Cricket 1901

2 2 8 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. J u n e 2 7 , 1 9 0 1 . Amongst several other remarkable perform­ ances may be mentioned Tarrant, G., 7 for 0, England v. X X II. of New South Wales, at Sydney, 1864 ; Caffyn, W ., 7 for 1, U.E.E. v. X V III. of Ireland, in Phconix Park, 1856 ; Shaw, J. C., 10 for 20, XV I. of Nottingham­ shire v. England, at Eastwood Hall, 1870 ; and D. Wilkie, 11 for 12, Victoria v. XV I. of Tasmania, at Launceston, 1866. The Yorkshire team of 1900 and 1901 will be classed by generations yet unborn with the famous old Hambledon Club, the great Surrey team of the sixties and the Australian eleven of 1882, whilst Wilfrid Rhodes, when the history of the game comes to be written, will be placed as a bowler in the same category as David Harris, William Lillywhite, Alfred Shaw, F. R. Spofforth and George Lohmann. The Yorkshire eleven is so superlatively strong that it is a difficult matter to realise the side ever being beaten, but one of these days the unexpected will probably happen and the team be beaten by a side not occupying a very high position among the counties. It speaks volumes for the strength of the team that Mr. F. S. Jackson should be so little missed. Mr. Frank Mitchell is now in splendid run- getting form, playing in the manner which made him such a terror in college matches at Cambridge six years ago. Those of us who used to occasionally play against him in minor cricket in Yorkshire before he pro­ ceeded to the University always looked upon him as a batsman of more than average ability, but few, if any, could have anticipated him occupying so prominent a place in the public eye as he does at present. S O U T H G A T E v. C H E SH U N T .— Played at Cheshunt on June 18. C h esh u n t . C. G. W ard, c Sm ith, b W aldron 121 C. H . W ood , b W a l­ dron .............................. 4 F .T .G allow ay, b B aw - tree 17 D . Raincock, b B ow ­ ley ..............................18 C. R . D urban, c and b W a ld r o n .....................54 Rev. F. H . P rocter, c Sm ith, b A . R icketts 3 G. C. Beloe. not out.. 22 E . E . France, b W a l­ dron .............................. 0 E. C. Galloway, b A . R ic k e tts ..................... 1 W .T . Barwell, b W a l­ dron ............ 4 W . Saunders, b A . R icketts ..................... 0 B 22, lb 4 ............26 T otal .. 270 S o u th g a te . J.H .W ildgress.c R ain- cock, b Barwell ... 61 L . D . Sm ith, c Rain- cock, b Barwell .. 63 R . S. D ickson, not out 93 W . B. V . Jacob, lbw, b Raincock ............32 A . Ricketts, st Gallo­ way, b W ard ............ 1 L . M . W aldron, H . G. R ow ley, and G. W hite did not bat. __________________________ L E A T H E R H E A D v. S T R E A T H A M .— Played at Leatherhead on June 22. A . T . K night, b R ain- H CF°Bow tree; b E in'- 2 c o c k .............................. 4 H . J . R icketts, not out ..............................15 Byes ..................... 4 T otal (6 wkts) ...275 L e a th e b h e a d . G . A . Bush, c K ey, b F ie ld ..............................J H on. D . Lam bton, b Y oun g ..................... E .F . A therton, c Scott, b Y ou n g ..................... A . F. Burton, b K ey... i H . H ennell, st K err, b F ie ld ..............................] H . F . H eagerty, c Thom as, b Field C. B . T ritton, c B ark­ w orth, b Y oung ... 17 F. Sturt, c Y oun g, b K ey ..........................13 A . G odson, c Y oung, b K ey ................... 2 F . M aples, b K ey ... 0 R. V . A lcock, not out 1 B 1, lb 2 .......... 3 T otal . 122 Second innings : E. F. A therton, b K err, 16; A . F. Burton, not out, 1 ; H . Hennell, b K err, 6 ; A . G od­ son, c K ey, b K err, 3 ; B 5, w 1.— T otal (3 wkta), 32. S trb a th a m . G . A . T aylor, run out 0 D . O. K err, c M aples, b Sturt ... ............ 1 C. E . Currie, b S tu rt.. 8 H .T .Thom aa, c Lam b­ ton, b A lc o c k ............ 1 K . J . K ey, c Tritton, b A lcock ..................... 18 H . H . Scott, b A lcock 31 H . 8 . Barkw orth, b A th e r to n .....................57 H . M . L eaf, b A lcock 31 E . F ield, not out ...5 3 W .F . Y oun g,c M aples, b Atherton ............ 21 E . P . Pulbrook, b A l­ cock .............................. 3 B 8, lb 1, w 1 ... 10 Total . 234 CRICKET UP-TO-DATE. I always read the articles of your “ Old Harrovian ” with the very deepest respect; a respect engendered as much by the adjective as the substantive of his well*known nom de plume. And it is for this reason that I shall make no attempt to either follow up the arguments, or criticise the proposed reforms, which have been the kernel of the articles from his pen which have formed so special a feature of Cricket's winter numbers, it is enough for me that your correspondent, all through the recital of his antique experiences and regrets, decries what he terms the desire to make money at cricket, or what has been elsewhere called of late “ gate-money cricket,” ‘ ‘ the financial aspect, ” or “ the commercial side 99 of the game. Like so many other laudatores temporis acti your “ Old Harrovian” refuses to recognise that this feature of latter- day cricket is not a mere excrescence of the game, but practically the very game itself. It may not be pleasant to have to accept this as a fact, but a fact it remains. For, do away with “ the gate ” (or, call it what you will) and all that is included in the expres­ sion, and cricket, at any rate as the national sport, would very quickly disappear. Vestigia nulla retrorsum; the principles of evolution apply as much to cricket as to everything else under, or above, the sun. There may have been,a8 your “ Old Harrovian ” believe , fewer blots about the game, ‘ ‘ twenty and thirty, and forty years ’ ’ ago than now ; but you cannot properly institute any comparison between the game as played then and now. What used to be the recreation of the few is now the business of thousands, and the sport of millions. As well compare a j ourney by stage coach and its modern equivalent in an express train ; undoubtedly the former was more “ sporting” in many ways and open to fewer objections than the latter, but it has vanished never to return. And we can no more return to the cricket of fifty years ago than to the stage coach era; even if the change were desirable, which it is not. Nor can we reconcile many of the usages and laws of the game, as played years ago, with the modem product. And it is the non-recognition of this truth, as I maintain, that renders nugatory nearly all the modem amendments of the cricket code. As I write I am in ignorance of what has been decided in connection with the proposed change in the l.b.w. law. But radical though the change now appears, and whether it is made this year or next or in five years’ time it will have no real effect; it will no more keep down scores or help games to be finished than any other of the amendments of the past few years, from which so much was expected and so little has resulted: the closure, the follow-on, the increased over, or the n e t! N o; what we must all recognise—and this will be recognised sooner or later—is that, like it or dislike it, we must make some fundamental change in its conditions to keep cricket where it is and prevent it from sinking to the level of a mere exhibition of baseball, as in the States. Tinkering with the laws or making trifling changes in the weapons of the game can give but temporary respite. In what direction, then, should cricket reform be looked for P Surely not in a return to the barbarities of the game, as some suggest, by playing on unprepared grounds, any more than by using prehistoric weapons. It might please some few, like your “ Old Harrovian,” to see a return to the days when Lord’s was dangerous to play on and when matches of even the first importance seldom lasted out two full days. But they would,be a very few ! Cricket as now played, whether the cause of its being played is love of sport or love of “ gate,” demands the best of everything, and this involves that a first- class match should last through the whole of the time set apart for it. But (i) the interest in matches must be maintained, and (ii) matches must be finished; two propositions that are by no means identical if the necessity for a match to last over its full three days is admitted. For this we must look to some sort of adapta­ tion of the system known as cricket by “ compartments.” And when every county match even is finished as a matter of course and draws are practically unknown, except as the result of abandonments owing to weather, we soall all wonder how it was such a simple remedy for all the evils under which the game is now played was delayed so long. As I said before, evolution must be recog­ nised in cricket as in everything else, so it is impossible to suggest a perfect scheme that would meet every requirement. But could not something of this kind be tried at least ? Surrey and Notts are playing at the Oval. The usual Bank Holidday thousands throng to the ground. The rival captains toss for innings, and the winner takes his choice—all in the old sweet way. But, the time is different, for it is only 11 o’clock, instead of noon when the game starts, and the earlier play is rather more vigorous than it used to be, for there does not seem to be the same amount of “ playing in ” that there was in 1900. For the inside, Surrey, have only six hours to make runs in—play lasting from 11 to 2, and from 3 to 6—and to-morrow Notts will bat for the same time. If, that is, the weather is as it should be in August. For if the wicket is bad, and the winner of the toss puts his opponents in, then one side might bat from 11 to 2 the first day, and from 3 to 6 the second day—if he prefers it— for I would give the loser of the toss the choice of innings the second day, if there was any obvious advantage gained by the toss on the first. But, for the purposes of this letter, and a full elaboration of the scheme would take up too much of your valuable space at this time of the year. Assume perfect weather. Surrey bats for six hours on Monday and makes 420. Notts in the same time on Tuesday runs up 450. What happens on the Wednesday? Play again commences at 11, and again the captains toss for choice of innings, that is for choice of batting from 11 to 2, or from 3 to 6. There is no playing against time ; no saving a point in the championship table by scraping out with a draw, for at the end of the match the full force of Law II. is applied : “ The side which scores the greatest number of runs wins the match.” But though I have merely outlined this scheme most faintly, I have already taken up far too much of your space. So I will con­ clude with but one remark more ; a reply to the obvious question, “ What happens if one side is dismissed ere its time is up.” That could be settled by the other side going in, as now, but only batting for the rest of the day. I have already given an example of what a match would be like if the weather were typically “ summer.” Say, instead, it is typically “ English.” Surrey wins the toss and puts Notts in on a bad wicket, and gets them out in a couple of hours. Surrey then bats for the rest of that day, and Notts on the second day has choice of batting for three hours or letting Surrey continue. And on the third day I would make another change, under these circumstances. As before said,