Cricket 1899

F e b . 23, 1899. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 19 BUSSEY'S HOCKEY . FBN tS T C LU B M AD E IS THE ' f / v ^ AS USED BY THE BEST PLAYERS, REGULATION CANE HANDLE HOCKEYS, 6 / 6 , 5 / 6 , 3 6 . DEST mAKK- A P P L Y F O R C A T A LO G U E TO Geo. G. BUSSEY & Co., 3 6 & 3 8 , Q u e e n V ic t o r ia S t r e e t , L C N E O N ; OR DEALERS ALL GVtR THE WORLD. M ANUFACTORY- BETWEEN THE INNINGS. FIRST-CLASS CRICKETERS o f 1898. (Continued from page 5.) A. Eccles had scored 80 in his second inn - ings against Mr. Webbe’s Eleven early in the season, but from that game until the Lord’s match had done very little, and there were some who thought that he was not worth a place in the team, so that his masterly display at headquarters came as a distinct surprise. He was at once enlisted under the Red Rose banner, failed in his first m a'cb, but in his second ran up a capital 139 v. Leicestershire, at Leicester, and did some good service in most of the remaining games, his 51 v. Surrey, at the Oval, being, perhaps, the best of his other innings. C. R . Hartley, who had played a few times in 1897 with some amount of success, came into the team about the middle o f June, and, aided by some luck, ran up 22 and 83 v. Warwickshire in his first match, and 88 v. Surrey in his second. Thereafter, save for some falling off in August (which, perhaps, accounted for his absence from the last two matches), he made plenty of runs in nearly every match—70 v. Notts, at Manchester ; 61 and 31 at N ottingham ; 61 v. Essex, at Manchester; and 53, not out, v. Kent, at Canterbury, being some of his best scores. He is scarcely to be numbered among the correct players, but is a fine, free hitter, who does not lack defence either, and should be very useful if he can find time to play regularly. PECKHAm, LONDON. TIM BER M ILLS— E L M S W E L L , S U F F O L K . I t would be idle to pretend that either Briggs or Mold was at his best in 1898. Still, there were excuses for both. The former had been playing in Australia through the winter, though he had scarcely done as much work out there as on some former trips from which he has returned as “ fit as a fiddle.” Mold had an injured leg, which kept him out of several matches, and must have handi­ capped him throughout. Both fell short of a three-figurenumber of wickets, Mold for only the second time in ten seasons, Briggs for the first time in the last twelve years. Y et both did very good work at times, and there is no reason to suppose that either is played out yet, though one may fairly doubt whether they will ever again equal the performance of their best days. Briggs took nine u ickets for 7& v. Derbyshire, at Derby, and on the Old Trafford ground he had nine for 138 v. Notts, tight for 63 in the first innings of Middlesex, and seven for 82 in the first of Sussex, but immediately after the last- mentioned performances fell off so much that iu the course of the remaining four­ teen matches in which he took part before the season closed his harvest was only twenty-seven wickets for nearly a thousand runs. Mold got a good number of wickets at no great cost so often that it is surprising to find his captures work­ ing out to fully twenty runs each. He took six for 33 v. Hants, at Southampton ; five for 27 in the second innings of Derbyshire, at Derby ; five for 20 in the first of Warwickshire, at L iv erp ool; five for 39 iu the first of Notts, and six for 22 in the first of Gloucestershire, both at Manchester, while on five or six other occasions he had half, or more than half, of the wickets iu an innings at a cost of less than twenty each. On three or four occasions Briggs showed that his old ability to play a merry, nonchalant inn­ ings had not entirely deserted him, once scoring over 50, and on four other occa­ sions over 40, but he is a long way from being the batsman he was ten years or so ago. ____________________ The reserve wicket-keeper, Lees Ra'?- cliffe, played in three matches more than the first string, Charles Smith. But this was ow ing to an accident to Smith’s arm; from which blood poisoning resulted, keeping him out of the cricket-field for nearly two months in the height of the season. Both are really fine wicket­ keepers, with very little to choose between them in that department; but Smith is very decidedly the better bat. H e was only once seen to advantage in iront of the wickets in 1898, though, the occ ision being the Leyton match to which I have already alluded in speaking of Baker. R idcliffe stumped no fewer than six batsmen in the Middlesex match at Manchester. Paul, who has done good work in the team during the last two or three years, was only plajed in three matches, and it seems a decided pity that so capable a ba'sman should not have been given a better show. I ’Anson played in three matches also, but failed to show any glimpse of the form which brought him to the front in the beginning of the 1896 season. Hallows, a left- handed colt on the Old Trafford ground staff, shaped very well for 47 v. Warwick­ shire, at Birmingham ; 43 v. Somerset, at Taunton ; and 51 v. Surrey, at the Oval. In ten innings in first-class matches, A. N. H ornby scored just 100 runs, which is not a great record, it is true ; yet it shows that the famous old Lancashire captain is not quite done with yet, and his occasional appearances in the team were hailed with pleasure by all but the very newest critics, who incline to novelty at any cost, and are too apt to assume that a veteran is lig g in g superfluous on the stage. S. M . Tindall captained the team in several matches. He scored 57 v. Gloucestershire, at Gloucester, but was not conspicuous with the bat on any other occasion. W . B. Stoddart, a Liverpool amateur and a famous Rugby forward, was a real addi­ tion to the strength of the team, being a very useful slow bowler, and by no means a bad bat. H e began fairly well with five wickets for 77 v. Warwickshire, at Liverpool, his best performances after­ wards being five for 63 v. Surrey, at Manchester, eight for 122 in the out match with Leicestershire, and six for 121 in the first innings of Kent, at Canterbury, when the better-known bowlers of the side were very ineffective. L jncaster, who has appeared from time to time in the county team for some six years or more past, played in four matches, and did one notable bow ling performance (seven for 25 in the second innings of Middlesex at Manchester),