Cricket 1900

1 5 4 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. M at 24, 1900. The latter scored 144, ajid the Kensington men found themselves with only sixty- three minutes left for batting. They, however, rose to the occasion, and scored 151, and thus won their match. The result was mainly due to some fine bat­ ting by Mr. L. de Montezuma, who scored 78 (not out) out of the last 101 in forty-five minutes. Mk. A. E. STODDABT made his re­ appearance in first-class cricket on Monday, for Middlesex against Sussex, at Lord’s. He had not intended to play, but took the place of Roche when the latter fell ill just before the game began. So evenly did Hayes and Abel score on Monday at the Oval, when they had both got going, that there was much excite­ ment when they were each approaching their hundred. Their scores were level at 94, 97 and 98, and then Hayes made an off-drive for two runs. T h e appearance of the Surrey score in Tuesday’s paper was socurious that it is worth reproducing in “ Gossip.” It will be seen that of the seven men who batted (Mr. Crawford was not out) three scored 475 out of 483 from the bat. S u bbey . Abel, st Straw, b B ir d .........................................221 Brockwell. b W ilson ........................................ 2 Hayes, b B ir d ........................................................160 Lockwood, not o u t................................................ 104 Hayward, b Arnold................................................ 5 Holland, b A rnold................................................ 0 V . F. S. Crawford (not oat)................................ 1 B 11, nb 1 ..................................................12 Total (5 wkts) ...495 B a ttin g debutants in county cricket have had a particularly successful time duriDg the past week. Mr. F. A. Barrs, the Repton School left-hand batsman, scored 58 and 2 for Derbyshire v. Surrey, Mr. G. W. Beldam, the Richmond player, 62 for Middlessx v. Sussex, Mr. G. S. F. Giiffin, a well-known club player, 88 not out in the same match, and Mr. H. J. Hodgkins 5 not out and 44 for Glouces­ tershire v. Essex. A n y readers of Cricket who are fond of calculation might get some entertainment in estimating the chances which the teams which opposed the Universities this week would have of winning in a match against each other. The teams were as follows :— Lond. County (v. Oxford).! M.C.C. (v. Cambridge). W . G. Grace, W . L. Murdoch, J. M. Campbell, S. M . Tindall, F. G. Bobinson, A . F. Somerset, L. Walker, Stedman, Braund, Smith, H. R. Parkes. T. B orton, Thompson, H.E. Symes-Thompson, A. Page, J. Gilman, Brown (T.), C. C. T. Doll, G. Howard-Smith, Tate (E.), Oates, Overton. M b . R. E. F o s t e r has vastly.dis­ tinguished himself since last Thursday. He scored 129 and 100 not out for Oxford University against Mr. Webbe’ s team at the end of the week, and followed this up with 169 for the University against London County on Monday. Thus he has placed his name (for the second time) in the list of scorers of two separate hundreds in a first-class match, and also in the list of men who have made three hundreds in succession. U p to August, 1892, Dr. Grace, who had three times scored two separate hundreds in a first-class match, stood absolutely alone in a list by himself. In August, 1892, Mr. Brann made 105 and 101 for Sussex against Kent, and the ice once broken, the feat was accom­ plished time after time. But still Dr. Grace stood alone until last week as the only man who had accomplished the feat more than once, and he is still one ahead of all the rest of the world. Mr. Foster, it will be remembered, scored two separate hundreds last year for Worcestershire against Hampshire, his brother, Mr. W. L. Foster, accomplishing the same feat in the same match. The batsmen who have scored three hundreds in successive innings in first- class matches are Dr. Grace (four times), Mr. A. C. MacLaren, Abel, Storer, K. S. Ranjitsinhji, Tyldesley, Major Poore, Hayward (twice), Hirst, and Mr. R. E. Foster. ------ “ T h e Right Honourable the Master of the Rolls.” Such, we believe, is the correct title at the moment of the President of the Surrey County C.C. Yet he will be known by his works, good works, too, they have been, in the cause of Surrey cricket; known best, at all events, under his old title of Sir Richard Webster. If the papers are correct—are they ever wrong, by the way ?—the new Master of the Rolls proposes in the future to be known to all men as Baron Alveretone. The name is taken from his property in the Isle of Wight. Ernest Hayes and little Bobby Abel, On a wicket like a billiard table, Paved the way for Lockwood’shundred; But the crowd sat tight and wondered, When their Tommy Hayward was unstable. T h e following anecdote about Major- General Baden-Powell has, we believe, never been previously published. We may almost venture to say that it is untrue When B.-P. was at school, acting as captain of a very small boys’ eleven, a bowler on the opposite side suddenly changed with­ out warning from right hand to left hand, and took a wicket. From his seat in the pavilion B.-P. sent the following message to the captain of the other side: “ All right. Keep your hair on, until our turn comes. We have a bowler with a glass eye !! ” This threat so alarmed his opponents that, when they went in, the bowler with the g'lats eye disposed of them one after the other, neck and crop, and won the match. A new cricket song has just been issued by Mr. Joseph Williams, 32, Great Portland Street. It is entitled ‘ ‘ Cricket. ’ ’ The words are by G. A. Hicks, and the mutic, according to the publisher’s announcement, is set to an old-time tune, which we do not remember to have heard although it is very pleasing to the ear. There is a good deal of “ go ” about the song which, we should think, will become popular. One of the verses which will give a good idea of the others, runs as follows :— No matter what the bowling, no matter fast or slow; Whether underhanded lobbing or an over­ handed throw; A yorker in the block-hole or a curler from behind, In every bowler’s basket there’s a sweet one you will find. A v e r t curious incident occurred in the match last week between the Nor­ bury and Brixton Wanderers’ clubs. Norbury made 162 runs, and at five minutes to the drawing of the stumps, the Brixton Wanderers were some sixty runs behind with the last two men in. One of the batsmen, the first ball of the over, was struck a violent blow on the elbow, and some six or seven minutes were spent in rubbing the part affected; and finally the captain of the Wanderers cameoutand gave instructions for another over to be bowled. The player batted with one hand, and the result was that the Norbury Club lost their five minutes’ and probably a win, though the matter was, of course, taken in a most sportsmanlike manner by them. Now, very curiously, there is no men­ tion made in any rule as to the length of time allowed between each ball of an over, though in the old rules a time limit of one minute is stipulated for in the laws of single wicket. The batsman may therefore, apparently, lie for hours behind his wicket, change his bat after one ball, his gloves after the second, his hat after the third, his shoe after the fourth, and so on, returning each time to the pavilion. In the case above mentioned, the man injured would not, we imagine, have remained for a single minute at the wicket had it been otherwise than the last wicket. Of course, the match was drawn, as it was not “ played out.” But what a noble opportunity is offered by the lesson taught by this match to some batsman or other in one of the number­ less league matches which are nowadays scattered over the country ! W it h regard to the above interesting finish, it is difficult to say what ought to have been done, since there are no laws bearing on the point, unless Rule 45, “ When thty shall call ‘ play,’ the side refusing to play shall lose the match,” may be said to apply. The umpires, in the absence of a definite rule, could have done nothing, uni ass, in accordance with custom, they ordered the over to be finished which had been commenced when the batsman was hurt. But what might have been done is this:—The cap­ tain of the batting side might have withdrawn his man, retired hurt, thus giving the match to the fielding side, who, of course, being sportsmen, would have declined to take advantage of this action. The result would have been that by mutual consent the match would count as a draw. W a lt e r F b it h , the authority o f the successful play, “ T he Man o f F o rty ,”