Cricket 1901

102 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. M ay 2, 1901. out o f the incident, when somebody sug­ gested that one of W . G .’s bats should be put through the gauge, and the very first one would not pass muster.’ I need hardly say that, though this is a good story, it has no foundation so far as my bat was concerned. I think the gauge might well be reintroduced, and bat makers m ight be recommended to make all bats a trifle smaller than is the present custom, so that when played with they would be just the proper size, and no larger. I do not think a wide bat is of much advantage to a big hitter, but I do think it a great help to a defensive player, such as a BannermanoraBarlow . “ M y last point, but b y no means the least important, is that men should play more for their side, and less for them­ selves and their averages. There are many players, I am sorry to say, who are selfish enough to think more of their average for the season and making records than of winning the match in which they happen to be playing. ‘ ’Tis true, ’tis p ity ; and p it y ’tis,’tis true.’ If a county has the misfortune to have more than one of these selfish players in its eleven, what is the consequence ? They draw most of their matches and only finish about one in three. I should recommend all coun­ ties to go boldly into this matter. It is cf the most vital importance for the good of the grand old game. These selfish players should be warned that if they still persist in playing for themselves and not for their side, that they will be left out of the team. I am perfectly sure this would be for the benefit of the county to which they belong, and for the welfare of cricket generally. “ To sum up this article : The game must be played fairly and squarely, and according to the strict letter of the law— so I approve of the step taken by the captains to put down throwing. But we must try and lessen the present evil of drawn matches. I fear that running everything out would not do so, and that it would not encourage good cricket. But all matches not played out should be decided on the first innings. Bowlers might be helped by altering the law of the l.b.w . and using the gauge once more, which would certaiDly lessen the width of the bat used by most players o f the present time. And every cricketer should try to be as punctual and unselfish as possible.” C R ICK ET AN D G O L F * The announcement that there would be in this book many coloured reproduc­ tions o f old cricketers and cricket prints naturally awakened the liveliest interest among cricketers. W e may say at once that the publishers are to be congratu­ lated on their share in the book, for although modern process work in colours cannot reproduce the charm of the old aquatints the illustrations (of which six belong to cricket and three to golf) give *“ Cricket and G olf.” By the Hon. R. H. Lyttelton. (The Haddon Hall Library). J. M. Dent and Co., 20 and 30, Bedford Street, W .C, an excellent idea of the prints; they, moreover, give an attractive appearance to the book. The binding and printiog, as in all the Haddon Hall series, leave nothing to be desired. When we come to consider the work of the author it is a little disconcerting to find that he announces in the introduc­ tion that “ the present volume will treat of cricket and golf, but I hope that both reminiscence and teaching will be con­ spicuous by their absence.” But a little later we read that “ what the author hopes to be able to do is to talk of cricket and golf from the untechnical point of view, to try and show not only the charms of both games, but also the shortcomings and the principles which should guide those in authority on the matter of reform, and the proper spirit that should be shown in playing the games, and also to describe the conditions under which both games are played, and the points of interest of both.” A li this Mr. Lyttelton proceeds to do, and as was only to be expected, does it well. We must own that we were at first under the impression that by including g o lf in his cricket book, Mr. Lyttelton tacitly admitted that a book on cricket would have a better chance of paying if another subject were introduced, more especially as he admits, in the introduc­ tion, that his acquaintance with golf only dates back to 1886, and that, as for teaching, he may be said to know nothing of the game. But with charming frank­ ness .he continues : “ A t cricket every­ thing that he (the author) can say on the didactic side he has said elsewhere, and the public are weary of statistics, which, thanks to the energy of our press corres­ pondents, are thrust upon them at every turn.” There is matter enough in the intro­ duction to furnish subjects for any number of articles, and we imagine that it will attract a great deal of attention. Mr. Lyttelton takes the most gloomy view of modern cricket literature. He asks But what can be said of the literature of cricket and games generally ? Nyren has written a simple, old-fashioned book that has a great charm about i t ; and in modem times we have the great name of Andrew Lang, who seems to me to combine every quality that a writer on cricket should have. But between these two writers, or at an interval of about fifty-four years, the literature of cricket may be said to be a series of records and one or two treatises, and some poems, few of which have any great merit, if the famous hymn sung to the praises of Alfred My nil be excepted. . . . The cricket literature of to-day has been of two kinds—the remini­ scence and the didactic treatise. W . G. Grace, Daft, Giffen and Caffyn have given the first kind, and the Badminton and Oval series the second. One is tempted to ask what was Nyren’s charming book but a mixture of didactic treatise and reminiscence, and what cricket book Mr. Lang, delightful writer as he is, has ever produced Y Also, one cannot heip asking what is the matter with P ycroft’s “ The Cricket Field ” and Mr. F ry’s part of the “ Jubilee Book of Cricket,” to say nothing of other books and authors ? But we find that the want of a cricket novel of the level of “ Handley Cross” is what is chiefly vexing Mr. Lyttelton, and perhaps he is right. George Meredith has done a little in the way of describing the game of cricket in some of his novels, and has described it with a master hand, but we certainly have no outstanding cricket n o v e l; and the question occurs to us, “ Should we be much happier if we had ? ” On the Development of the Game the author has something to say, and has treated the well-worn subject with con­ siderable skill. He is interesting when he writes of school cricket, comparing the old style with the new, while to the subject of Reform he devotes two well- considered chapters. In his chapter on Heroes he is severe on most modem bats­ men; indeed, he says “ I would ask any fair-minded impartial observer of the game whether he has seen more than two or three real scientific exhibitions of bat­ ting played on wickets favouring the bowlers ” — which is a little hard on F. S. Jackson, Ranjitsinhji, Fry, L . C. H . Palairet, Maclaren, Warner and Co. He writes lucidly and strongly on the unfair-bowling question, and after exam­ ining it from every point of view, comes to the conclusion that (1) To define a throw is impossible. (2) N obody can tell whether a large proportion of doubtfully delivered balls are or are not throws except the bowler himself. (3) The umpires are the only authorities who ought to adjudicate, as they are put in that position for the purpose, and have as good opportunities of judging as any­ body except the bowler himself, the wicket keeper and batsman, all of whom are precluded from giving a decision. (4) I t is impossible to throw unless the arm is ben t; and if, therefore, the authorities want finally to disestablish throwing, let the rule be altered so as to make it obligatory to bow l every ball with a straight arm. The question then being very doubtful, except in a few very obvious cases of throwing, it ought, in my opinion, to be decided on broad principles. The point above all to be kept in mind is how to promote the best interests of cricket.” It will be evident from what we have said above that the book contains matter which must interest every cricketer, whether he agrees with it or not, and therefore it is distinctly a book to be bought. TH E M ETROPOL ITAN CLUBS IN 1901. ( Continued from page 93). B io x le y P a r k , as usual, plays most of the principal metropolitan clubs, as well as the Incogniti, the B a n d of Brothers, the Nondescripts, and the Blue Mantles. The teams for the different matches will be chosen by T. P . Hilder, F. de L . Solbe, W . J. Chattell, F. W . Simmonds, S. A. Smith, E. R. Bouch, T. E . Hodgson, the hon. secretary, L . A. Shuter, W . S. Sidney, W . L. Knowles, G. C. Boosey,