I would have no object in speaking. When I return home I will not mention a word on the subject. That would do no good. “ It is not the English team alone that is subjected to this barracking, for the cricketers of this Country receive it just as much as we do. I t is not my wish to interfere or speak in this matter except in the interests of cricket. I shall, in all probability, never visit this country again with a cricket team, and what 1 have said has been purely for the good of the game, for the sake of the players in this country, and of English teams com ing out here in future. This system of barracking, if allowed to go on, will inevitably reduce cricket to a low level, for your better class players, with any sense of feeling, cannot keep on playing under such cir- *Au8tralia. cumstances. The jeering by the crowd has occurred on all the grounds, and in all our big matches. Our first experience was at Adelaide, where we were advised to take no notice of it . The same thing occurred at Melbourne, and we were similarly advised, whilst our Sydney experiences were no different. We did not take any notice of it, but when the thing is repeated in every match, and on ever ground, I feel it my duty to speak, and to deplore that those in authority do not take steps to prevent it.” MORAL SUASION TO SUPPRESS BARRACKING. “ Can you suggest a remedy ? ” “ I don’t mean that those who jeer and hoot should be turned out of the ground. I would suggest that an appeal be made to their better feelings. If some of your influential men were to walk round the ground, speak to the people, reason with them, quietly and rationally, I am sure a great deal of good in the direction of preventing these scenes would be achieved. I remember one case at Layton, in England, where the spectators were very unruly. Mr. C. E. Green went round, spoke kindly and calmly to them, and quietened the whole lot in a very short time ‘ ‘ To show that moral suasion is useful in a matter of this kind, I will quote an incident in my own experience: A t Bris­ bane, the day we played the Combined Team, it was wet, and ow ing to a shower a cessation in play took place for a little time. The Combined Team had been in the field in the morning. When they went out again in the afternoon they were hooted by a certain section. I saw one man who had hooted, and went up to him and said, ‘ Now, why did you hoot your own side ? ’ He replied : ‘ Because they fielded badly.’ Then I said: ‘ Do you consider that hooting them will make them field better ? ’ He replied : ‘ I don’t know.’ I talked to him very quietly and seriously for about ten minutes, during which he gazed at me and seemed to wonder what sort of person I was. At the end of that time he said ‘ he was damned if he would ever hoot them again.’ Every man has a generous spot in him ; most of those who jeer and hoot have good points, and, if you appeal to their better nature, I am sure they will give it over. And, if you can successfully appeal to one man, you can do so to a body of men.” “ The onlookers make mistakes just as players and umpires do ? ” “ Quite so. In the last Test match at Melbourne our wicket-keeper appealed for a catch at the wicket, and so did the bowler. The umpire gave it not out. The crowd set to work and hooted at our wicket-keeper and bowler, whose appeal was legitimate. I was given to under­ stand in the pavilion afterwards that the batsman admitted he was out in that stroke. A little later, when the Austra­ lians took to the field, their wicket-keeper appealed for a catch at the wickets, and, before the umpire had time to give his decision, he threw up the ball high in the air. Mind you, I have the greatest admira­ tion for the Australian wicket-keeper’s honesty, and feel certain that he will admit having made a mistake in throwing the ball up before the umpire had given his decision. The crowd did not hoot Kelly, as they had done our wicket­ keeper. “ In this last match here Hearne re­ ceived a severe blow from Jones, at which the crowd, many in the pavilion, laughed. Later, Bichardson was bow ling, and he sent a full-toss over Darling’s head, at which the crowd in the pavilion howled. There were three men who hooted in front of our dressing-room. I stood up from my seat and said they ought to be ashamed of themselves. Howell, who was in the balcony above, heard the hooting there. At this stage in the game we were doing very well. Bichardson told me himself that the wicket was one on which he thought he could really bow l his best. He said it would help him, and he did not think the Australians would get the runs. O f course, you know how much depended on Richardson. They hooted and howled at him to such an extent that when he came into lunch he had lost his head and had lost his bowling. He came to me almost with tears in his eyes and told me this. Now, y o u ste h ow unfair it is ; not necessarily to be unfair, for I don’t say the object of the crowd was to put Richardson off, yet they did so. DONNAN’S BLIND SWIPE. “ In the last New South Wales match another instance occurred. Donnan was playing against Jack Hearne and Briggs, who were bow ling magnificently, and it was impossible for anyone to get runs. F or a time Donnan stopped the ball with­ out scoring, and the crowd jeered him most unfairly. The consequence was that he made a blind swipe at a ball which it was not possible to hit under any circum­ stances, and he got out, a result that I am quite certain was due to the crowd’s jeering. “ And with regard to Garrett’s treat­ ment when he played against us, a more disgraceful scene I have never seen. How is a man to do his best under such circumstances ? ” “ With regard to the Press ? ” “ I am perfectly well aware that there are men in this country who write cricket as a sport, and whose notes are acceptable to all of us. It is only a certain section that do not write proper matter. They say we have had fights amongst ourselves, and when that is played out they say we drink. You can understand how repul­ sive this is to us. In spite of the bad luck we have had to upset us, the good fellowship existing between us has been most marked. I myself can safely say that I have never heard a cross word spoken by any member of this team to another. By writing in this way &uchmen do great harm to the game in every way. CABLING LIES TO LONDON. ' ‘ In Adelaide a prominent pressman cabled home that as Prince Ranjitsinhji had been giving himself airs and was making himself exceedingly unpleasant, there had been dissensions between the