Cricket 1899

l i t CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. M a y 11, which we were astonished by this youngster.” “ Y ou are not one of the fortunate batsmen who are always being missed ? ” “ Well, no, I fancy that m y luck has been the other way about. But I re­ member making 200 at Cambridge, for the Anchor against Cassandra, and being missed ever so many times. I may say that I played for the Anchor when we won the cup in the first year that it was given b y the Cambridgeshire Cricket Association. Speaking of luck, of course, like other batsmen, I sometimes get given out when I don’t think the decision is right. I remember in a local match being given out by an umpire who said that ‘ he fancied he heard a noise ! ’ But I never believe that any umpire would make a mistake wilfully, and the wonder is that they are as a rule so accurate in their decisions. For it may easily happen on a blazing hot day, for instance, when everyone feels the heat more or less, that hour after hour may go b y without a single appeal. Suddenly when any um­ pire m ight have become lulled to a feeling of security, an appeal is made which re­ quires the very coolest and nicest ju d g ­ ment.” “ Have you done much umpiring your- self ? ” “ I only umpired once in a big match. I th ick it was Essex against M.C.C. That was when I first began to play for Essex.” Everybody who had the pleasure and excitement of watching the final stages of the famous match between Essex and Yorkshire at Huddersfield the year before last will rememberthe shudder which went round the ground when Hirst was missed at third man off Mr. Kortright b y Car­ penter. He is such a good fielder that the mistake was all the more noticeable. About this catch Carpenter tells an amusing little story. “ Y ou may ima­ gine,” he said, “ that I felt just then that the world was hollow. A t the end of the over Mr. McGahey said to me as we were crossing over, “ Y o u ’ll be glad when he’s o u t ! ” I thought that 1 should indeed be glad. Presently, when the game was in an even more interesting position, Mr. Milligan skied a ball to square leg in the direction of Mr. McGahey. H e missed it. I felt as wretched as if I had done it myself, but I couldn’t resist the tempta­ tion of going up to Mr. McGahey and asking him whether he wouldn’t be glad when Mr. M illigan was o u t! 1 think that we both felt half a dozen years younger when Mead g ot Bairstow l.b.w. with a full pitch and we won b y one run ! It may surprise a good many people to hear that Carpenter uses a bat weighing about tw o pounds seven ounces. He accounts for this by saying that as a boy he began to play with a heavy bat, and, though he has often tried, he can never use a light one with any success, because he finds that he always plays too soon at the ball. W . A . B ettesworth . THE METROPOLITAN CLUBS IN 1899. (Continued from page 101.) Some three or four years ago the C h i s ­ w ic k P a r k C.C. was one of the m o't prominent clubs near London, but unfor­ tunately, ow ing to financial difficulties, it was to all intents and purposes dissolved. The local members j ust managed to keep the club in existence, and, as there are a considerable number of new members this year, there is every probability of a suc­ cessful season. The fixture card is small, but contains fixtures with very good clubs. Many of the members who for­ merly belonged to the club are under the impression that it is defunct, but this is anything but the case, and there are indi­ cations to show that in a few years it will regain its former prosperity and tak-i up its old position among the best London clubs. The honorary secretary is Mr. W . H . L. Horton, Sunnyside, The Mall, Chiswick, who is making energetic efforts to make the club once more a success. MAY. 20. Chiswick Park, y. St. Thomas’ Hospital 27. Chiswick House, v. Chiswick House JUNE. 8. Chiswick Park, v. Emeriti 17. Chiswick Park, v. St. Thomas’ Hospital 24. Chiswick Park, v. Richmond JULY. 1. Surbiton, v. Surbiton 8. Chiswick Park, v. Barnea 15. Chiswick Park, v. Wimbledon 22. Chiswick Park, v. Ealing 29. Wimbledon, v. Wimbledon AUGUST. 5. Richmond, v. Richmond K e n s in g t o n ’ s card contains twenty- eight matches for the first and a similar number for the second team. Visitors will be surprised to see the alterations to the ground, which is now in capital order. A large pavilion, containing several dressing rooms and every possible accomo­ dation for cricket teams, has been erected, and a very handsome structure it is. The ground now comprises upwards of six acres, and affords plenty of room for two matches to be played simultaneously if necessary, and that without crowding. One of the features of Kensington’s ground is the portion provide d for practi ce nets, which is not only ample in extent but of excellent turf, good enough for any match wicket. In the enlargement of the ground, the erection of the pavilion, and the lease for a long time which has been obtained, the hon. sec. sees some reward for the unremitting negotiations and labours of the last few years. There is a large increase in the number of members this year, and with all the old members to the fore, there seems nothing to check the prosperity of this club. W . W . Read and L . de Montezuma expect to be playing regularly, the latter’s business engagements not admitting of much county cricket. W . L. Murdoch and Y . F. S. Crawford will also assist when they can get away. M AY. 13. Home, v. St. Mary’s Hospital 20. Home, v. Holborn 22. Acton, v. Pallingswick 2 1 . Home, v. Old Citizens JUNE. Home, v. London County Council Cane Hill, v. Cane Hill Asylum Elstree, v. Elstree Masters Home, v. Marlborough Blues Home, v. Bartholomew’s Hospital JULY. Home, v. South Hampstead Home, v. St. Mary’s Hospital Home, v. Holborn Finsbury, v. Hon. Artillery Company Brookwood. v. Brookwood Asylum Wandsworth, v. Spencer AUGUST. Home, v. London County Council Acton, v. Pallingswick Horn?, v. M.C.C. and Ground Hastings, v. blastings and St. Leonards^ Lewes, v. Lewes Priory Eastbourne, v. Devonshire Park* Bognor, v. Bognor Worthing, v. Worthing Chichester, v. Priory Park* Littlehampton, v. Littlehampton* Home, v. Hon. Artillery Company SEPTEMBER. 2. Home, v. South Hampstead * Two-day matches. Percy Child, of 29, Streatley Boad, Brondesbury, N .W ., is the hon. sec. of the L o n d o n S c o t t is h C.C. this year. A. F . Denniston, of 23, Gordon Boad, Ealing, W ., captains the side. The season opei ed on Saturday last with a h -m e mate1! against the Old Boys of University C jllfg e School and extends till September 2ud, everv Saturday, »s well as the two Bank H .lidays, being utilised. A novel feature in the card is a match Ladies v. Gentlemen on June 14th. It begins at 5'30 p.m. W . Parmeister is the ground bowler. M AY. 13. Hampstead, v. Hampstead 13. Brondesbury, v. University College School 20. Brondesbury, v. Hampton 27. Ealing, v. Ealing 27. Brondesbury, v. Westminster Hospital JUNE. 3. Brondesbury, v. Richmond 3. Willesden Green, v. University College School 10. Blackheath, v. Blackheath 10. Brondesbury, v. Crescent, Hampstead 14. Brondesbury, Ladies v. Gentlemen 17. Brondesbury, v. Ealing 17. Mill Hill, v. ASill Hill School 24. Brondesbury, v. Kensington Park 24. W ood Lane, v. Kensington (2) JULY. 1. W oodford Bridge, v. Claybury Asylum 1. Brondesbury, v. St. Augustine’s Church 8. St. Quintin’s Park, v. Kensington Park 8. Brondesbury. v. Westminster Hospital 15. Hornsey, v. Hornsey 15. Brondesbury, v. Hornsey 22. Brondesbury. v. Charlton Park 22. Charlton Park, v. Charlton Park “ A ” 29. Richmond, v. Richmond 29. Brondesbury, v. Crescent, Hampstead AUGUST. 5. Brondesbury, v. Hampstead 12. Rrondesbury, v. Hornsey 19. East Acton, v. Pallingswick SEPTEMBER. 2. Brondesbury, v. St. Augustine’s Church MILL H ILL SCHOOL. M AY. 13. Mill HilJ, v. Mill Hill Schoolmaster* 17. Mill Hill, v. Nonconformist Grammar School 20. Mill Hil, v. Hornsey C.C. 24. M ill Hill, v. University College School 27. Mill Bill, v. J. D. McClure. Esq.’s X I. 31. Mill Hill, v. Royal Naval School. JUNE. 3. Mill Hill, v. G. Kemp, Esq.’s X I 7. Mill Hill, v. M.C.C. 10. Cooper’s Hill. v. R.I.E.C. (“ A ” team) 14. Mill Hill, v. F. S. Young, Esq.’s X I. 17. Mill Hill, v. London Scottish 28. M ill Hill, v. K. J. Hodgi>o j , Esq.’s X I, JU LY. 1. Mill Bill, v. Hornsey C.C. 5. Be iford, v. Bedford Modern School 8. bishop’s Stortford, v. Nonconformist Grammar bchool 14. M ill H ill, v. W ellingborough Grammar School 15. Mill Hill, v. Old Millhillians 19. Willesden, v. University College School