Cricket 1899

448 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. O ct. 26, 1899. © o m s p o n t o n c e . The Editor does not hold himself responsible for the opinions o f his correspondents. GRIFFITH’S FOUR SIXES IN ONE OYER. [We have received several letters in which the writers state that they agree with Mr. Ball that Griffiths’ four sixes were made at the Oval, and Mr. Ball himself has given us additional proofs that he was right. But the following letter from Mr. Ashley-Cooper settles the question beyond the possibility of doubt.] To the Editor o f C r i c k e t . S i r , —In two recent numbers of Cricket a correspondent, Mr. Ball, has stated that the feat performed by Ben Griffith of scoring twenty-four runs from an over of four balls, by hitting each ball for six, occurred not at Hastings but at the Oval in a match between Surrey and Kent. I append a list of all the scores made for Surrey against Kent at the Oval by Griffith Year. 1857, 1858,* 1859,* 1860, 1861 1862 j 1863, 1864 j 1865, 1866 j 1867 J 1868 j 1869, 1870, b Willsher, 2 c Fryer, b Bennett, 29 (one 4, five3’s, three 2’s) c Wells, b Stubberfield, 16 no match b Willsher, 55 (one 5, four 4’s, one 3, five 2’s) b Traill, 28 (three 4’s, one 3, one 2) cB.Norton,bBaker,24 (two5’s,three 3’s,two2’s) cW . 8. Norton, b Willsher, 7 c Bennett, b W . 8. Norton, 1 c Fryer, b Willsher, 6 c and b Willsher, 6 c Fryer, b Troughton, 0 c and b Willsher, 0 c Bennett, b Wilsher, 16 c W . 8. Norton, fc Willsher, 22 c Palmer, b Bennett, 27 (three 3’s, four 2’s) b Willsher, 4 b Willsher, 13 b Bennett, 5 c Kelson, b Willsher, 59 (one 5, two 4’s six 3’s) * v. Kent and Sussex. I have given particulars of each score of twenty-four or more, and, as not one of these scores contained even a single hit for six, it stands to reason that Grif­ fith cannot possibly have made four sixes, or twenty-four runs, in one over. The match in which Griffith scored twenty-four runs off an over of four balls was between the United All-England XI. and Twenty-Two of Hastings and St. Leonard’s, at Hastings, August 29th, 30th, and 31st, 1864, and the bowler who was so severely treated was Bennett. In reporting the match, The Field remarked: “ The second United innings was chiefly remarkable for an over which Griffith turned to great account, having scored twenty-four runs by four consecutive hits.” The Sporting Life said: “ Griffith made four of the most magnificent hits that were ever seen—off four consecutive balls (one over) he hit Bennett out of the ground for six each, making twenty-four runs in one over. Each ball was sent as nearlyas possible 115 yards.” In “ Scores and Biographies ” reference was made to the performance in the following words: “ Griffith, in his second innings, hit four consecutive balls in one over, off Bennett, out of the ground, scoring six for each, or twenty-four altogether. They were on-drives, and each ball went as near as possible 115 yards, the last of the series alighting on the roof of ahouse.” Writing in “ Wisden’s Almanack” for 1872, the late Mr. W. H. Knight, one of the most accurate chroniclers the noble game ever had, remarked: “ How Griffith served one over of Farmer Bennett’s demands special mention, for it is a bit of batting that is supposed to have no equal in the history of hitting. In 1864, at Hastings, the United All-England Eleven played Twenty-one of Hastings, with George Bennett (of Kent). Bennett bowled an over, every ball of which Griffith hit away for six, making twenty-four runs from one over of four balls.” One quota­ tion more. Mr. F. G. Harding, who needs no introduction to Cricket readers, has kindly forwarded me a copy of “ The Hastings andSt. Leonard’sCricket Club,” published in 1894, on page 21 of which appears the following statement con­ cerning the 1864 match: “ In the second innings of the U.A.E.E , Griffith (dubbed the ‘ lion hitter ’) made 60, including four sixes, hit clean out of the ground, off one over from ‘ Farmer ’ Bennett. Four balls only were then bowled to the over.” From the above quotations it will be seen that Griffith’s “ gentle tapping” occurred at Hastings, and not, as Mr. Ball maintained, in a Surrey v. Kent match at the Oval. Yours faithfully, F. S. A s h l e y - C oo pe r . Kennington Oval, October 4th, 1899. “ CRICKET BY COMPARTMENTS.” To the Editor of Cricket. D e a r S i r , —It has got about in print— and I saw it in Cricket —that I am sup­ posed to be the author of a scheme for dividing cricket matches into fragments of time—such as one side batting for two or three hours, and the other side trying to beat the score in the same or less time, etc., etc. It is needless for me to say that I never dreamt of such a scheme. My remedy for drawn matches is old- fashioned, and dates back to the days of tall hats almost. I propose to return to the old system— i.e., the old practice of (1) Judging l.b.w. from bowler’s hand to wicket, thus giving a bowler the benefit of his “ on break ” ; (2) Running runs out; adopting the low boundary recom­ mended by V. E. Walker and others; (3) Playing sharp time from 11 to 7 in June and July; (4) Insisting on wicket-keepers never intentionally using their pads to stop the ball whether behind the wicket or in the field on receiving a ball returned by the field; (5) Employ umpires who know a “ throw ” from “ fair bowling,” and who have the courage to “ no-ball ” an offender. [If the above suggestions are too hard for modern cricketers, you must have a re­ serve and give those who are tired a com­ pulsory rest for a match occasionally.] (6) Go back to “ a fair level greensward ” with a little short grass on the top instead of the billiard table grounds which look as if they were shaved by the barber and ironed with the tailor’s goose, and I fancy drawn games would cease. In going from Horshamto London the traveller sees rather conspicuouslymy old house on Mitcham Common. On one occasion a fellow traveller pointed it out to me and said, “ Look there; that house is where old Gale, the mad cricketer, lives.” He was a jolly, good-natured city man; a stranger to me. “ Yes,” I answered, “ you are quite right, that is my house. You said it good naturedly, and I am not in the least offended ; and I shall tell the story to Billy Burrup in strict confidence, which will be as good as sending the town crier round to com­ municate the news on the Stock Exchange.” Perhaps my fellowtraveller was right in all details. Yours faithfully, “ F. G.” CRICKET ETYMOLOGIES. To the Editor of C ricket. S i r , —In your “ Gossip” of September 21st you quote some problems in archae­ ology set by Mr. W. J. Ford, and as that gentleman has often given me pleasure by his writings, I should be very pleased to think that I had helped him with a solution or two in return. Mr. Ford “ queries” his own suggestion of enticer as the etymon of tice. The Encyclopaedic Dictionary gives tice as an old English verb, meaning to allure, a contraction of ntice, and quotes from Kit Marlowe:— “ What strong enchantments tice my weary soul.” This certainly seems to confirm his sup­ position. Taking the other words in their order, point, as a fielder’s position, has its origin indicated by Nyren. He calls the station “ at the point of the bat,” and locates it within three and a-half yards of the striker, on the off side, and directly opposite {sic) the popping crease. Thus the term evidently arose from the vicinity of the “ point ” of the bat, whether we understand thereby its tip (extremity) or tilt (direction). The old-fashioned “ voluted” bat, it must be remembered, would expose an up-curved tip when grounded. Generations unborn may hail with joy the assurance that the stately bearing of the bobby “ on point duty” had nothing to do with the origin of this expression. With regard to on and off, these two words formerly signified toward and away, as in the two examples from Shakespeare:— “ If Csesar nod on him. . . “ Six miles off from Ampthill. . The on and off-stumps would, therefore, be equivalent to the near and far from the batsman’s aspect. The application of these terms to the two sides of the field would be a natural extension. Compare the near and off parts of a gee-gee and a road, the port and starboard sides of a vessel and its course, the left and right hands of a person, and the rest of Nature relatively which undergoes the suzerainty of one or the other. Slip comes next. In days when the field was set mainly before or in a direct line with the wicket," no doubt many a lucky stroke steered the ball off obliquely, * It is noteworthy that Ranjitsinhji, in placing his field for lobs (Jnbilee Book, p. 128), has no off-fielder at the striker’s end beyond point, and the Hon. and Rev. E. Lyttelton (All England Cricket, p. 33) places one slip and the keeper only behind wicket.