Cricket 1902

J u n k 5 , 1902. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 179 BUSSEY’S CO w i j o fc. fc b OQ •J w £ co S3 >J W a s <s X> .§ CO « * C O CO w GQ p e r* Q D CO CO e* o >**a A § B 0 3 BUSSEY’S AT THE SIGN OF THE WICKET. B y F. 8. A sh le y -C oopbr . The first match of the season between England and Australia has now passed into history. The honours of the game—and all the lack—were with the former side, and everywhere regret was expressed that rain should have interfered so sadly with the play. In the circumstances, a draw was the most appropriate result, for it wouldassuredlyhave been most unfortunate had the Australians been defeated when the luck was so much against them. What play there was, was full of interest and incident. In a way, Darling’s management of his side was as remarkable as Tyldesley’s century. Whilst England were at the wicket on the opening day, scoring 351 runs, there were as many as twenty-six bowling changes, and not one could by any stretch of imaginationbe termed a false move or unnecessary. On the con­ trary, each was a sign of good leadership, and it is doubtful if any other captain in the whole country could have handled his team with so good a judgment. The wonderful success attained by the Yorkshire eleven in recent years has been owing in no small measure to the skilful manner in which Lord Hawke has managed his bowling. A good captain, such as Darling has proved himself to be, is worth three men in the field. The collapse at the opening of the England innings was not surprising. To say it was to be expected would be to invite scornful retort. The batsman on the side were too brilliant a set to be reliable, and a steady bat such as Abel or Shrewsbury to have opened the innings with Maclaren or Fry was what was required. In great matches, a sideto do well must not rely for runs entirely upon brilliant batsmen. The collapse of the Gentlemen at Lord’s last year proved the falsity of such an idea, and there can be no doubt that had Maclaren taken a less brilliant array of bats­ men with him to Australia, his team would have made far more runs. Tyldesley played a very great game for his side, and although his innings was not faultless, it was a very fine display, and quite worthy of so great a batsman. Lockwood’s batting at quite the end of the innings was one of the features of the game, and aid much to place England in a winning position. The match will chiefly be remembered on account of the small score by the Australians. They batted on a ruined wicket, and in a bad light, against the finest bowler in England, and, remembering these things, and that Notts were dismissed last year for thirteen runs when opposed to Rhodes, it must be admitted that the Australians were not disgraced. It was only natural that Rhodes and Hirst, with all the conditions in their favour, should make the most of their opportunities. In how brilliant a manner they did so will be found in the full report of the match in another column. The Australians during the past week have made history by compiling the smallest total ever recorded in a Test match, and by being dismissed for the lowest score made against a county by any Australian team in this country. As the wickets were, it was most unfortunate indeed that the teamshould have been obliged to face the best bowlers in Englandin two consecutivematches, especially as they still lacked the assistance of Trumble. Had the side possessed a hitter of the stamp of Massie, McDonnell, or Lyons, the collapse on each occasion would probably have been lessjpronounced. Kegarded statistically, the Australians’ total of 23 appears a far more lamentable one than it really was. It must be remembered the innings was played on a wicket altogether against run-getting, and against the strongest bowling m England, backed up by one of, if not quite, the best fielding side in the whole country. No team would have done better than the Australians, taking the circumstances into consideration; most sides would probably have cut an even sorrier figure. To Hirst and Jackson belong the honours of the game, and it is safe Sto say thatthemannerinwhich they dismissedone of the strongest sides which have yet visited us, will long be told in Yorkshire cricketing circles. More than a passing word of praise is due to Tate, on account of hisrecentfineperform­ ances with the ball. It has been remarked, and with truth, that had he belonged to almost any other county, he would have become far more famous, for the Brighton ground, with its billiard-table wickets and short boundaries, is enough to break a bowler’s heart. Tate, however, hasremained loyal throughout to his county, and has gained the distinction of being the only bowler who has obtained over a thousand wickets for Sussex. Bowling right-hand medium-paced, he uses his head well, and can generally berelied uponto obtain wickets, on even the hardest pitches. This year he is bowling as well as at any time in his career, and a place in the Players’ eleven at Lord’s next month should be his if he maintains his present fine form. The following short table dealing with wicket-keepers may prove of interest:— ■WICKET-KEEPING AVERAGES OP 1902. (Compiled to June 1st.) Mchs. Total Per­ played wkts. cent­ in. C. St. Tot. fallen. age. W . Findlay ... ... 3 . 7 .. 2 .. 9 .. 40 .. 22-50 Huish ........... ... 6 10 .. 2 ..12 .. 71 .. 16-90 Board .......... ... 9 . 18 ... 4 . 22 ..138 .. 1594 Thomas .. .. ... 4 .. 6 ... 1 .. 6 .. 43 .. 13-9.=* Whiteside .. ... 5 .. 9 ... 0 . 9 .. 65 .. 13-84 Storer ........... .. 6 .. 7 ... 3 ..30 .. 76 .. 1315 Stedman ... 10 ... 14 .. 1 .15 ..117 .. 12-82 C. E. Winter ... 3 .. 1 .. 4 . 5 .. 41 .. 1219 R u ssell........... ... 6 ... 5 .. 2 .. 7 .. 64 .. 30-93 Butt ........... ... 5 ... 7 .. 2 .. 9 .. 85 ... 10*58 Gaukrodger ... ... 4 ... 2 . 4 .. 6 . 57 .. 10 52 H u n ter........... ... 7 ... 2 .. 8 . 10 .. 96 .. 10-41 Kelly ........... ... 5 ... 4 .. 2 .. 6 .. 69 .. 10-16 Lilley ........... ... 5 .. 3 . 2 .. 5 .. 63 .. 7 93 Radcliffe ... 3 ... 2 .. 2 .. 4 .. 54 .. 7-40 A. E. Newton ... 3 .. 1 .. 3 .. 4 .. 55 .. 7-27 No player is included in the above list who has obtained less than four wickets. THE W ANDERERS v. EALING DEAN.—Played at Ealing Dean on May 28. T he W anderebs . fi. Colman, b Hughes 0 K. E. M . Barker, b Thomasaon ...........50 G. W.Beldam, cPayne, b W ood ...................78 J. Faulkner, c Shanks, b Cooper ...................58 A . M. Latham, b Hughes ...................28 A . J. Fleming, c Per­ kin., b Tappenden 21 C. Armytage Moore, e Hughes,b Tappenden 9 W .H .Walter,bHughes 4 N.A.Damian,bHughes 5 H. Armytage Moore, not out ................... 2 E xtras................. 68 C. A . Beldam did not bat. Total ... *308 * Innings declared closed. E aling D ean , E.C Cooper, cLothian, C. Dalton, not out ... 0 b A. beldam ...........14 W. H. Thomasson, e J. W . Jarvis, b Barker 0 G. W . Beldam, b G. Perkins, b C. A. Barker ................... 1 Beldam ...................16 H . P.Shanks, not out 0 H. Hughes, b C. A. Extras .................27 Beldam .................. 38 “ L. B. Tappend^n, b C. Total (6 wkts.)141 A. Beldam .......... 46 A. A. Payne, G Bryan, and W ood did not bat. R ABEL & SONS, l ‘>, Harleyford Street and 310. . Kennington Road. 8 E „ are the Sole Makers of the celebrated “ Guv’ n or” Bat as used by Robert Abel during the last six years, including last season wben he made his record 3.309 runs, and at Leyton last week, scoring 150 for Surrey against Essex.— (A dvt .)