Cricket 1904

196 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME, J une 16, 1904. NOTTS y. YORKSHIRE. Played at Trent Bridge on June 9, 10 and 11. Yorkshire won by 10 wickets. The Yorkshire bowling waa severely tried on the first day of this match, although only two men, A. O. Jones and J. A. Dixon, offered any prolonged resis­ tance to it. For a time everything worked well for Yorkshire, and wh*n four Notts wickets were down for 54 runs, it seemed not unlikely that thetotal would be very small. But Dixon now joined Jones, who was playing a fine game, and for two hours the bowling was’mastered, while the score was increased by 151. Both menplayed beautifulcricket, andwhile they were together the bowling was made to look uncommonly easy. Yorkshire made 10 runs without loss before stumps were drawn, and thus with all their wickets in hand we-re 342 runs behind. On the next day the Notts \ owlers came in for even more severe treatment than had been the lot of the Yorkshiremen on the previous afternoon, and when play ended for the day, Yorkshire had still two wickets in hand, and were leading by 80 runs. Several of the team played excellent cricket, but Tunnicliffe, the highest scorer, was by no means seen at his best. He and Denton put on 174 for thethird wicket in two hours and ten minutes. Later in the day, Hirstand Rhodes made a most uBeful stand, and when stumps were drawn with the total at 422 for eight wickets, Lord Hawke was net out 18. It did not seem at all likely on Saturday that the match would be finished,for with twowickets in hand York­ shire only had a lead of 70. But the unexpected happened, and before half-past four Yorkshire had gained a brilliant victory. The remaining two wickets increased the total by 30, and when the inn­ ings came to an end Notts were 100 runs behind, while the wicket still remained good. But every­ thing now came off for Yorkshire, whose three regular bowlers were seen in their form of last year. Even Rhodes, who has of late been of very little service to his side with the ball, came out of his shell, and showed something of his old skill. It was a bad thing for Notts when Hirst got rid of A. O. Jones and W. Gunn for a duck’s egg apiece, and although he did nothing else during the innings, he deserved extremely well of his side. From this time Notts struggled in vain to extricate themselves from an awkward position, and although Iremonger, J. Gunn and Dixon all played with great pluck, they could not savetheir side. N otts . First innings. Second innings. A. O. Jones, b Haigh........ 113 cRingrose,bHirst 0 Iremonger, c Tunnicliffe, b Ringrose ........................ 7 cRhodes, b Haigh 30 Gunn (W.), lbw, b Hirst ... 18 c Tunnicliffe, b Hirst .......... 0 Gunn (J.), lbw, b Ringrose. 2 b Rhodes ... v. 23 Anthony,cWilkinson,bHirst 0 c and b Rhodes .. 0 J. A. Dixon, b Myers..........135 cHunter,b Haigh 27 Day, bHirst........................ 8 b Haigh .......... 1 Hardstaff, b Haigh ..........35 lbw, b Rhodes ... 4 Oates, not out .................19 b Haigh ............12 Hallam, b Haigh................. 5 c and b Rhodes .. 7 Wass, b Myers ................. 0 not out .......... 0 B 2, lb 4, nb 4 ..........10 B 3, lb 4 ............ 7 Total .................352 Total......... Ill . Y o r k sh ir e . Rhodes, b Wass.......35 Grimshaw (C. H.), c Oates, bWass.......... 9 Lord Hawke, not out. 29 Haigh, st Oates, b J. Gunn......................... 9 Ringrose, c and b J. Gunn........................10 B 6, w 1, nb 3 ... 10 Hunter, c Dixon, b J. Gunn ....................17 Myers, c Day, b An­ thony....................... 47 Tunnicliffe, c Oates, b Iremonger ...........119 Denton, c Oates, b Iremonger .............85 H. Wilkinson, lbw, b Iremonger ........... 5 Hirst, c W . Gunn, b Total ..........462 Wass...........................77 Second innings.—Hunter, not out, 11; Myers, not out, 0; nb 1—total (no wkt) 12. N otts . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W . O. M. R. W. H irst................. 29 1 119 3 .......... 12 2 25 2 Ringrose .......... 25 2 86 2 .......... 6 0 22 0 Rhodes .......... 17 4 64 0 .......... 13'1 7 12 4 Haigh................. 22 4 55 3 .......... 20 8 45 4 Myers................. 4'5 1 28 2 Ringrose delivered three, and Hirst one no-ball. Y orkshire . First innings. O. M. R. W. 44 12 114 3 46-4 14 119 , 27 14 48 36 16 14 35 60 , 1J , 3 3 . 6 . 16 Second innings. O. M. R. W . ... 32 1 11 0 ... 4 4 0 0 Wass..; .. J. Gunn .. Hallam .. A n th on y .. Day ........ Jones......... Dixon Iremonger J. Gunn deliveredtwono-balls, andWass twono-balls and one wide. HAMPSHIRE y. WORCESTERSHIRE. Played at Southampton on June 9, 10 and 11. Worcestershire won by six wickets. The Hampshire men gave a fine account of them­ selves on the first day, scoring 845 and dismissing three of their opponents for 68. The best innings of the day was the 105 by A. C. Johnston, who was batting for two hours and a half. On Friday the Hampshire tail failed badly in the second innings, and Worcestershire were left to make 205 runs to win. They had a few minutes batting before stumps were drawn, and scored one run without losing a wicket. On Saturday H. K. Foster and Bowley put up 105 runB for the third wicket, and Wheldon and Foster had nearly knocked off the runs, when the latter, anxious to reach his hundred, made a bad stroke and was caught. H ampshire . First innings. Second innings. Llewellyn, b Burrows.......... 0 c Burrows, b Pearson ..........50 Bowell, cWhe!don,b Arnold 6 c Bowley, b Pear- Bon ................. 0 E.M.Sprot, cFoster, b Pear- c Bowley, b son .......... .................... 71 Arnold ............. 31 Webb, b Arnold....................63 b Pearson........... 30 A. J. L. Hill, c Wheldon, b Pearson ......................... 2 b Arnold ............ 4 Rev. W . Y. Jephson, c c Wheldon, b Foster, b Arnold ..........21 Arnold ............. 0 A. C. Johnston, c Wheldon, b Arnold .........................105b Arnold ............ 4 E. B. Frederick, cWheldon, b Arnold ........................... 11 not out............... 4 Soar, c Foster, b Pearson ... 4 c Bowley, b Pearson .......... 4 Langford, lbw, b Arnold ... 49 c uowley, b Arnold .......... 5 Stone, not out ................. 1 c Wheldon, b Pearson ..........14 B 3, lb 9, nb 1 ..........13 B 1,1b 3, w 1... 5 Total .................345 W orcestersh ire . Total ..........151 First innings. Bowley, cStone, b Langford 0 W . B. Burns, b Soar..........22 H. K. Foster, c sub... b Soar 13 Wheldon, c Jephson, b Frederick ........................63 Pearson, c Stone, b Lang­ ford ............................... 13 Arnold, c Stone, b Soar ... 39 G. E. Bromley-Maitin, c Frederick, b Hill ..........61 A. W . Isaac.c Sprot,b Hill 60 Bird, not out........................10 Burrows,c Langford,bSprot 8 Keene, c Stone, b Sprot ... 1 Wides........................ 2 Second innings, c &b Johnston... 66 c Frederick, b Jephson..........97 not out... ... 21 not out................. 0 c Webb, b Lang­ ford ................. 1 b Sprot Lb 1, w 2... ... 17 Total........................292 Total (4wkts) 205 H am psh ibe . Second innings, o M. R. W. 1 80 5 O. M. R. W. O. Arnold ... ... 381 4 125 6 ... ... 21 Burrows... ... 13 1 51 1 ... .. 11 Bird.......... ... 12 1 58 0 ... Keene ... 6 0 22 0 ... Pearson ... ... 22 2 71 3 ... !!! 9*4 Foster ... ... 3 1 5 0 ... Pearson delivered one no-ball and one wide. W orcestershire . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Langford ... 35 12 88 2 .......... 25 4 67 1 Soar.................. 32 6 74 3 .......... 21 8 65 0 Frederick ... 22 6 72 1 .......... 4 0 31 0 Johnston ... 5 0 19 0 .......... 3 0 5 1 Sprot ........... 8 4 11 2 .......... 5 1 16 1 Hill.................. 7 2 9 2 .......... 8 2 26 0 Llewellyn ... 3 0 17 0 Jephson.......... 2 1 13 1 Langford bowled two wides and Soar and Sprot one each. SURREY v. CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY. Played at Cambridge on June 9, 10 and 11. Surrey won by 40 runs. From the Surrey eleven which opposed Cf mbridge severalwell-knownmenweremissing, includingAbel, H. B. Chinnery, Lockwood, andRichardson. On the first day Lees bowled so well that although his side had only made 193, the University lost nine wickets for 116 before stumps were drawn. Perhaps the best innings for Surrey was the 44 by Sarel. For Cambridge, the oaly batsman who greatly dis­ tinguished himself was J. F. Marsh ; he was not out 60 at the endof the day. On Friday the innings soon came to an end, Lees having a very fine analysis. The chief feature of the battin? in the secondinnings of Surrey was the fine display by Hayes. Most of the team found McDonell as difficult to play as he had been in the first innings, and during the match he took fifteen wickets for 138 runs. When stumps were drawn, Cambridge, with eight wickets in hand, still required 252 runs to win. Although the Uni­ versity team on Saturday failed to make the best use of their opportunities, they made a determined fight, and with a little more luck might even have won. But in the morning when the wicket was wet and the ball greasy, thebatsmen far themost partplayed into the hands of their opponents by remaining contentto keep at the wickets without trying to make runs. Keigwin was in for two hours for 25 runs, and if the other men had put some life into the game, his stand would have been invaluable; as it was it was thrown away, for as time went on the wicket became more difficult. Wilson made a splendid effort to s*ve the game, andwas finely backed up by Payne, who helped him to put on 63 in half-an-hour for the ninth wicket. If the same sort of game played by these two men had been adopted earlier in the innings, things might have gone badly for 8urrey, but the mischief had been done, and when they came together eight wickets were down for 161. S urrey . First innings. Second innings. Hayward, c Napier, b Mc.- Donell...............................35 b McDonell ... 3 Holland, cWilson, bNapier 47c Roberts, b Mc.- Donell .... 22 Hayes, cMcDonell. bNapier 12 bMcDonell... 80 S. S. Harris, c Napier, b st Payne, b Mc.- McDonell ........................ 1 Donell ... ... 8 W. G. ttarel, c&bMcDonell 44c Payne, b Mc.- Donell ....12 Moulder, b McDonell.......... 0 c Payne, b Mc,- Donell ...... 6 Lees, c Eyre, b Napier ... 3 c Payne, b Mc.- Donell ...... 7 Gooder, lbw, b McDonell... 7c Eyre, b Napier. 8 Strudwick, c Keigwin, b c Marsh, b Mc.- McDoneil ........................... 1 Donell ......16 Smith, c Eyre, b McDonell. 28 not out....... 23 P. R. May, not out .......... 0c and b Napier .. 26 B 11, lb 1, w 2, nb 1 ...15 B l,n b 2 ... 3 Total ....................193 Total...........212 C ambridge U niversity . First innings. Second innings. R. P. Keigwin, lbw, b Lees 1 b Lees.................25 C. H Eyre, c Strudwick, b Lees ............................... 6 b Lees..... ... 35 E. W . Mann, c Hayes, b c Holland, b Gooder ........................ 8 Smith ......37 J. F. Marsh, not out .... ... 60 b Hayes .......... 5 E. S. Phillips, c and b Lees 1 c Hayes, b Lees... 0 F. B. Wilson, cMay, b Lees 4 c Sarel, b May ... 76 H. C. McDonell, b Lees ... 9 lbw, b Hayes ... 0 F. J. V. Hopley, c Hayes, b Lees ............................... 0 bM ay.................16 F. B. Roberts, c Hayward, b Lees...............................26 b Lees................... 7 M. W. Payne, c Hayward, b Smith............................... 0 c Harris, b Lees.. 36 G. C. Napier, b Lees.......... 3 not out................. 8 B 3, lb 1 ... 4 Total ...118 S d b r e y . Total..........247 First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W . Hopley .......... 7 3 16 0 .......... 4 0 19 0 Napier .......... 27 8 86 3 .......... 20 3 62 2 McDonell.......... 28 11 55 7 .......... 36 8 83 8 Roberts .......... 6 3 12 0 .......... 12 2 45 0 Keigwin .......... 3 0 10 0 Keigwin bowled one wide, Napier one wide and one no- l all, and Roberts and Hopley each one no-ball. C am bbidge U n iv e b sity . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W . O. M. R. W. Lees .................19 3 4 68 8 .......... 28 5 9 66 6 Gooder .......... 14 0 47 1 Smith................. 5 1 13 1 .......... 25 6 82 1 May.......... 15 4 49 2 Hayes ... 19 4 47 2 MIDDLESEX v. KENT. Played at Catford on June 9 and 10. Kent won by eight wickets. So slowly were runs made on the first day of this match that although cricket was played for nearly five hours and a half the record for the day was only 250. Middlesex seemed to have secured a con­ siderable advantage by winning the toss, but they made very little use of it. They lost three wickets for 43 runs and then G. W. Beldam and Bosanquet put up 81 runs for the fourth wicket in an hour and a half. Beldam’s invaluable innings lasted for three hours and ten minutes, but it was unfortunate for the spectators that all the other Middlesex men