Cricket 1899

J uly 13, 1899. C R I C 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 . 275 CRYSTAL PALACE v. KENSINGTON PARK .— Played at the Palace on July 8. K ensington P a r k . E.H. Seaton,b Lulham 14 J,G.Donaldson,cT. A. Darke, b Campbell 70 T. Shaw, b Umnev ... 70 S. M. Tindall, c Lul­ ham, b H. L. Turner 15 C. S. G. Lloyd, b H. L. Turner ...................35 M. A. Nicholas, cR .H . Darke bH.L.Turner 7 A.W .Watson,c Camp­ bell, b H. L. Turner 0 C r y s t a l H. Colegrave, b Lloyd 3 E. H. Lulham, run out 4 J. M. Campbell, b Abney ...................27 H .L . Turner,b Abney 0 R.H . Dillon, c Tindall, b Abney ................... 2 E. G. Turner, b Abney 4 R. E. A. Elliott, lbw, b H. L. T u rn er........... 4 L. E. G. Abney.not out 55 G.Turville-Browne, b Cam pbell................... 1 J. C. W ood, c Parry, b Umney ................... 7 B 13, lb 4, wb l,n b 2 20 Total ...248 P a l a c e . A . Cosens, not out .. 72 Dr. W . F. Umney, b L loyd.......................... 14 T. A . Darke, b W ood 19 W . J. Parry, not out... 38 B 4, lb 1, wb 5, nb 1 11 Total (8 wkts) 194 R. H. Darke did not bat. HAMPSTEAD v. WOODFORD WELLS, at W oodford on July 1. H a m p s t e a d . -Played F. R. D . Monro, b Palmer ...................65 H .C . McNeill, c Giller, b P a lm er...................27 T.S.Wheater,b Palmer 13 W . R. Moon, not out 9 Extras ... ... ... 16 Total (3 wkts) *110 W . T. Danby. E. W . H. Eeaton, S. M. Knight, R. Matthews. J. C. Toller. J. C. R. Dickson, ard A. Eiloart did not bat. * Innings declared closed. W oodford W e lls . A.D.Cham en,bKnight 20 E x tras............... 3 A.M .Tossetti,cKn,-ght, — b M cN eill...................13 Total (2 wkts) 42 A. E. Burnie, not out 6 W . J. Giller, H. F. Chamen, E. C. Palmer. W . Kinslinbuiy, F. Cfcamen, and three others did not bat. SURBITON v. CHISWICK Surbiton on July 1. C h u w ic k P a r k . P . P . Arkinstall, b 8heriff ...................14 W . H. L. Horton, st Newton, b Sheriff ... 6 R. L. Finnis, b Sheriff 13 W . H. Bacon, b Sheritf 2 C.H. Candler, b Sheriff 2 E. C. Turner, b Sheriff 2 H.C.Henderson,notout 7 PAT K .- Played at H. Harding, lbw, b Sheiiff ................... E. W . Smi<h, b Sheriff F. Finnis, b Sheriff ... G. Gilbert, b Sheriff .. Leg-bye ........... Total P. Castle, c Finnis, b Sm ith.......................... 2 E. Andrew, c and b Arkinstall...................43 J. F. Newton, c F. Finnis, b Smith ... 19 H. Sheriff, lbw, b Arkenstall ... ... 0 H. J. Bryant, lbw, b Smith... ............... o H. Chambers, c and b Finnis ...................17 S u rrito n . Rev. A. E. Beavan, b Arkinstall ...0 F. Forsyth,bArkinstall 0 C.Wrinch.cHenderson b Finnis ..................... 14 V.Howell.c Arhinstall b Candler... S. Hoiford,not out B 9, lb 1 ... T o ta l......... J ' S W E L L 'S X I. V . DULW ICH (2).-P layed at Tulse Hill on July 8th. J . C. L o v e l l’ s X I. G. A. Ring, jun., b C.H.Mountain, b King 27 J .P.Candler,cAldridge b Shaw ...................33 D.V.Hassard, c Cowin, b Shaw ................... 4 J. S. Lovell, b Shaw ... 8 W . H. Golds, b Shaw 6 A. Meller, b Leighton 20 E. D. Lovell, b Ca’cott 8 Calcott ... E.G. Langton, c Page, b Leighton ........... S,H.Flindt cF.Twigg, b C a lco tt................. H. T dy, notout B 15,lb 2 ........... W . A. K ing, b Candler W .M .Frizell,c H assard b Candler................... W .J. Twigg, b Candler R.D.Shaw,c Mountain, b J. Lovell ........... R. A . Bendle, lbw, b J . L o v e ll................... M.B.Calcott,b J.Lovell L C. Page, c Mountain, b J. Lovell D u lw ic h . Total ..136 C. F. Twigg, st M oun­ tain, b J. Lovell .. J. H. Cowin, did not b»t (hurt) ........... A. W . S. Aldridge, b J. lo v e ll................... H. Leighton, not out Byes ................... Total ........... Second innings : W . A. King, not out, 1 ; W . M. ft” a ’ F1,ndt- 3 J R- A. Bendle. c Tidy, b Flindt, ^ I .8. Aldridge, not out, 5; H. Leighton, c Golds, b Flindt, 11; byes, 4—Total (3 wkts) 35. C T o m s p o n t i n u e . The Edit r does not h Id himself responsible for the ot in'ons of h's correspondents. SLOW SCORING AND DRAWN GAMES. To the Editor of C r ic k e t . Sir,—Some time ago there appeared in one of the Manchester newspapers a sketch of the crowd at one of the matches in which the Australians were playing. Individuals in it are represented as yawning, nodding, and fast asleep, the description underneath being “ Slow cricket and its effect.” Now, Sir, I maintain this is not as it should be. I am as enthusiastic a cricket supporter as could be found anywhere, and have only been able to see one match this year so far— Australia v. Lancashire, but I muBt say it was enough to damp anyone’s enthusiasm. The rate of scoring was painfully slow, averaging about 40 runs an hour. I con­ sidered the style of practically all the Aus­ tralian team (I had not seen a first-class match for five years, having been abroad) as cramped and ungraceful, and the batting of the Lancashire eleven, except Tyldesley and Cuttell, appeared like that of a lot of nervous schoolboys. This style of slow, anxious, and ungraceful play appears to be gaining ground. I am certain Albert Ward has advanced in it. A spectator at this match said to me “ I ’m sure he’s as bad as Barlow ever was,” and a gentleman passing with a book in his hsnd, another onlooker remarked, “ Ah ! he’s a wise chap. He brings a book to read while Ward’s batting.” How did Quaife get his position in the averages? By slow, tedious play. Two more of the greatest cricketers, Gunn and Shrewsbury, are by­ words for it. It seems to grow upon players who formerly had a free, confident style, witness Brann and others. And compare the present Australian team with its predecessors in this respect. The success of Quaife last year and the Australians this will give a further impetus to this style, and professional cricketers especially will duly bear it in mind. I maintain, however, that it is not cricket, and if it progresses, as it seems to do, it will ruin the game. What isthe object of batting— to make runs ; and if a man cannot do this, he is not a batsman. Why, you will see wicket-keepers and men of the very tail-end, upon the instruction of their captain, keep up their wickets for an hour or two by simply not attempting to score—like many of the players do in test matches. What do spec­ tators go to see at cricket matches ? Runs made, or, if runs cannot be made, what ought to result—wickets taken by the bowlers. No, if a man cannot make runs, he has no right to play cricket, for what does slow play result in—drawn games. Now, from a sporting point drawn games are a complete waste of time, for two teams meet together to decide their superiority, and drawn games ( fo the M.C.C. says) don’t decide superiority. Fancy a team coming all the way from Australia to challenge England and then playing drawn games, i.e., defeating the object of the journey. And we might rationally argue that all the other test matches will be drawn, for if two teams on three full days, on perfect wickets, and without losing an hour’ s time, whilst making comparatively small totals,- only draw the match, what is to be expected on other occasions when the time may be shortened by weather, or the scores large? I believe about one-third of the matches last year ended in draws, and, mind you, cricket is played for one team to win. It has been proposed to increase the size of the wickets, amend the lbw. law, do away with boundaries, and make several more in­ advisable changes. I propose a simpler ex­ pedient—put a time limit on the rate of scoring. Let the M.C.C. rule that any bats­ man whose score does not amount to 35 runs at the end of the first hour of his innings, 70 at the end of the second, 105 at the end of the third, etc., must be given out at the end of the hour wherein he has not kept up the stipulated proportion of runs—the umpires to time the batsmen (an easy thing to do with the new scoring boards). This would mean 70 runs per hour about, and besides securing a result to every match, where not interfered with by weather, it would render cricket an ideal game to watch. Thirty-five runs per hour isnot averyrapid rate of scoring, andcricketers would soon adapt themselves to the change. If they did not, they would be out, and very properly out, too. I don’t think it would increase scores very materially even if all cricketers got to be experts at fast scoring. It would shorten their innings many a time, and where they did keep in, by maintaining a rapid rate of scoring, they would naturally get fatigued and play less surely as their score got large. Nor do I think it would lessen scores. Resolute hitting is the correct game on a soft wicket; instead of which you frequently see our famous cricketers pottering about for an hour for half-a-dozen rum—a thing any tail-end man can do, occasionally. I saw S. Gregory score 4 in an hour and ten minutes (when he might have got the same number in the first over by a little courage and one vigorous stroke) and Albert Ward blocking away for twenty minutes without making a run. It is positively shameful the way some of our players shape on these per­ fect wickets. I know, from experience, the difference between a first-class wicket and an untended one, and declare that you may see many a youth on an open village green batting away in a free resolute style that has far more cricket in it than the frequent poking exhibitions of some of our leading batsmen, because it conduces to the object for which cricket (or first-dass cricket, at any rate) is properly played—a definite termination and the pleasure of the onlooker. There is a time-limit to the moves in chess, and in other games. Perhaps some cricketers now can, occasionally, do better when they score 4 in an hour, or nothing in twenty minutes, than they could if they were limited to time, and perhaps a chess player could sometimes make a better move if he thought over it a day, or a month, or a year ; but the object of the limit would be the same in both games, to ensure a conclusion and avoid en><ni. Gentlemen of the M.C.C., put this proposal into operation, or a similarly efficacious one, if you wish to preserve the public esteem for our national pastime. Ftrnch touched upon this point of dissatisfaction years ago when he wrote of Scotton— “ But an hour of Grace, or Walter Read, Were worth a week of you.” And public feeling on the subject is yearly growing stronger. 1 am, Sir, etc., JNO. W . SKELHORN. Old Trafford. The Tenth Australian Tour in England. ONE PENNY. NOW READY. Containing P hotos and B io g r a ph ie s of each member of the team and interesting tables relating to previous tours. 168, U p pe r T ham es S t re et , L on r. o n , E.C.