Cricket 1899

Aug. 31, 1899. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 381 cricketers to the United States next month. Since then “ Ranji ” has an­ nounced his intention of going to America himself this autumn. Mr. MacLaren has also been mentioned as having accepted an invitation to form one of the team, if the tour should come off. As far as one can hear, however, nothing has as yet been definitely settled on this side. Still, in view of the trip, arrangements are being made by the Philadelphian authori­ ties for a series of matches. T h e Field of last Saturday makes the following comment on the behaviour of the crowd at the Middlesex v. Australians match at Lord’s :— “ During the innings of the Australians on Monday afternoon the batting became so tedious that the spectators at length protested by ironical applause and the whistling of airs intended to be expressive of their opinion of the funereal dulness of the game. Their banter was good-humoured enough, and is not to be compared with the conduct exhibited by spectators on various occasions when English teams have heen playing in Australia. It was, however, exceedingly annoying to the players, and especially to the Middlessex men, who naturally felt much ashamed of their countrymen, and who showed their disapproval by suspending the game for a few minutes. Inexcusable as the outbreak undoubtedly was, it cannot be considered altogether surprising that the spectator of the present day, who is alternately courted and condemned, should occasionally forget the difference between a cricket ground and a theatre.” “ I OBSERVE your remarks in Cricket of the 24th inst.,” writes Mr. A . B. Harland, “ re the performance of McLeod and Jones against Middlesex last week. The last time to my knowledge that two men bowled unchanged in a first-class match right through was on July 23rd and 24th, 1896, when Martin and Alec Heame at Catford for Kent v. Surrey disposed of Surrey for scores of 43 and something like 150. The match was finished off on the second day at five o’clock. I can vouch for the accuracy of these state­ ments as I was present at the match.” [Mr. Harland is in error. Martin and Alec. Hearne only bowled unchanged through the first innings of Kent v. Surrey at Catford in 1896, although they accounted for all the wickets in each inn­ ings. Mason and Shine bowled in the second innings but did not obtain wickets. The last occasion upon which two men bowled unchanged through a match was in the Middlesex v. Somerset­ shire encounter at Lord’s last May, when, owing to the success of Hearne and Trott, the match was completed in one day.— E d .] W h e n they looked in the papers on Monday it must have puzzled a great many people to know how many runs Mr. Townsend had made this season. The Daily Telegraph gives him 2,866—it may possibly be 2,366. The Sportsman is apparently undecided— the two middle figures might be read as anything, although in another place it gives 2,306 (which I believe is right.) The Evening News gives 2,806 (or possibly 2,896), while the Daily Chronicle plumps for 2,866. A t the beginning of the week Surrey had the chance of being the champion county of the year, provided that they did not lose any of their remaining three matches— against Kent, at Blackheath ; and Hampshire and Warwickshire at the Oval. But the Kent grounds have so often proved fatal that the chance was not remarkably large. W e fancy that they would still have been champions if they had lost to Kent and beat Hampshire and Warwickshire, but we do not profess to be able to work the thing out properly. W e are at a loss to know what the £ ’s mean in the following score, which appears in the Sunday Chronicle. Possibly Mr. Lancaster had a benefit. Another gentleman on the other side (Meltham Mills) was “ b Shaw, £ 19 .” Both bats­ men went in first for their side:— H olm firth . W . W . Lancaster, lbw,b Ward...£ .££...£ 25 R. T. Hardy, c A. Johnson, b Ward ...... 3 A. Lancaster, not out................................... 23 A. Shaw, b A. Johnson............................... 6 Dawson, c Haigh, b A. Johnson................. 7 A. Robinson, c Ward, b A. Johnson.......... 1 J. Littlewood, not out................................... 1 Extras........................................................ 1 Total (for 6 wkts)...................................67 I t waB quite pleasant to see an English bowler at last doing something for Middlesex this August, and Mr. Wells may be congratulated on taking nine wickets for 111 runs against Notts, as well as making a score of 244— the highest innings ever played against Notts. O ut of a total of exactly 400 runs, made by the Gloucestershire batsmen against Essex, two men, Mr. Townsend and Mr. Troup, were responsible for 339, which must surely be regarded as a curiosity of cricket. H obson , who by scoring twenty-eight runs in the second innings of Somerset against the Australians, on Saturday, brought his total for the season to more than 1,000 runs, is the first Somersetshire professional to accomplish the feat. “ P . M . R obinson 85, or thereabouts! the other day at Bangalore, got eighteen in one over,” says a writer in the Madras Times, “ and hit a full pitch to leg, which pitched from the bat on the Cash Bazaar and first bounce cleared the bar at the Bowring Institute of all its super­ incumbent glass and good cheer. This must be the biggest sixer on record. My correspondent, a noted cyclist, followed the ball most accurately in its course, and gives me his assurance that the ball ended up in a pocket of the billi.” A C o n t r a s t :— Mr. C. M . Wells made 244 for Middle­ sex, against Notts, in five hours and three- quarters. W . G. Quaife made 100 for Warwick­ shire, against Kent, in five hours. I n bringing his total of runs 'and wickets for the season to 1,000 and 100, Trumble has joined a select band of two other Australians who have accomplished the feat during a tour in England. The record is now as follows: — G. G iffe n — Wickets. Runs. 3886 ................. 162 ................. 1454 1893 ................. 148 ................. 1280 1896 ................. 117 ................. 1208 G. E. P almer — 1886 ................. 110 ................. 1056 H. T eumblb — 1899 ................. 135 ................. 1085 T h e list of hundreds made by English­ men against the Australians is still increasing, and is now as follows :—• E. H. B. Champain, for Oxford University ... 120 L. J. Moon, for Cambridge University .......... 138 T. L. Taylor, for Cambridge University.......... 110 J. T. Brown (Driffield), for Yorkshire .......... 166 T. Hayward, for England, at Manchester ... 130 Alec Heame, for Dr. Grace’s Eleven................. 168 Braund, for Dr. Grace’s Eleven ........................ 126 Hayes, for Surrey .............................................. 131 C. B. Fry, for Sussex ...................................... 181 Eillick, for Sussex .............................................. 106 F. S. Jackson, for England, at the Oval .......... 118 T. Hayward, for England, at the Oval .......... 137 C. L. Townsend, for Gloucestershire................. 135* M e a n w h il e the Australians are not standing still, and their list is as follows : S. E. Gregory, v. S. of England (Crystal Palace) 124 M. A. Noble, v. S. of England (Crystal Palace) 105* M. A. Noble, v. Oxford University ................. 100* J. Darling, v. Oxford University........................ 106* C. Hill, v. M.C.C. and Ground ........................ 132 C. Hill, v. Cambridge University........................ 160 S. E. Gregory, v. Cambridge University .......... 102 J. Worrall, v. Yorkshire...................................... 104 C. Hill, v. England (2nd m atch)........................ 135 V. Trumper v. England (2nd match)................. 135* J. Worrall, v. Leicestershire............................... 100* H. Trumble, v. Derbyshire ............................... 100 M. A. Noble, v. Derbyshire............................... 156 J. J Darling, v. Derbyshire............................... 134* Y. Trumper, v. Gloucestershire ........................ 104 J. Worrall, v. Sussex ...................................... 128 V. Trumper, v. Sussex ...................................... 300* J. Darling, v. M.C.C. and Ground ................. 128 S. E. Gregory, v. England (5th match) ... ... 117 J. Darling, v. Middlesex...................................... Ill F. A. Iredale, v. M iddlesex............................... Ill F. Laver, v. Somerset ...................................... 143 * Signifies not out. D u r in g a recent match near Sheffield a very stiffly-built little Yorkshireman (nicknamed “ T omm y” ) went into bat. After one of his side had been bowled by the last ball of an over, “ Tommy,” who had not yet received a ball, took up his position at the wicket ready for the next ball for at least three minutes, till the next man came in. Then he drew him­ self up, looked carefully round to see where he could most easily score a four, and was clean bowled by his first ball. F r o m the Madras Times :— “ On a ground not very far from Madras, but far enough to grow beans, some recent umpiring has waltzed off with every hit of cake in the district. “ Wide! O v e r !!” first roused the cognoscenti in the pavilion, and not long afterwards “ No-Ball! O v e r !!” —a week separated these two beautiful remarks, but that’s a detail. To show that there was absolutely nothing up the sleeve and that a fair field and no favour was the motto, one umpire last week chimed in with “ Boundary! One short!! ” after somebody had hit a four.”