Cricket 1903

S ept . 3, 1903. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 387 BUSEY’S “DEMON DRIVERS. GEO, G. BUSSEY & GO Desire to inform Cricketers all over the world who may experience a difficulty in ob­ taining “ Demon Drivers ” that this difficulty arises in consequence ofthe ever-increas- ing demand exceeding the supply. Readers of G e o . G. B u s se y & Co.’s pamphlet, entitled “ Evolution of the Demon Driver,” are aware that a fea­ ture of the success of the “Demon Driver ” is due to a special process, occupying a long period,that thebatsunder­ go before leaving the works, and although there are always a large number of Bats under this treatment which could be placed on the market, G e o . G . B u s s e y & Co., in the interest of cricketers and their own repu­ tation, will not deviate fromthe system that has made the The Finest Bat the World produces. GEO.G.BDSSEY&CO, 3 6 & 38 , QUEENVICTORIASTREET, E.O, Manufactory—PECKHAM, S.E. Timber Mills—ELHSWELL SUFFOLK. AT THE SIGN OF THE WICKET. B y F . S . A sh lb y -C oopbr . By means of his splendid innings of 138 against Kent, at Brighton, on Monday last, C. B. Fry placed his fiftieth three-figure innings in first-class cricket to his credit. This is a feat which had been previously performed only by W. G. Grace, Abel, Shrewsbury and K. S. Ranjitsinhji. Fry’s 138 against Kent was his eighth hundred of the present season and, unless we except his 234 against York­ shire, at Bradford, in June, also his best. The Kent attack was very steady, and how difficult it was to get the ball away may be judged from the fact that it took Fry two hours and twenty minutes to reach 50. His fifty centuries may be summarised as follows : F o r S u ssex (42). 109 . v. Gloucs. ... 1891 170*.. v. Notts ... 1901 122 .. v. Kent lfc97 241 .. v. Leices. .. 1901 104*. . v. Middlesex 1898 241 .. v. Cam. Uni. 1901 108 123* v. Middlesex 1898 219*.. 116 . v. Ox. Univ. 1901 v. Middlesex 1901 110 .. v. Somerset 1898 119*.. v. Somerset.. 1901 133 .. v. Hampshire 1898 106 .. v. Hants ... 1901 179*. v. Yorkshire 1898 209 .. v. Yorks ... 1901 162*.. v. Yorkshire 1899 149 .. v. Middlesex li.01 181 .. v. Austral’ns 1899 105 .. v. Surrey ... 1901 162 .. v. Somerset 1899 140 .. v. Kent 19J1 167 .. v. Hampshire lb99 122 .. v. Middlesex 19)2 145 .. v. 8urrey ... 19C0 169 .. v. Sum y ... 1902 101*.. v. Essex ... 190) 159*.. v. Middlesex 1902 110 .. v. Kent 1900 174 .. v. Worcester 1903 135 .. v. Leices. ... 1900 181 .. v. Lancs. ... 1903 125 2 9 v. Surrey ... 1900 234 .. 200 .. v. Yorks ... v. Surrey ... 1903 1903 110 .. v. Middlesex 1900 160 .. v. Hants ... 19 )3 105 .. v. Gloucs. ... 1930 127*.. v. Leices. ... 19 Q 1903 145 .. v. Leices. ... 1900 133 .. v. Kent 110 ... 119 ... 106 . AGENTS ALL OVER THE WORLD. F or O xford U niversity (4). .Somerset.. 1892 |100'... v. Cam. Un. 1894 . Sussex ... l c9» |125 ... y. Sussex ... 1695 F or T hb G entlemen (3). . Players ... 1899 112 i ... v. Players ... 1901 232*.. v. Players ... 1903. F or E ngland (1). . Yorkshite, at Lord’s ........................ 1901 * Signifies not out. It is a remarkable coincidence that Fry in the above innings should total 7,348 runs and that W. G. in his first fifty three-figure scores should have made 7,347. The Master made his runs on rough grounds and when all hits had to be run out, and obtained his first hundred in 1866 and his fiftieth in 1875 : Fry, on the other hand, has generally batted on perfect wickets and has had the very great advantage over W. 6. of having flourished in the days of boundaries. The latter made his first and fiftieth centuries in 1892 and 1803 respectively. W. G. in 1875 was twenty-seven years of age, whilst Fry is now thirty-one. So the record for this particular lrind of thing still stands to the credit of W, G.—more power to him ! Middlesex are to be heartily congratulated upon winning the County Championship, their all-round play throughout the season having been of an exceptionallyhigh standard. That they were the best team in the country, judging from their whole season’s work, and the one least likely to be dismissed for under a hundred will be readily granted. Through­ out the three months over which their programme extended they gave no such sorry exhibitions as did Yorkshire at Canter­ bury and Brighton, or Sussex at Worcester. In possessing men of all-round ability the side was exceptionally fortunate, especially after C. M. Wells came into the eleven, whilst the fact that duriDg the latter portion of the season Trott’s place in the order of going in was tenth testifies to the strength of the batting. It has been urged against the side that it did not meet all the other counties engaged in the championship competition, and that the eleven was therefore more likely to escape defeat than would otherwise have been the case, fcuch a statement, to carry any weight, should have been brought for­ ward at the commencement of the campaign, and not after the side had, by excellent cricket, gained the highest honours attain­ able. Furthermore, Middlesex met all the more powerful counties, and only a most prejudiced person could urge that matches with such sides as Derbyshire, Hampshire, Leicestershire, etc., would not have tended to place Middlesex in a higher position, arithmetically, than it already enjoys. Of late years, apart from 1902, the county has always occupied ahigh place in the cricketing world, having been second in the champion- ship competition in 1898, 1899 and 1901, and third in 1893, 1894 and 1896. They now occupy the leading position for the first time since 1878, in which year, in strictly inter­ county matches, their record was won three and drawn three, total six. They beat Surrey at Lord’s by 113 runs, and Yorkshire in both matches—at Sheffield by an innings and 94 runs and in London by 90 runs—but had the worst of the games at the Oval and Trent Bridge. In the Notts match at Lord’s, played for the benefit of Bob Thoms, a great fight was seen, as when stumps were drawn on the third day the visitors required 19 runs to win and had two wickets in hand. Apart from the above, the Australians were met at Lord’s and the county beaten hy 98 runs, despite a wonderful innings of 113 by the Hon. E. Lyttelton—now Canon Lyttelton, headmaster of Haileybury—who made his runs in under two hours by a superb display before an absurdly small attendance. In 1866 the county had as successful a season as it has enjoyed this year, for of the eight matches played they won six and lost but one. In each of the Surrey fixtures Middlesex won by an innings after scoring over 400— Tom Hearne making 146 at Islington and J. J. Sewell playing his historic innings of 166 at the Oval—Notts were defeated on their own ground by an innings and 67 runs, whilst Lancashire succumbed i a both matches and Cambridgeshire in the match on the Cambridge ground. The only reverse sus­ tained by the side was when they met Cam­ bridgeshire at Islington in the first week of June, and faced Tarrant on a wicket to his liking. So strong a team had the county in 1866 that, at the special request of the M.C.C., they played England at Lord’s the following year, with disastrous results, however, for Alfred Lubbock played a great innings of 129, whilst W. U., then scarcely nineteen years of age, scored 75 in addition to taking eight wickets at reasonable cost. Middlesex lost by an innings and 25 runs, but it is only just to add that they had the worst of the wicket. Of the players who appeared for Middlesex in that successful season of 1866 are many who have made their names live. The brothers Walker—V. E. (who averaged over 50 runs an innings for the season), B. D. and I. D. - J. J. Sewell, whose sonis occasion­ ally found in the Gloucestershire eleven, nowadays, Tom Hearne, who made 122 not out for the Players against the Gentlemen, at Lord’s, in 1866, A. W. T. Daniel, who scored 112 not out in the Eton v. Harrow match of 1860, B. B. Halli- well, a fine wicket-keeper, whose son is one of the best men in that position at the present time, and Howitt, a fast left-handed bowler, who was irresistible in his day—all of these were frequently to be found assist­ ing the side, whilst among those who only occasionally donned flannels may be instanced A. J. Wilkinson, a fine batsman, who also appeared for Yorkshire, C. F. Buller, whp