Cricket 1900

“ Together joined in Cricket’s manly toll.”— Byron. wo. 544 v o l . x i x . TH U R S D A Y , J U N E 2 8 , 1900. p b io b aa. CHATS ON THE CRICKET FIELD. MR. W . E. ROLLER. Although he was one of the finest all-round cricketers who ever played for Surrey, Mr. Roller was in some mysterious manner over­ looked hy the authorities at Cambridge University, and forms one of the group of famous players who have never received their Blue. In after years Cambridge did its best to repair the fatal mistake by choosing him as one of the first in the eleven which represented the University Past and Present against the Australians. As a batsman he had a delightful style, and was one of the most dangerouB men in England when things were going against his [side. As a bowler he was exceedingly useful, and there was no more likely man to break up a long partnership than he, for even on the best of wickets a ball from him got up very quickly, and he was especially likely to deceive amanwhen he first went on. In the fieldhewas good anywhere. For Surrey he scored 3,822 runs in 174 inn­ ings, with an average of 21'9. liut for a damaged knee, which obliged him to retire in 1889, he might still be one of the most valuable men in the county team. He represented tfte Gentlemen v. Players. As mentioned in “ Gossip” a fortnight ago, Mr. Roller was once the victim of a misunderstanding like that by which Lewis was given out this year in the Somersetshire match at the Oval. “ The wicket-keeper,” he said, “ was an amateur. I had left my ground under the impression that I was given out caught at the wicket, but to make sure I turned to the wicket-keeper and said, • What did the umpire say? ’ to which the reply was, ‘ You’ve got to go.’ So I went and the wicket was put down. The wicket-keeper afterwards explained the matter to me and apologised for putting down the wicket, although I don’t think that he was in the least to blame. He said : *I thought I had caught you at the wicket, and that the umpire had given you out. I had the ball still in my hand, and when I heard that I had mistaken the decision, and Baw you standing out of your ground, I put down the wicket quite unconsciously.’ This seemedaperfectly natural explanation to make, for a wicket­ keeper has no time to think, and as I had unintentionally broken a rule, it seemed to me that I was rightly out, so that when the opposing captain said that he should be pleased if I would continue my innings as if nothing had happened, I felt that I ought not to accept his considerate offer. It was the fault of the rule—or want of a rule—and not of the wicket-keeper or umpire. Yet, if I had been at the wicket |nearest to the pavilion, I should not have been I out in this way, which is an anomaly. Years before that, Pooley was temporarily suspended for doing the same thing, but now, I think that most people realise that a wicket-keeper cannot help putting down the wicket when he sees a man out of his ground. The mention of decisions reminds me that when Walter Read was playing for Surrey I used greatly to be amused by his different ways of ask ing ‘ How’s that ? ’ When he was not qu sure, he would ask ‘ How was that?’ , when he knew for certain that the batsm was out, he asked sharply ‘ How’s that ? ’ Another reminiscence comes to my mind. I was playing in Scotland, in a village match, and the wicket­ keeper, who was the village blacksmith, seemed to have made up his mind to diddle me out somehow or other, for he was constantly pretending to throw the ball up to the bowler while keeping it still in his hand, and going in for various other artifices to delude me into feeling secure.” Mr. Rolleronly once captained the Surrey team. This was in a match against Derbyshire, at Derby. ‘ ‘ In the first innings, ’ ’ he said, “ Lohmann said that he was unable to bowl on account of a sprained side. The consequence was that Derby­ shire made a lot of runs, and we eventually put them in for the fourth innings of the match to make about 80 on a plumb wicket. It seemed odds of a hundred to one that they made the runs. But I went up to Lohmann and said, ‘ You’ve got to bowl, whether you’re ill or not.’ He said, ‘ All right. I’ll seewhat I can do.’ Never have I seen him bowl as he did on that day ; he took eight wickets and caught out the other two men, and we won by about 20 runs. I never thought that he bowled his best when playing against a weak side, unless cir­ cumstances turned out so that the weaker side seemed the stronger for the time being. Oddly enough, although in his later years for Surrey he was one of the finest fields imagin­ able, Jack Shuter had to speak to him con­ stantly for not picking up the ball clean, and for letting it through his legs, etc., when he first began to play. I ’ve no doubt that this was caused by playing in small matches on queer grounds.” ‘ ‘ Had you not something to do with the discovery of Mr. Key ?” “ I was playing for Tooting against Clifton College, and a big and heavy UB. W . B. ROLLER. (From a Photo by It. W. Thomas , 41, Cheapside , London.)