Cricket 1899

J une 1, 1899. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 165 TH E AUSTRALIANS. THE LANCASHIRE MATCH. SIXTH OF THE TOUIt. Played at Old Trafford on May 25 and 2G. Australians won by an innings and 84 runs. Neither in batting nor bowling did the Lancashire men show to advantage in this match. It is true that they had the worst o f the wicket, and that their bowlers did very well for a time, but Mold could not get a hold and only bowled a few overs, while Cuttell was the only man who gave the visitors much trouble. Before lunch Cuttell bowled 24 overs for 24 runs and took four wickets, and it was not the fault of the batsmen that he did not get more. After lunch he met with bad luck, tut while all the other bowlers were hit freely he still had to be played with care. There was nothiDg at the beginning of the A ustralian innings to point to a good total, for after being more or less in difficulties with the bowling, Iredale, Darling, Bill, Gregory, Worrall and Noble were all out for 65. Then came a stand by Kelly and Trumper which quite altered the appearance of the game, the partneiship producing 83 runs in an hour and a half. This broke the back of the bowling, and its discom­ fiture was completed when Trumble joined Trumper, and when at last these two batsmen were parted the total had reached 229. Trumper was the first to go for a very well played innings of 82, which had taken him two hours and three-quarters to put together ; he was distinctly fortunate in being missed two or three times and in escaping what teemed a certain run out, but accidents like this will happen in the best regulated teams. Trumble also played an excellent game, and with Howell put on f 8 runs in twenty-five minutes. Lancashire had a terrible fifteen minutes before stumps were drawn, losing Baker and Bards- well for 6 runs. The history of the match as played on Friday is the history of Tyldesley’s batting and the bowling of Trumble, Howell and Noble. All the Lancashire batsmen failed except Tyldesley, who in both innings played a great gam e; to him the bowling never seemed to look remarkable. In the first inn­ ings he made 56 out of a total o f 84 while he was at the wickets and in the second 42 out of 76. Altogether he was batting for three hours and a half. If Ward had once been allowed to begin to get the ball away some approach to a fight might have been made. A u str a lia n s . F. A. Iredale, c Mold, b Cuttell ...................21 J. J. Darling, c Ward, b Cuttell ...................16 C. Bill, c Ainsworth .. 11 S. E. Gregory, c Bards- well, b B riggs........... 4 J. Worrall, c Hartley, b Briggs ........... ... 12 M. A. Noble, c M old,b Cuttell ................... 0 L ancashire . First innings. Baker, c Iredale, b Howell.. 0 G. R. Bardswell, c and b Trumble ........................... 0 Radcliffe, b Trum ble........... 6 Mold, b Howell ................... 0 Ward, b M cL eod................... 8 Tyldesley, c and b Noble ... 56 A. Eccles, b Noble ........... 5 C. R. Hartley, c Trumble, b Noble ... ........................... 5 Cuttell, cWorrall, b McLeod 11 Briggs, b Noble ................... 0 J. L. Ainsworth, not out ... 0 B 6, lb 3, nb 2 ...........11 Total .................. 102 V. Trumper, b Baker. 82 J. J. Kelly, b Briggs.. 36 C E.M cLeod,bCuttell 1 H. Trumble, b Cuttell 51 W . P. Howell, not out 20 B 6, lb 6, w 1 ... 13 Total . 267 Second innings, c Hill, b Trumble 0 b Howell ........... 0 not out................... 0 c Worrall, b Trum ble........... 1 run out ........... 6 c and b H owell... 42 b Howell ........... 0 c K elly,b Noble.. 1 b Trum ble...........14 c and b Trumble. 1 cNoble,bTrumble 0 B 8, lb 7, w 1 16 Total ... 81 A u str a lia n s . O. M. R. W . 0 . M. R. W . Cuttell ...53 1983 6 M old ... 5 3 4 0 Ainsworth...32 1574 0 Baker ... 9 1 23 1 Bnggs......... 36 10 70 3 Mold bowled a wide. L a n c a sh ir e . First innings. Second innings. O. M.R. W . O. M.R. W . Irum ble..........2L 10 18 2 ............ 14 5 20 5 S 0y ell ...........16 9 26 2 ........... 13*1 7 16 3 JJeLeod.......... 19 6 29 2 ............ 7 2 12 0 Noble ..........35-3 4 18 4 ............ 8 4 17 1 Trumble bowled two no-balls. WARWICKSHIRE v. KENT. This match was to have taken place at Edgbaston 26th and 27th, but so much rain had en that at the request of the Warwickshire com- Augujst agreed to postpone the match until SUSSEX v. SOMERSET. Played at Brighton on May 25, 26 and 27. Sussex won by an innings and 49 runs. Never very strong at this time of the year, the Somersetshire men have gone through a series of 1 rying experiences in the present season. They can­ not complain that there was a want of variety in their matches last week, for while they met Middlesex on a sodden pitch, they found the wicket at Brighton in excellent order for batting. Against Sussex they won the toss, and in these days of low scoring they seemed to have done pretty well when they had ended their innings with a total of 210, towards which Mr. Trask, Robson, and Mr. Wo< ds had been the only important contributors. Robson’s play was of ihe kind which all cricketers love ; he hit vtry hard, without taking unnecessary risks, and his batting was correct. His eighty runs were put together in seventy minutes. Mr. Trask’s innings, while it was not as brilliant as that of the professional, was of very great value to his side. So well did Sussex begin, that when their first wicket fell they were only 150 runs behind. But Ranjitsinhji and Murdoch were not in form, at<d soon three wickets were down for 78, which was not at all a promising outlook. Meanwhile Mr. Brann wss playing beautiful cricket, and when he was joined by Killick the bowling was mastered, and it seemed that the two partners would play out time. Just before stumps were drawn, however, Mr. Brann was bowled for an admirable innings of 69. Killick was not out 35, and Sussex were only 61 runs behind with six wickets in hand. This was fairly satisfactory on paper, but the Sussex tail has been known to collapse in such a remarkable manner that no confi­ dence could be felt as to the result. On Friday, how­ ever, the tail, who had perhaps been reading about the fine show made by the Australian tail at Old Trafford on the previous day, astonished friends and opponents alike by a noble exhibition of batting. Killick and Collins (see “ Gossip” for an explanation of the rcas< n why they should be included in the tail) put on 143 runs in two hours and a quaiter for the tifih wicket by batting which was almost above re­ proach, while Butt and Tate treated the tired bowlers in a very rough manner by putting on 126 in an hour and twenty minutes. KilJick’s score of 140 was made by very sound batting indeed, although when he had passed the hundred he for a time become careless ; he was at the wickets for thiee hours and three-quarters. W ith a balance against them of 259, Somerset lost three wickets lor 88 before stumps were drawn, so that unltss Mr. W oods happened to give one of his characteristic displays against Sussex on the follow­ ing day his county was marked out as certain to lose. Mr. Trask was not out 40, another very good innings. On Saturday Mr, Trask was out before he had made another run. Mr. Woods seemed quite at home, but was out when he was just beginning to be exceedingly dangerous, and although Gill and Mr. Newton knocked up 77 in thirty-eight minutes, the side never looked like making a good fight of it. S om erset . First innings. Second innings. H. T. Stanley, c Butt,b Tate 9 run out ........... 2 W . Trask, c Brann, b Tate . 56 c Tate, b Bland... 40 Nichols, b Tate .................. 5 b T a te.. ...........14 Robson, c Fry, b Bland ... 80 c Brann, b Killick 27 Capt. W . C. Hedley, b Tate 3 b Ranjitsinhji ... 19 S.M .J,W oods,cF ry,bT ate 23 b T a t e ................34 Capt. C. S. Hickley, c Butt, b T a te.................................. 4 b T a it ................... 2 J. L. Daniell, cTate,bBland 4 b Bland .......... 2 Gill, b B land.......................... 12 cCollins,b Killick 50 Newton, not o u t ................... 6 not out...................24 Tyler, b Bland ................... 0 absent................... 0 B 6, nb 2 .......................... 8 B 3, lb 2, nb 1 6 Total .................210 Total .............220 S u ssex . Cox, c and b Gill 3 Butt, c Robson, b Gill 75 Tate, not out ...........59 Bland, c Daniell, b Trask..........................10 B 17, lb 8, w 2, nb 1 28 C. B. Fry, b Gill G. Brann, b Nichols... 69 K. S. Kanjitsinhji, b Gill ..........................13 W . L. Murdoch, b Gill 0 Killick,cNewton,b Gilll40 A . Collins, c W oods, b Daniell .................. 52 Bean (J.), b G ill......... 2 Total ...479 S om erset . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W . O. M. R. W . T a te ........... ...29 7 74 6 ... ... 12 3 42 3 Cox ........... ...10 4 23 0 ... ... 7 2 26 0 Bland ...23-2 9 44 4 ... ... 33 7 91 2 Ranjitsinhji ...13 7 37 0 ... ... 14 6 26 1 Killick ... ... 4 1 21 0 ... ... 134 2 29 2 B ea n ........... ... 2 1 3 0 Bland bowled three no-balls. S u ssex . O. M. R. W . O. Tyler.......16 3 44 0 |N icholls.. 23 Robson .. 22 4 52 0 Gill .......50 14 117 7 Hedley ..22 4 61 0 Robson and Nicholls each bowled a wide, bowled a no-ball. M. R. W . 4 59 1 W oods ...20 5 75 0 Daniell ...10 1 27 1 Trask ...10*2 3 16 1 Gill WORCESTERSHIRE v. OXFORD UNIVERSITY. Played at Oxford on May 25, 26 and 27. Worcestershire won by 7 wickets. This was a well fought out match, in which the University, by an excellent second innings, redeemed their failure in the first. So well did m ey play up when things were going badly against them, that they set Worcestershire what set ms a hard task for these days—namely, to make 240 in Ihe fourth innings of a match, but the Worcestershire batsmen were quite equal to the occasion, and won without any difficulty. The most noticeable points in the match were the batting of Arnold and the bowling of W ilson. The former made 180 in his two innings and was only out once; his cricket was always good, at d although he played very oteadily, he hit well when occasion offertd. W ilson’s bowling was quite too much for the University in the first innings. Mr. fcL. K . Foster also very greatly distinguished ftimself in both inn­ ings, while R. E. Foster with a score of 84 in the Oxford second innings played quite up to his reputa­ tion. O xfo rd U n iv e r sity . First inuh gs. Second innings. F .H .B Champain, b Arnold 2 c H. Foster, b Wilson ...........16 H. C. Pilkington, b W ilson 5 cStraw,bBurrows 59 L.P.Collins,c bird, bW ilson 3 b B ird...................42 R. E. Foster, cBird,b Wilson 11 c Straw, b H. Foster ...........84 A. M. Hollins, st Straw, b W ilson................................... 0 b B urrow s...........20 A. Page, b W ilson ...........10 run out ............. 0 H. Martyn, c Simpson- Hayward, b Burrows ... 61 b Burrow s........... 1 R. A . W illiams, c Straw, b W ilson.................................. 12 cStraw,bBurrows 42 E. C. Lee, not o u t..................11 b Burrows............. 3 B. J. T. Bosanquet, bW ilson 6 c and b W ilson... 27 T. B. Knox, c Arnold, b W ilson................................... 2 not out................... 4 B 5, lb 6 ...................11 B 12, lb 10, w 1 23 Total ... ..134 Total ...........321 W orcestershire . First innings. Second innings. G. H. Simpson-Hayward, c Lee, b Knox ................... 4 c Lee, b Hollins 36 Arnold, lbw, b K n ox...........55 not o u t............ 125 H. K. Foster, c Page, b C ham pain.......................... 83 b W illiams.......55 W heldon, c Bosanquet, b Knox ...................................32 n otou t...............12 Bowley, b Bosanquet........... 6 c Martyn,b Knox 0 A. W . Isaac, c and b K nox 1 Straw, c Williams, b Bosan­ quet ................................... 3 E. G. Bromley-Martin, b Bosanquet...........................16 Bird, b Bosanquet ........... 0 W ilson, b Bosanquet............ 6 Burrows, not o u t.................... 1 E xtras............................ 9 B 9 ,lb l, w 2, n b l 13 Total...........................216 Total (3 wkts) 241 O xford U niversity . First inniogs. tiecond innings. O. M . R. W . O. M. h . W . W ilson ...........26 4 9 46 8 ............. 29 6 79 2 Arnold ........... 15 7 29 1 ............. 10 3 39 0 Burrow8 ...........11 1 ^8 1 ............ 29 1 9 73 5 Bird ........... 17 3 58 1 B.-Martyn... 2 0 14 0 Foster........... 12 3 35 1 Burrows bowled a wide. W orcestershire . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W . O. M. R. W. Bosanquet ... 39.2 12 77 5 ........... 20'2 3 94 0 K n o x ................. 37 10 66 4 ............ 35 7 67 1 W illiam s........... 6 1 26 0 ........... 20 8 42 1 Lee ................... 5 0 16 0 ........... Hollins ........... 7 2 18 0 ............ 9 3 25 1 Champain........... 4 2 4 1 ... .. Bosanquet and Knox each bowled a wide, and Williams delivered a no-ball. LEICESTERSHIRE v. DERBYSHIRE. A r e m a r k a b l e e n d in g . Played at Leicester on May 25, 26 and 27. Drawn. Although the weather at Leicester was fine on Thursday, cricket was out of the question by reason of a very heavy shower on the previous night. On Friday Leicestershire were doing pretty well when they were unfortunate enough to lose the services of W o o d co ck , who was tying up the Derbyshire men; he strained the muscles of his right arm. Pougher was also placed hors de combat in stopping a very hard return. Under these untoward circumstances the county did well to dispose of Derbyshire for 207 on a