Cricket 1902

THE FINEST BAT THE WOULD PRODUCES. J uly 17, 1902. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 2T5 BUSSEY’S BUSSEY’S AT THE SIGN OF THE WICKET. B y F . 8 . A sh le y -C oopbr . The chief feature of the match at the Oval between the Gentlemen and the Players was Hayward’s large innings of 177. Except for a most difficult chance to Eccles in the slips, with only a single to his credit, the Surreyman made no mistake, and his innings must be considered one of the best he has ever played. His success should do much to restore confi­ dence in him, for hitherto he has failed to play up to his usual high standard of ex­ cellence. Before the luncheon interval on the second day Hargreave, who was assisting the Players for the first time, did some remarkable bowling. On being put on for the second time, he sent down ten overs, seven of which were maidens, for six wickets and eight runs, at one period taking three wickets in three overs without a run being scored from him. “ W.G.” was seen to great advantage in the early part of the match, and proved far and away the highest scorer on his side, but he just failed to notch his two-hundredth century. Lastweek he twice came within measurable distance of accomplishing the feat, making 88, not out, for London County v. Streatham on Wednes­ day, and 82 for Gentlemen v. Players on the two following days. His innings of 82 was a marvellous display for a man within a week of his fifty-fourth birthday. The following short table, recording his great feats on various grounds, may prove of interest. MR. W . G. GRACE’S BATTING AVERAGES IN GENTLEMEN v. PLAYERS MATCHES. Mtchs. Ground. plyd. in. Inns. Not out. Most. Total. Aver. Lord’s . 35 ... 6i . . 3 .. 169 . . 2398 .. 40-64 Oval ... . . 33 . 62 . . 5 .. 215 .. 2470 .. 43 33 Prince’s . . 6 ... 8 . . 0 .. 110 .. 281 .. 35*12 Hastings . . 6 ... 11 . . 1 . 131 .. 334 ... 33-40 Brighton . . 2 ... 2 . . 0 .. 217 .. 217 . 10850 Scarboro’ . . 1 ... 1 . . 0 .. 174 .. 174 ...17400 — ----- — ■ - . --------- Totals 82 146 9 217 5874 42-87 The only other batsmen who have obtained as many as a thousand runs in these matches are :— Hayward, T. .. 14 ...24... 3 ...177...1175... 55 95 Abel, R ............. 34 ..55... 5 ...247...2055... 41‘ 10 Shrewsbury,A. 30 ... 53 ... 7 ... 151*... 1749 ... 38 02 Gunn, W. ... 31 ... 64 ... 3 ... 169 ... 1666 ...32 66 G. F. Grace ... 24 ... 40 ... 8 ... 134 ... 1008 .. 31-50 W. W . Read .. 21 ... 41 ... 2 ... 159 ... 1128 ... 28 92 Ulyett, G. ... 37... 65 ... 0 ... 134 ... 1791 ...27 55 Barnes, W . ... 30... 51 ... 5 ... 130*... 1263 . 27 45 A . N. Hornby 31... 51 ... 1 . 144 ... 1221 ... 24 42 Lockwood, E. 28 ...55... 1 ..97...1178... 21*81 Jupp, H. ... 33 ..64... 0 ...72...1344... 21 00 •Signifies not out. T h e com pan ion table sh ow in g those bow lers w h ohave taken as m an y as a hun dred w ick ets is a p p e n d e d :— Mtchs. bowled in. Inns. Balls. Runs. W ks. Aver. L illrw hite.W . \ * " £ ~ 886." 330 ... « ... *04 A .M ynn ... ;;; g ;; « ;;; « * Shaw, A .............. 27 ... 45 ... 7599 . 2102 ...134 ...15'68 W . G. Grace ..71 .. 113 .. 12fc67...5010 ...268 ...18-69 M r. A . G . Steel has obtained 99 w ick ets at a cost o f 1,521 runs, o r 15-36 each. H ere, again , th e M aster is easily first, in regard to am ou n t o f w ork done, as m an y as 268 w ick ets standing to his credit. A s the b o w lin g analysis w as n ot kept re g u la rly in these m atches before 1852, it is im possible to g iv e fu ll particulars con cern in g th e feats o f L illy w h ite and A lfre d M yn n . It says m uch fo r th e w on derfu l sk ill o f the form er, that the last 41 w ick ets he to o k fo r the P layers should h av e cost bu t eigh t runs a -p ie ce , as he c o n ­ tin u ed to appear against th e G entlem en until he was fifty-seven years of age. Complete details of his earliest, and therefore best, bowling feats can never be known. Sussex, like Somerset, have, for the second year in succession, outplayed Yorkshire. In many respects, last week’smatch at Brighton greatly resembled the one played the previous season between the two sides. On each occasion the advantage rested with the home team when time came to the rescue of York­ shire, whose bowlers will have good cause to remember the run-getting properties of the Brighton Ground. Last year Hhodes had 97 runs scoredfromhim, and Hirst 76, and neither obtained a wicket, whilst in the match of last week, the analysis of the former was 1 for 83, and of the latter, 1 for 111! The figures of some of the Sussex men, in the first innings of Yorkshire, make interesting reading; e.g., Relf, 1 for 68, Tate, 0 for 70, Vine, 1 for 85. Such analyses indicate high scores, and Haigh and Rhodes for Yorkshire, and Newham and Brann for Sussex, were the batsman who left their mark on the score sheet. Long scores from the bats of the Northern pair do not come as a surprise, but with the Sussex amateurs it is slightly different. Both New­ ham and Brann may be regarded somewhat as veterans, seeing that the former’s connec­ tion with Sussex dates back to 1881, and the latter’sto 1883. The two—Old Ardinians both —are in capital form just now, despite their failure against Surrey at Hastings, and, as their batting is always worth watching, their success is very welcome. Last week, in con­ secutive innings, Brann scored 83 and 56 against Hampshire and 108against Yorkshire, and, on each occasion, helped to add over 100 runs for the sixthwicket, each time, curiously, enough, with a different partner. Against Hampshire the partnerships realised 103 and 104, his confreres being A. Collins (49 not out) and Butt (51), whilst against Yorkshire Newham (109) helped to increase the score by 179. This recalls the fact that three years ago Darling and Iredale scored over 100 runs whilst together for the sixth wicket, three times in consecutive innings, via., 101* v. Gloucestershire, 201 v. Middlesex, and 119 v. Somerset. Mr. George Routledge, apropos of the list which appeared in this'column a fortnight ago, sends the following additional informa­ tion concerning the schools at which the cricket Blues from 1877 to 1901 were educated :—“ A. M. Sutthery was afterwards at Oundle, before going to Cambridge; T. C. O’Brien was at St. Charles’ College, Notting H ill; C. Topping at Sedbergh, G. E. Robin­ son at Burton, H. Wood at Sheffield Colle­ giate School, and N. Hone at Rugby (?).” Mr. R. W. Curwen draws my attention to the fact that the name of A. M. Hollins, who assisted Oxford in 1899, should have been added to the list of Old Etonians. Congratulations to Hampshire and Derby­ shire for their victories over Somerset and Leicestershire respectively! In each case the winning side was one of the weakest taking part in the County Championship, and their successes yet again proved the truth of the old, old saying that cricket is a remark­ able game and one full of wonderful uncer­ tainties. Derbyshire did very well indeed to defeat Leicestershire, who had been first among the counties for so long, by such a margin as 242 runs. To Mr. L. G. Wright, who has been faithful to the side through many years of depression, the result must have been especially pleasing. The heroes of the match were Mr. E. M. Ashcroft and J. Humphries, though Warren’s effective bowl­ ing in the last innings must not be over­ looked. Mr. Ashcroft, by making 51 and