Cricket 1902

J uly 31. 1902. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 307 BUSSEY’S BUSSEY’S AT THE SIGN OF THE W ICKET . B t F. S. A sh lby-C oopbr. It is difficult, even now, to write about tile recent match between England and Australia without the blood tingling and the pulse heating at an alarming rate. In many reBpects it was an ideal game, although for some of us the concluding portion was too exciting to he pleasant. Fortunately for the public peace of mind, so dramatic a finish to a match of such importance is not witnessed more than once in a generation, the previous occurrence of anything of the kind having been at the Oval twenty years ago, when the Australians won by seven runs. Many historical games between England and Australia have been played, but that of last week must rank as the most noteworthy of all. The splendidpartnerships of Trumper and Duff for the one side, and of Jackson and Braund for the other, the bowling of Lockwood on the second afternoon, and the exciting finish combined to stamp the match as one of the most remarkable in the annals of first-class cricket. It was a thousand pities the weather played so prominent a part in the game. English cricketers, whilst regretting that their own side should have been beaten, will be able to console them­ selves with the fact that what luck there was in the match—and there was considerable — was all in favour of the Australians. It has been stated, and with truth, that winning the toss was worth a hundred runs, for the wicket, easy at first, got worse as time went on. The English bowling, too, in the first Australian innings could well have been utilised more judiciously. It was a sad blunder not to give Lockwood a trial until 129 runs had been scored without the loss of a wicket, and not to put on Tate, who was included in the eleven owing to the soft nature of the ground, until third change. Taking everything into consideration, it was a wonderful performance on the part of England to be beaten by so narrow a margin as three runs. Even defeat was glory in such a struggle. The Australians deserve every praise for their admirable bowling and fieldingin the concluding stage of the game. In the test matches played in England this year, England have scored 1,200 runs for 51 wickets, average 23'52, and Australia 950 for 62 wickets, average 18■26. The match between Kent and Middlesex, at Beckenham, came to a surprising con­ clusion, the former, after holding the advantage throughout, losing by five runs. Earlier in the season Kent had twice been defeated by a single wicket, and it must be almost unique for a county to lose three matches in one season by such smallmargins as one wicket and five runs. Kent has probably taken part in more close finishes than any other county. The following table will show which matches played by the county have been lost and won by two wickets or ten runs or less. (1) Matches won by Kent (23):— M argin . A gainst . G round . Y rar . 1 wkt. England Artillery Ground 1744 1 Surrey A rtillery Ground 1760 1 it England Rochester 1800 1 Sussex Tunbridge W ells 1876 1 »* Lancashire M aidstone 1877 1 ft Sussex Tonbridge 1888 2 »» Sussex T ow n M ailing 1837 2 » Sussex Tow n M ailing 1838 2 Sussex Brighton 1839 2 »» England T ow n M ailing 1841 2 Surrey M aidstone 1873 2 Derbyshire Tunbridge W ells 1870 2 ” ! M iddle Bex Tonbridge 1890 2 Ha Australians Canterbury 1899 M argin . A gainst . G round . Y ear . 2 runs England Tow n M ailing 1839 2 „ K ent M aidstone 1870 2 „ M .C.C. & G. L ord’s 1896 3 „ W arwickshire Gravesend 1891 4 „ M .C.C. & G. L ord’s 1796 4 „ Sussex Canterbury 1842 6 Surrey Oval 1852 7 Yorkshire M aidstone 1879 9 „ Sussex Brighton (2) Matches lost by Kent (19) :— 1844 1wkt. H am bledon W indm ill Downs 1786 1 H Sussex Canterbury 1844 1 »» Derbyshire D erby 1877 1 tt M .C.C. & G. L ord’s 2902 1 „ Sussex Tunbridge W ells 1902 2 „ Surrey K ennington Com. 1736 2 „ 2 wkts. Ham bledon Coxheath 1787 Sussex Brighton 1829 2 „ Yorkshire Sheffiel 1 1862 2 „ M .C.C. & G. L ord’s 1899 2 •• M iddlesex T onbridge 1901 2 runs Sussex Gravesend 1855 5 * W hite Conduit Islington 1786 5 „ M .C.C. & G. L ord’s 1857 5 „ M iddlesex Beckenham 1902 7 tt Sussex T unbridge W ells 1815 8 „ H am bledon j [ Broad-Half-penny | D ow n j 1781 9 » England Artillery Ground 1751 10 „ England L ord’s 1792 Kent have played two tie games—against 11amble(Ion, on Windmill Downs, in 1783, and against Surrey, at the Oval, in 1847. In the latter match Kent lost their last three wickets when the game was a tie. “ Do I wake, do I dream, or are visions about? ” Surreybeaten, and in no uncertain manner, by Hampshire ! The result should do much to spur the latter side to great deeds, for this season the team has always given one the impression of entering the field without the slightest hope of ever proving successful. The return of Major Poore should strengthen the eleven considerably, the great need of the side being a thoroughly dependable batsman. Hampshire’ s win was a meritorious achieve­ ment, for Surrey were outplayed from start to finish. Llewellyn’ s bowling and A. J. L. Hill’s hitting were the chief factors in the deb&cle. An interesting debut was that of A. 0. Johnston, of Winchester College, who obtained three wickets at a reasonable cost in the first innings of Surrey. In this connec­ tion it is interesting to recall that in 1836 Arthur Lowth—still alive and well, I believe —when a boy of nineteen, was taken from Winchester and given a place in the Gentle­ men’s eleven at Lord’s. He obtained four wickets in the first innings and five in the second, and had a great deal to do with the Gentlemen winning by 35 runs. His bowl­ ing was fast—there were 29 and 36 extras in the Players’ totals of 77 and 99—and even the great Beagley asked, “ Bag pardon, Muster Falix, but how be oi to ploy that yong gemmim’sbouling p ’’ ItwasBeagley’s last match for the Players, and he scored not out 1and b Lowth 0. The meeting of Notts and Gloucestershire, at Trent Bridge, was rendered memorable by the feat of Shrewsbury in scoring 101 and 127 not out, and therebymaking two separate hundreds in a match for the first time in his long and distinguished career. Considering how prominent a place Shrewsbury occupies in cricket history—has he ever been sur­ passed as a batsman except by W.G. f_it is astonishing how many players of his own generation occupy more noticeable positions in the records of the game. Shrewsbury has never made as many as 300runs in aninnings, neither has he ever made three consecutive centuries in great matches, and not until last week had he obtained two separate hundreds in one game, though he missed performing the feat by a few runs only, at Lord’s, in 1893, when he made 106 and 81 for England against Australia. At the present time Shrewsbury is evidently in excellent form.