Cricket 1899

THE FINEST BAT THE WORLD PRODUCES. J u l y 6, 1899. C R IC K E T : A W E E K L Y R E C O R D O F T H E G A M E . 247 BUSSEY’S CO LU M J o fa fe & 03 tJ J a & *co s J w tie CD 2 CO 2 , i - S .O £ H _ CO CO CO C - o « CO CO w cii S3 pers M O w — fa 0 3 I CO ^ CO | c3 3 fl a s CO BUSSEY’S AT THE SIGN OF THE WICKET. By F. S. A sh ley -C ooper . It was unfortunate for all concerned that the great match at Leeds last week was obliged to be abandoned on the last day on account of rain, without a definite result being arrived at, for, when play ceased on the Friday, the ffame was in such an even con­ dition that an interesting struggle had been looked forward to on the following day. Several changes were madein the composition of the English eleven, places being found for Brown, Briggs, Young, and W. G. Quaife, none of whom had played either at Notting­ ham or Lord’s. Briggs was included because the match was played on a soft wicket, whilst Quaife owed his place in the eleven to the fact that Shrewsbury had declined to play, think­ ing that, at his age, participation in so important a match would prove too great a strain. Both Brown and Young have been in such fine form lately, the former with the bat and the latter with the ball, that their places in the team were thoroughly deserved. The most interesting feature of the Australian innings was furnished by Worrall, who went in first, and played a masterly and resolute innings for seventy-six. Daring the time he was at the wickets he almost monopolised the scoring, claiming all the first 28 runs, 37 out of 38, 47 out of 52, 51 out of 62, 64 out of 79, and, finally, 76 out of 95. His innings, which lasted an hour and a quarter, was made without a chance, and contained fourteen fours. Hill batted an hour and fifty minutes for thirty-four, and Trumble carried his bat out for twenty, the innings closing for 172, after having lasted three hours and five minutes. At the end of the first day England had scored 119 for four wickets, and were thus only fifty-three runs behind, with six wickets in hand. Before play com­ menced the following day it became known that Briggs had been seized with an epileptic fit, and would be unable to take any further part in the match. This was a great misfortune for England, but further disasters were in store, for two wickets, those of Mr. Fry and Quaife, fell without any ad­ dition being made to the overnight total. It was at this point that Hayward and Lilley became associated and made a welcome stand, the value of which cannot be overestimated. Whilst together, an hour and forty minutes, the two batsmen increased the score by 93 runs, and so enabled England to hold a lead of 48 runs on the first innings. The second innings of the Australians commenced in a sensational manner, half the side being out with nine runs required to wipe off the deficit. This startling collapse was mainly due to Heame, who performed the hat-trick, his vic­ tims being Hill, Gregory, and Noble. Only twice before had this feat been accomplished in matches between England and Australia. The first case occurred at Melbourne, in January, 1879, when F. R. Spofforth disposed of V. K. Royle, F. A. Mackinnon, and Em­ mett with successive balls, and the second instance took place on the same ground, in January, 1883, the bowler being Bates and the unfortunate batsmen, McDonnell, Giffen, and Bonnor. With five wickets down for 39 runs, a complete collapse seemed highly pro­ bable, but some valuable batting by Trumble, Laver, Kelly, and Trumper enabled the in­ nings to eventually reach the respectable total of 224. England had made 19 runs without loss of the 177 required to win when stumps were drawn for the day. On Saturday play was quite out of the question, on account of tho weather, and the game accordingly ended n a very even draw. Whether the neceseary runs would have been obtained had play been possible is, of course, a matter of opinion, but it was generally thought that at the close England had slightly the best of the game. The victory of Hampshire over Surrey last week was the first defeat experienced by the metropolitan county this season in an inter­ county match. The result was chiefly brought about by the magnificent batting of Major Poore, but it must not be forgotten that Brockwell, Hayward, and Richardson were at Leeds, and that in consequence Surrey could only put a weak team into the field. A curious fact in connection with the result was that it was the first time Hampshire had beaten Surrey since 1866. The first match between the two sides was in 1788, and the two counties continued to meet regularly from that time until 1793, during which period seven games were played, of which Suirev won four and Hampshire three. After a lapse of seventy years the counties again met, and since 1863 have played thirty-four matches, Surrey winning twenty-five and Hampshire but four. Appended will be found some statistics dealing with the University matches, giving results, etc., of all matches played since the two sides first met in 1827. RESULTS OF A L L MATCH E8. Cambridge won 1839, 1840,1841, 1842, 1843, 1845, 1847, 1819,1851,18*6, 1859,1860,1861,1862.1867.1868, 1869. 1870,1872, 1876, 1878, 1879, 1880,1882,1883,1885, 1889, 1890, 1891, 1893, 1895,1697. Oxford won 1829.1836,1838,1846,1848,1850,1852, 1853, 1854,1855, 1857, 1858, 1863, 1864,1865,1866,1871, 1873, 1874, 1875, 1877, 1881, 1881,1886,1887,1892,1894, 1896, 1898. Matches dra\*n 1827, 1844, 1888. 1899. Sixty-five matches have been played. Cambridge have won 32, Oxford 29, and four have been left drawn. IN D IVID U A L CENTURIES. (* .)— O x f o r d . 1886 ........... K . J. K ey .................... M. R. Jardine .. .. G. O. Smith .......... H . K. F o s te r ......... F. M. Buckland .. .. V T. H ill................ .. W . H. G a m e ......... .. A . E ccles................. W . H. Patterson .. W . Rashleigh......... .. Lord Geo. Scott .. .. C. B. F r y .................. (& .)— C a m b r id g h .. W . Yardley ......... H. J. Mordaunt .. .. G. B. Studd ......... .. E. C. Streatfeild .. .. C. E. M. Wilson W . 8. Patterson E. Crawley ......... . .. C, W . W right......... H. W . Bainbridge.. W . Yardley .......... • Signifies not out. Mr. W illiam Yardsley is the only batsman who has twice played a three-figure innings in the ’Varsity match. TO TA L INNINGS OF THREE HUNDRED OR MORE. 1892 1896 1895 1877 1892 1876 1898 1881 1886 1887 1894 1872 1889 1882 1892 1898 1876 1887 1683 1885 1870 143 140 132 121 117* 114 109 109 107* 107 100 100* 130* 127 120 116 115 105* 103* 102 101 100 C ambridge . O xford . 1872 .............................. 388 1892 .............................. 365 1892 .............................. 388 1898 .............................. 362 1897 ............................ 336 1894 .............................. 338 1696 .............................. 319 1896 (6 wkts.) ... 330 1876 .............................. 302 1887 .............................. 313 1889 .............................. 300 1881.............................. 1886 .............................. 1899 (8 wkts.) 306 304 347 TOTAL INNINGS OF FIFTY OR LESS. C ambridgb . 1858 .............................. 39 1878 .............................. 32 1838 .............................. 47 1890 .............................. 42 The recent match was full of interest from the start to the finish, although on the first day the slow wicket to a certain extent spoilt the play. When Oxford, upon winning the toss, completed an innings for 192 runs, [it was generally considered that the side had done as well as could reasonably be expected, and when Cambridge had lost eight wickets