Cricket 1901

J an . 31, 1901. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. bationary teamB, would be the matching of Gloucester with Hants, and Somerset with Warwick and Worcester. A t the same time extraneous meetings between counties in different sections might be retained. Hastings and Scarborough have shown that such games can be none the less enjoyable for having no bearing on the championship and can also yield as excellent play and attract as full and appreciative attendances. The grouping of the counties might be managed in something like the following fashion:— N orthern H ome W estern S ection . S ection . S ection . 1 st Div. 1 st Div. lsi Div. Yorkshire Surrey Gloucester Lancashire Middlesex Warwick Notts Kent Somerset Derby Sussex Worcester Leicester Essex Hat ts •Northants •Bucks •Glamorgan 2nd Div. 2nd Div. 2nd Div. •Durham •Norfolk •Wilts •Northumberland •Berks •Oxon •Staffs *Camb8 +Dorset +Salop •Herts +Monmouth tCheshire •Beds +Cornwall tLincoln +Hunt» +Devon Eutland Suffolk +Hereford Cumberland Westmoreland * In Minor Counties Competition since 1895. +Playing matches with Minor Counties since 1895. The bottom county in each First Divi­ sion would be included on probation to test its strength in first-class company and be liable to relegation. The three I have indicated have held shares in the Minor Counties Championship in the past two seasons, winning, I believe, twenty- one games to two losses in competition matches between them. Worcester, it may be noted, were promoted after winning twenty-two to three losses in four years. The rules which I would suggest to govern the competition are as follows :— S tage I. 1. Every county to meet every other county entering in its own Division and Section in out and home matches. (This might he modified in a Second Division where the entrants exceeded five.) 2. The competition in this stage to be completed by the end of August Bank Holiday week. 3. One point to he given for each win ; one deducted for each loss ; draws ignored. 4. The county obtaining most points in each First Division to be the champion of its Section. (In case of identical records a deciding game might be played.) 5. The county obtaining fewest points to enter the Second Division Competition the following season. (Unless the captains of the other teams in the First Division recom­ mended, and the M.C.C. Committee approved, their retention.) 6. The county obtaining the most points in each Second Division to enter as probationary candidate in Division 1. (Unless challenged and beaten by the retiring county, which would then re-enter.) S tage II. 7. The three sectional champions to meet each other in out and home matches in August or early in September. [Or, Counties of difierent sections meeting at any time might elect by mutual consent, before play started, to regard the result as counting in their Second Stage score, in case they became qualified. Since all the most likely sectional winners do and most likely would continue to meet, both Stages might by this means run concurrently, and the limitation in proposed Buie 2 be obviated.] 8. The All-England Championship to be decided by points allotted as in the First Stage. A competition of this character seems to promise the best results. It would automatically remove all the chief defects of the present arrangement which I have enumerated. It would also relieve the premier shires of their present burden of obligations and gratify, I believe, the ambitions of the neglected minors. Drawbacks, of course, may be expected. But a review of all the proposed remedies shows that no scheme is perfect—least of all the remarkable substitute for a system which at present holds the field. S U S S E X C R IC K E T A N D C R IC K E T E R S . B y F. S. A sh le y -C oofek . — — I I .—THE COUNTY. (Continuedfrom page 475.) T able No. 5.— RUNS SCORED AGAINST SUSSEX Y E A R BY YE AR . Year. Runs. Wickets. Aver. 1815... ................. 185 ........... 20 . . ... 9-26 1816... ................... 313 ........... 18 . . ... 17-38 1817... .................. 310 ........... 19 . . ... 16-31 1823 .. ................... 390 ........... 40 . . ... 9 75 1824..: ................... 387 ........... 34 . . ... 11*38 1825... ................... 611 ........... 80 . . ... 6* 8 1826... ................... 366 ........... 60 . ... 6-08 1827... ................... 991 ........... 102 . . ... 971 1828... .................. 613 ........... 68 . . ... 9 01 1829... ................... 631 ........... 69 . . ... 10 69 1830... ................... 410 ........... 31 . . ... 18*2 1832... .................. 292 ........... 35 . . ... 8-34 1833... ................... 444 ........... 60 . . ... 740 1834... ................... 485 ........... 40 . . ... 1212 1835... .................. 859 ........... 85 . . .. 1010 1836... ................... 697 ........... 80 . . ... 871 1837... ................... 1192 ........... 129 . . ... 924 1838... ................... 830 ........... 82 . . ... 10-12 1839... ................... 919 ........... 82 . . ... 11-20 1840... ................... 576 ........... 76 . . ... 757 1841... ................... 693 ........... 61 . . ... 11-36 1812... ................... 802 ........... 86 . . ... 9-32 1843... ................... 1487 ........... 107 . . ... 1389 1844... ................... 1034 .. ... 80 . . ... 12-92 J845... .................. 969 ........... 72 . . ... 13 45 1846... ................... 1176 ........... 88 . . ... 1336 1817 .. .................. 1106 .......... 90 . . ... 12-28 1848... ................... 860 ........... 90 . . ... 9-65 1849... ................... 1699 ........... 121 . . ... 13-21 1850... ................... 1063 ........... 65 . ... 16-35 1851... ................... 955 ........... 95 . . ... 10*(5 1862... ................... 1002 ........... 89 .......... 11-25 1853... .................. 11&9 ........... 90 . . ... 13 32 1864... ................... 1509 ........... 119 .......... 12 68 1855... ................... 1379 ........... 140 ......... 985 1856... ................... 15i0 ........... 87 . . .. 17 47 1857... ................... 1374 ........... 87 ......... 16-94 1858... .................. 751 ........... 77 ......... 9-75 1869... .................. 679 ........... 60 ......... 9<-5 1860... ................... 1376 ........... 72 ......... 1911 1861... ............... 9*6 ........... 71 ......... 1304 1862 .. ................... 781 ........... 70 ......... 11 15 1863... ................... 1988 ........... 90 ......... 22-20 1864... ................... 2‘290 ........... 129 ......... 17 76 1865... ................... 2431 ........... 140 ......... 17"c6 1866... .................. 2033 ........... I ll ......... 1831 1867... .................. 1518 ........... 119 ......... I*-76 1868... .................. 14i 8 ........... 83 ......... 1696 18-9.. ................... 2349 ........... 108 ......... 2176 1870... ................. 1134 ........... 80 ......... 14 17 1871... ................... 916 ........... 92 ... 9 95 1872... .................. 1780 ........... 121 ......... 1471 1873... ................... $393 ........ 1'6 ......... 1639 1874... ................... 2604 ........... 110 ......... 21 86 1876... ................... 2033 ........... 168 ......... 1286 1876... ................. 2764 ........... 150 ......... 18-42 18^7... ................... 2013 ........... 96 ... 20 96 1878... ................... 2266 ........... 124 ......... 18*18 1879... ................... j 983 ........... 137 ......... 14*46 1880... ................... 4249 ........... 221 ......... 19*22 1881... ................... 4114 ........... 196 ......... 20*98 Year. Runs. Wickets. Aver. 1882.................. .. 4880 ... ... 195 ... ... 25 02 1883.................. ... 3763 ... ... *09 ... ... 18-00 1884.................. ... 5191 ... ... 272 ... ... 19 08 1885.................. ... 5967 ... 248 ... ... 26-07 1886................. ... £447 ... ... ‘281 ... ... 1938 188; ................. ... 6226 ... ... 260 ... ... 24-90 l>-88.................. ... 5*:J0 ... ... 297 ... ... 18-28 1889.................. ... 4958 ... ... 2*2 ... ... 2233 1890.................. ... 6578 .. ... 218 ... ... 3012 1891................... ... 6448 ... ... 290 ... ... 18 75 1892.................. ... 6663 ... ... 306 ... ... 21 77 1893................... ... 8673 ... ... 340 ... .. 25-60 1894.................. 6709 ... ... 349 ... .. 19-22 1895.................. ... 8807 ... ... 308 ... ... 28-59 1896.................. ... 9544 ... ... 294 ... ... 32-46 1897.................. ... 9500 ... ... 353 ... ... 2691 1898.................. ... 8881 ... ... 324 ... ... 2741 1899.................. ... 11302 ... ... 416 ... ... 27-16 1900.................. ... 11710 ... ... 419 ... ... 27 94 Totals .. ...213482 ... ...11109 ... ... 1921 That is, Sussex bowlers have averaged 19 21 runs for every wicket taken. The county’s opponents can thus claim an advantage of 2-25 runs per wicket. TiBi.it No. 6. — RUNS SCORED AGAINST SUSSEX. Opponents. Runs. Wkts. Aver. Australians ................... 3,714 .,.. 1‘29 .. 2879 Cambridge University . 7,291 .... 288 ... 25-31 Derbyshire....................... ... 3,076 .... 174 ..,. 17-67 Durham ........................ 115 . 20 .,,. 575 Ei gland ........................ .. 5,149 .... 474 ..,. 10 86 Epsom............................... 808 , 67 .,.. 14-17 E ssex .................................. 2,471 .... 90 .... 27-45 Gloucestershire ... ... 17,887 .... 750 .,.. 23-84 Godalming........................ 387 . 34 .,.. 11-38 Hampshire....................... ... 14,967 ... 906 .,.. 1651 Hants and 8urrey ... . 251 . 40 627 H ertfordshire................ 267 . 27 . .. 9-88 Kent . ................... ,,. 35,222 ... 2,264 ... 15 65 Lancashire....................... .. 11.935 .... 636 .... 22 26 Leicester h ir e ................... 2,005 .... 108 .... 18 56 Manchester ........... , 189 ... 18 ... 10-60 M.C.C. and Ground ... 17.966 ... 1,412 ... 1272 M iddlesex....................... ... 8,876 ... 343 ... 25-87 Nottinghamshire ... ... 18.361 ... 771 . .. 23 81 Oxford University ... ... 4937 ,... 199 ... 24-80 Philadelphians........... 299 12 ... 24 91 Prince’s Club ........... 184 19 ... 968 Somersetshire ........... ... 7,681 ... 316 ... 2430 South Africans... ... 281 20 ... 14 05 burrey.......................... ... 30,270 ... 1,321 . .. 2291 Worcestershire............... ... 1,835 78 ... 23 62 Yorkshire....................... ... 17/ 58 ... 703 ... 2426 ——— ____ Totals ........... ...213,482 11,109 ... 1921 T able N o . 7.—HIGHEST AND LOWEST INN ­ INGS SCORED B Y SUSSEX. Opponents. Highest. Lowest. Australians ................. . 414 in 18P9 ... 47 in 1878 Cambridge University .. 592 in 1895 .. 76 in 18“5 Derbyshire ................. . 327 in 1884 ... 45 iu 1880 Durham ......................... . 323 in 1>-S8 ... 9 in 188S England ......................... . 166 in 18 4 ... 31 in 18*3 Epsom ................... 445 in 1817 ... 64 in 18 5 Essex................................... c380 in 1897 ... 95 in 1898 Gloucestershire ......... 482 in 1892 . . 29 m 1878 Goda.ming .................,. 84 in 1824 ... 64 in 1824 Hampshire ................. . 438 in 1897 ... 71 in 1896 Bantu and Surrey ... ... 123 in 18-/6 ... 90 in 1826 B ertfoidsLire................... 85 in 1879 ... 49 in J879 K e n t ................................... 464 in 18.-4 ... 22 in 18.8 Lancashire ................... 476 in 1897 ... 24 in 1890 Leicestershire................ .. h6 86 in 1900 ... 60 in 1879 Manchester ................... 230 in 1868 ... 230 in 1858 M.C.C. and Ground .. 418 in 1897 ... 23 in 18*8 > iddlet-ex........................ .. 400 in 1900 ... 76 in 1893 Notiinghamt-hire ... ., 347 in 1899 . .. 19 in 1873 Oxford University... ... 487 in 895 . 80 i i 1900 Philadelphians......... .. 252 inl8y7 .... 46 in 1897 Prince’s C lu b ................... 17 k in 1872 .. 176 in 1872 bom ersetshire.................. 669 in 1896 ... 97 in 1895 South Afiicans ... ... 278 in 1894 ... 278 in 1894 S u m y............................... .. 661 in 1899 ... 19 in 1830 orcestershire ......... ?389 in 1900 ... 179 in 1899 Yorkshire........................... 368 in 1885 . 24 in 1878 «, for five wickets; g, for Beven wickets ; hy for eight wicketb. Considering the number of matches played against Nottinghamshire and Yoikshire, it is surprising that Sussex should never have compiled an innings of 400 against either of those counties. (To be continued.)