Cricket 1901

378 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. A u g . 29, 1901* men who have promised to play have chances of doing something remarkable by the end of the season in the way of total, runs, or wickets or hundreds, their doings will be watched with much interest. It is, perhaps, hardly necessary to say that if in the second match York­ shire wins by an innings, or is beaten severely, the result will prove nothing. In matches played at the fag end of the season results go for very little, although the matches are none the less interesting on that account. W i t h regard to the teams fcr the Hastings Week the selection of the York­ shire team will be left in the hands of Lord Hawke, but it will probably include Lord Hawke himself, Mr. Ernest Smith, Mr. T. L. Taylor, Rhodes, Denton, Tunnicliffe, Wainwright and Hunter. T h e England and Gentlemen and Players’ teams at Hastings will be chosen from the following :— YORKSHIRE v. AN ENGLAND TEAM. The England Team will be selected from the fol­ lowing Dr. W. G. Grace. Mr. J. R. Mason. K. S. Ranjitsinhji. Hayward. Mr. C. B. Fry. L'lley. Mr. G. L. Jeesop. Tyldesley. Mr. A. O. Jones. Field. Mr. A. C. MacLaren. Vine. GENTLEMEN v. PLAYERS. G entlem en P l a y e r s (selected from) (selected from) Dr. W. G. Grace. Abel. Lord Hawke. J. T. Brown. K. S. Ranjitsinhji. Hayward. Mr. C. B. Fry. B irst. Mr. G. L. Jessop. Lilley. Mr. A. O. Jones. Bhodes. Mr. A. C. MacLaren. Tyldesley. Mr. J. B. Mason. De ton. Mr. Ernest 8mith. Tunnicliffe. Mr. T. L. Taylor. Vine Mr. C. J. Burnup. Wainwright. Mr. E. A. Halliwell. Killick. I t may be taken as an axiom that there is no limit to cricket curiosities. Here is a new one. In a match between Horley and Reigate Priory in May Mr. O. J. M. Godfrey was to play for Horley, but as he could not arrive by the time the game began the Horley ground man was permitted to field as substitute for him. Now the Horley captain, knowing that the ground man could bowl, and forgetting that he was only a substitute, put him on first. He had bowled three overs (fortunately without getting a wicket) when Mr. Godfrey arrived and took his place. As the Reigate captain was kind enongh to overlook the error no harm was done. A n o t h e r Horley curiosity, being the latest interpretation of the rule about “ either umpire shall call ‘ no ball.’ ” A day or two ago Horley played away from home against Outwood. The local umpire was a celebrity of thirty years standing, whose name is Jupp, and he claims that his father was first cousin to the great Harry Jupp, the famous old Surrey player. While he was standing at square leg he suddenly took it into his head to “ no-ball ” Mr. C. J. M. Godfrey, who was bowling at the other end. In explanation, he said that Mr. Godfrey had so continually gone over the crease that he (Jupp) could stand it no longer ; he stood as umpire to see fair play, no matter at which end. The Outwood captain duly made his appearance, explained the law to Jupp, and agreed to cincel the “ no-ball ” in the score book. Two overs afterwards Mr. Jupp broke out once more, and the whole scene was re-enacted. After this the game took its usual course. W e are not sure that Jupp could not find a good many people to support him in his theory that by the laws as they now stand the square leg umpire may call “ no ball ” if he thinks the bowler oversteps the crease—probably Mr. God­ frey was not bowling no-balls at all. When the alteration was made in Law 10 the next “ no-ball ” law was not touched. Before the alteration the two laws read as follow s:— 10. T h e hall m ust he b o w led ; if throw n or jerked th e um pire shall call “ n o-h all.” 11. T h e how ler shall deliver the h all w ith one foot on the g r o u n d ....................otherw ise the um pire shall call “ no-hall.” But after the alteration they read as follow s:— 10. T h e hall m ust be how led ; if throw n or jerked either um pire shall call “ no-hall.” 11. T h e how ler sh all deliver the h all w ith one foot on the g r o u n d ....................otherw ise the um pire shall call “ no-ball.” A man might argue that, taking the two laws in juxtaposition, he is justified in supposing that as law 11 does not state which umpire is responsible, he may conclude that “ either umpire ” of law 10 may interfere. Be this as it may, we should imagine that Jupp has established a record. Y et another curiosity:—In the Gran­ ville v. Beckenham match in July, a Beckenham batsman, driving a ball hard back, knocked his partner’s bat out of his hand some six or eight yards. The ball went about ten yards behind mid-off. The striker called for what was an easy run. The non-striker, apparently think­ ing it was necessary to recover his bat before running, was run out by half the wicket’s length. M r . F r y has made a new record. He has played four consecutive innings of a hundred in first-class matches. The innings are as follows :— Sussex v. Hampshire........................ 106 Sussex v. Yorkshire........................ 209 Sussex v. Middlesex........................ 149 Sussex y. Surrey ... ........................ 105 In 1890 he scored 135, 125, 229, 110, 96, and 105 in consecutive innings for Sussex, but between his innings of 135 and 125 he made 68 and 72 for the Gentlemen against the Players, at Lord’s. I f Surrey’s first eleven have hardly been playing up to the high standard of eight or nine years, the county’s well- wishers have plenty of ground for hope in the excellent cricket the second team have been showing during the last two months. In all this summer they played eighteen matches, of which eight were won, seven drawn, and three lost. In these eighteen matches they scored 6,815 runs for 250 wickets, and had 4,973 runs for 288 wickets made against them. Their one defeat in the Minor Counties Cham­ pionship was at the hands of Yorkshire’s second eleven at the Oval, and that was only by four wickets. After June 28th they did not lose a match. T he writer of the lines which appeared last week in Cricket, entitled “ A North Country Side,” complains that the second verse, by the substitution of a semi­ colon for a comma in the second line was made to appear nonsensical. It should have read as follows :— W h ile sadly w e bow l, never nearer the goal, F o r F ry and you n g K illic k are ju s t m aking h ay, T h e m erry T ate sings of shekels and things, A n d R an ji is w aitin g— O Lord ! W h a t a day ! O h ! the H aw ke and the H irst, etc. T he committee of the Hastings and St. Leonard’s week have only paid E. A. Halliwell, the stumper of the South African team, the compliment he has richly earned in inviting him to keep wicket for the Gentleman against the Players on the 9th of next month. Halli- well has certainly no superior behind the sticks at the present time and, remember­ ing the reputation his father enjoyed in his time as a wicket-keeper, it is only in the fitness of things that he should be officiating in one of the most important English fixtures. F. C. H olland was very near beating the record for Surrey’s Second Eleven in the match against Norfolk at the Oval, in the middle of last week. The highest individual innings made so far has been R. Henderson’s 210, not out, v. Hertford­ shire in 1895. At the end of the first day Holland was 206 not out, leaving only four to tie Henderson’s score. As luck would have it, after making a Bingle the following morning, he was bowled off his legs. Hence Henderson’s 210 still remains unbeaten. M r . E. I. M. B arrett , the Hamp­ shire cricketer, made 205 not out on Saturday out of a total of 313 for seven wickets (24 extras) for United Service against Free Foresters. On Monday, Mr. C. E. Higginbotham scored 234 for United Service against Exmouth. T here was an echo of days long gone by in the match between Band of Brothers and Gore Court, on August 23 and 24, at Belmont, Kent, the country seat of Lord Harris. For the Band of Brothers, Lord Harris and Mr. Stanley Christopherson, the famous old Kent fast bowler, took all the Gore Court wickets between them at a small cost. In the two innings Lord Harris took eight wickets for 32, while Mr. Christopherson was responsible for all the rest, five in the first innings and seven in the second. For the same team Mr. M, C. Kemp scored 139 and disposed of four men at the wicket. I t cannot be disputed that under the care of W. G. the London County has