Cricket 1899

THB PINBST BAT THB WORLD PRODUCES. M ay 18, 1899. CRICKET ; A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 131 BUSSEY’S A T T H E S IG N O F T H E W I C K E T . B r F. 8. A shley -C ooper . OT J o fa fa » cc ►i j w £ 02 s J fa o w » 3 “ | l - * ^ L l I o z c s ^ LxJ UJ g L*J QC g _ CO CO *“ n C O CO w 03 per * «o fa G 3 C O C O I 3 a S3 3 s O S G 9 BUSSEY’S “ D o I wake, do I dream, or are visions about P” The defeat of the Aus­ tralians at Leyton came as a genuine surprise. Nobody who saw their form earlier in the week at the Crystal Palace would have thought that the side would have been disposed of b y Essex— who took the field without Kortright—for totals of 144 and 73. The victory by 126 runs in a low -scoring match was the more meritorious, as no county had previously defeated an Australian team since August 9th, 1893, when Kent, after follow ing on at Canterbury, gained a wonderful victory by 36 runs. The success of Essex was chiefly due to Young, who bow led with great effect, taking eleven wickets in the match at a cost of seventy-four runs, in addition to making thirty-three in his first innings. This was the first occasion on which the Australians had played against Young, and their collapse may, perhaps, in some measure be attributed to this fact. Be that as it may, however, the fact remains that Essex gained a glorious victory, and dismissed the strongest batting team in England twice for a total aggregate of 217 runs. Brockwell, in follow ing up his score of 102 at the Oval with 147 at Leicester, plainly showed that his visit to India during the winter did him no harm. On his present form he bids fair, providing too much bow ling does not fall to his lot, to surpass his doings in his great year of 1894. Albert Ward’s partiality for L ord’s ground is so proverbial, that his score of 118 against Marylebone came as no surprise. He first appeared at head­ quarters in 1889, and his scores there for Lancashire that year were 33, 62 not out, and 114 not out. Since that time his innings at Lord’s will be found to have been very large. Pougher’s recent successes with the bat must be very pleasing to Leicestershire folk, scores of 90 and 104 in one week being rather unusual for a Leicestershire player. With a few more such sterling players in the team the county would occupy a far more prominent position in the champion­ ship table. For many years the club has been fighting bravely to hold a place among the leading counties, and its success against Surrey— five hundred runs in the tw o innings—was very gratifying. Let us hope the above performance will prove the forerunner of many more equally as praiseworthy. The success of the Cambridge Uni­ versity freshman, E. R. Wilson, on his first appearance in a first-class match is unprecedented in the annals of the game. So near was he to scoring two separate centuries in the match, that I reproduce the follow ing table, giving a list of those players who have obtained 100 or more iuus in one innings and 80 or more in the other of a firBt-class match. 99 and 133, C. B. Fry, Sussex y. Hampshire, at Brighton, August 8, 9 and 10, 1898. 96 and 135, Hall, L., Yorkshire v. Middlesex, at Sheffield, August 18, 19 and 20, 1861. 94 and 121, Dr. W . G. Grace, Kent and Gloucester­ shire v. England, at Canterbury, August 3, 4 and 5, 1874. 211 and 92*, F. E. Lacey, Hampshire v. Kent, at Southampton, June 16, 17 and 18, 1884. 92 and 183*, Dr. W . G. Grace, Gloucestershire v. Yorkshire, at Gloucester, June 30 and July 1 and 2, 1887. 92 and 103*, T. C. O’Brien, Middlesex v. Yorkshire, at Lord’s, June 20, 21 and 22, 1889. 145* and 92, Bean, G., Sussex v. Nottinghamshire, at Brighton, July 9,10 and 11, 1891. 117 and 92, G. L. W ilson, Sussex v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol, August 7, 8 and 9, 1893. 102 and 91, J. A . Dixon, Nottinghamshire v. Kent, at Gravesend, June 17,18 and 19, 1897. 89 and 142, Griffith, G., Surrey v. Sussex, at Brighton, July 13,14 and 15,1863. 109 and 89, J. Trinniek, Victoria v. South Australia, at Adelaide, February 21, 23,25,26 and 27,1884. 109 and 86*, H. G. Owen, Essex v. Oxford University, at Leyton, July 5, 6 and 7,1894. I ll and 85*, Chatterton, W ., Derbyshire v. Essex, at Leyton, July 23, 24 and 25,1896. 124 and 83, P. S. M ‘Donnell, Australia v. England, at Adelaide, December 12,13,15 and 16,1884. 115 and 83, F. S. Jackson, Yorkshire v. Middlesex, at Bradford, August 17, 18 and 19,1896. 126 and 82, Dr. W . G. Grace, United South v. United North, at Hull, August 3, 4 and 5, 1876. 203 and 81*, Brown, J. T., Yorkshire v. Middlesex,at Lord’s, May 21, 22 and 23, 1896. 106 and 81, Shrewsbury, A., England v. Australia, at Lord’s, July 17, 18 and 19, 1893. 187 and 80*, F. A. Iredale, New South Wales v. South Australia, at Sydney, February 28, 29, March 2, 3 and 4,1896. * Signifies not out. The victory of Yorkshire over Somerset- shire was a foregone conclusion, but the decisiveness of the defeat was probably greater than even the most sanguine supporters of the northern county antici­ pated. There was some very bright cricket during the partnership of Hirst and Denton, the two adding 115 runs for the sixth wicket in forty-five minutes. The former appears to be in quite his best form both with bat and ball, having supplemented his eleven wickets against Marylebone with a score of 84 against Somersetshire, whilst Rhodes, judging by his performances against Somerset­ shire and Gloucestershire, has evidently regained the form which last season placed him in quite the first flight of bowlers. The career of Worcester­ shire as a first-class county is decidedly interesting. It was a capital performance on their part to make Nottinghamshire follow -on, but why were only two days set apart for the fixture ? Had a third day been allotted, Worcestershire would have gained a popular victory, thanks to Arnold’s great innings of 142. H owell’s first appearance for an Aus­ tralian team in England will long be remembered. N ot only did he dismiss a batsman (Abel) with the first ball he delivered, but, by obtaining all ten wicaets in an innings for 28 runs, he performed a feat which no one, save perhaps John Wisden in 1850, had ever accomplished before in a first-class match at so small a cost. Appended will be found a list of those bowlers who have captured all ten wickets in an innings of a first-class match. Hinkly, E., Kent v. England, at Lord’s, July 10 and 11,1848. Wisden, J., for scarcely 30 runs. North v. South, at Lord’s, July 15, 1850. (All clean bowled.) Y . E. Walker, for 74 runs. England v. Surrey, at the Oval, July 21, 22. 23,1859. W ootton, G., All E gland Eleven v. Yorkshire, at Sheffield, July 17,18, 19, ’ 865. V. E. Walker, for 104 runs, Middlesex v. Lancashire, at Manchester, July 20, 21, 22, 1865. Hickton, W ., for 46 runs, Lancashire v. Hampshire, at Manchester, July 21, 22, 23,1870. S. E. Butler, for 38 runs, Oxford University v. Cambridge University, at Lord’s, June 26, [27, 18ft.