Cricket 1904

D ec . 22, 1904, CRICKET: A *EKLY RECORD OF rrHE GAME. 475 thehistoriccrickethavenot alwaysb een remarkabffor accuracy : doubti.eshe [ther, and, perhaps, /more .bjects, withwhichto/occupy original research, /in any t remains that a cricket club existed, but flouri/ghed, at ty years ago. _So/Mr. Lang egarded as a cricket pioneer.” has had importa: his time| case, th not onl; Geneva cannot T h e balanci last 80 ! is pre: 1905, tary, a] does not seem to be at all pessimistic about the chances of the Australian team against England next summer. Quite the contrary. He was rather surprised at the success of the Marylebone teamin Australia last season, and the results of that tour have not shaken his faith in Australian possibilities. “ T h e y haven’t got anybody,” he said, “ who stands out as Richardson or Lock­ wood used to. I should say they are rather inclined to be on the weak side in bowling. They should have a difficulty in picking their side as far as thebowlers are concerned. If you want an example of the weakness of English bowling on good wickets, look at the Gentlemen v. Players match at Lord’s. The Gentle­ men wanted 411 runs, and they got them in the last innings for the loss of eight wickets.” “ T h e best fast bowler in England,” according to L. O. S., “ is Warren, of Derbyshire, who is playing with aweak side., He is very tall and thin, with a high delivery, and he makes the ball nip back fromthe off at a tremendous pace. They have any number of good fast bowlers, but no one of the highest class —no one like Jones when in his prime— with that extra bit of pace which makes all the difference.” “ In answer to a question on the rela­ tive values of a left-hand bowler on i. j , , English and Australian wickets, Mr. % Sreat. advance among many said: ,hpk ftfo, 5 ^ “ ? ^ . 5 “ ,? Mr. iddlesex County C.C. has a its favour of £697 Os. 8d. on ,’smatches. Mr. Y. E, Walker fint and honorary treasurer for A. J. Webbe honorary secre- Mr. Gregor Macgregor captain. o b it u a r y . [Seep. 466.) Mb. J a 'E s C r a n s t o n . __ James sranston, whose death occurijedquit'? acently, was at one time perhaps thebf-t left-handed batsman in England. B'rn at Birminghamon the 9th January 1859, he was educated at Taunton 2 'llege, and 90 early as the year 1876' eceived a trial with Glouces­ tershire, c^e county of his adoption, being trolled as one of the team that ppeared against Yorkshire at SheffM. Between that year and 1881 his sst attempts with the bat were 37 ae.nst Surrey in 1877, 38, not out, v. Yorkshire in 1878, and39 against Somer- in the following year. In 1881 he ihowed a a left-hander to be quite an ordinar bowler on Australian wickets, and y» be a very good bowler over there, wbfe the wickets are always helping -he bowler a bit. He gets a bad v,ket occasionally, and doesn’t have a seces­ sion of bad days to take the heartJut of him.’ He adds that a left-handoowler and a slow bowler are, in his pinion, absolutely necessary in an ^istralian Eleven. ‘ The left-hander,’ fle adds, ‘ you simply cannot do withor/ ” A ccordin g to the latest *dvices from Australia, it seems very -inlikely that Hugh Trumble will com* to England next summer with the .Australian team, “ Felix,” in the AmfO-lusian in the middle of last month, vrites,111 sawhim practising at the M.CC. nets on Thurs­ day evening, and I informed that he will probably play the next pennant round, but that be/ond pennant cricket he will not go. la this connection it is significant that ne did not represent Victoria and SouthAustralia at Adelaide last month.” ------ Mr. A sh le y -C o o pe r writesas follows: “ In the December issue of Longman's Magazine Mr. Andrew Lang remarks that in the old English translation of ‘ Don Quixote ’ cricket is playedinSpain, audhe adds :— “ Servetus,whomCalvinburnedatGeneva, was a Spaniard, hut probably he did not introduce cricket into Switzerland. I did that in1870, but the game strucknoroot.” Fascinating writer as Mr. Lang un­ doubtedly is, his statements concerning 42 v. Yorkshire, 52 v. Somerset, and 51 against Surrey. His fame as a batsman was now firmly established, and two years later he had the satisfaction of registering his first century, when he made 127 v. Lancashire at Clifton. Until the year 1889 he was now absent from Gloucestershire and its eleven, though in the meantime he made a few appearances for his native county of Warwick with little or no success. Reinstated in the Gloucestershire team, the summer of 1889 found Mr. Cranston in great form. He made 130 v. Sussex at Brighton, and 111 not out against Surrey at Cheltenham, in addition to many other good totals, including 51 not out for Gents v. Players at the Oval. Again in 1890 he made 101 againstYork­ shire at Bristol, and in the returnmatch completely turned the scale with a mag­ nificent 152, which converted an impend­ ing defeat into a victory. His splendid formnot only securedhima place in the Gentlemen’s team at Lord’s, where he made 68 not out, but he received thehigh water-mark distinction of representing England v. Australia at the Oval, when the mother country snatched a narrow win by two wickets. In 1891 Mr. Cran­ ston was not in the best of health, and failedwith the bat, but in 1899 he re­ appeared in four matches for his county, though this, as it happens, was his last year in first-class cricket. Latterly, as is well known, he occupied the post of cricket instructor to the young players of Gloucestershire. He had been in failing health since August. J. B. P. F IX T U R E S FOR 1905. APRIL. 24. Oval, Suriey v. Gentlemen of England. MAY. 1. Oval, Surrey First Eleven v. Next Fourteen. 3. M.C.O. Annual Meeting and Dinner 3. Lord’s, M.O.C. and Ground v. Notts 4. Taunton, Somerset v. Yorkshire 4. Oval, Surrey v. Essex 4. Ciystal Palace, Gentlemen of England v. Austral lians 8. Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Sussex 8. Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Somerset 8. Leicester, Leicestershire v. Lancashire 8. Nottingham, Notts v. Australians 8. Oval, Surrey v. Hampshire 8. Bristol, Gloucestershire v. Yorkshire 11. Lord’s, Middlesex v. Gloucestershire 11. Manchester, Lancashire v. Warwickshire 11. Brighton, Sussex v. Notts 11. Worcester, Worcestershire v. Yorkshire 11. Oval, Surrey v. Australians 15. Lord’s, Middlesex v. Notts 15. Oxford, Oxford University v. Australians 15. Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Leicestershire 15. Bradford, Yorkshire v. Derbyshire 15. Manchester, Lancashire v. Essex 18. Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground (or Gentlemen of En­ gland) v. Australians 18. Oval, Surrey v. Sussex 18. Chesterfield, Derbyshire v. Lancashire 18. Cambridge, Cambridge University v. Warwick­ shire 18. Southampton, Hampshire v. Northamptonshire 18. Leicester, Leicestershire v. Yorkshire 18. Nottingham, Notts v. Essex 22. Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Kent 22. Sheffield, Yorkshire v. Australians 22. Leyton, Essex v. Derbyshire 22. Oval, Surrey v. Warwickshire 22. Brighton, Sussex v. Leicestershire 22. Bristol, Gloucestershire v. Notts 22. Oxford, Oxford University v. Gentlemen of En­ gland 22. Liverpool, Lancashire v. Worcestershire 25. Lord’s, Middlesex v. Sussex 25. Manchester, Lancasliire v. Australians 25. Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Yorkshire 25. Aldershot, Hampshire v. Surrey 25. Leyton, Essex v. Leicestershire 25. Gravesend, Kent v. Notts 25. Oxford, Oxford University v. Worcestershire 25. Wath-on-Deame, Yorkshire Colts v. Notts Colts 27 & 29. Swindon, Wiltshire v. London County C.C. 29. Nottingham, England v. Australia (First Test Match) 29. Lord’s, M.O.C. and Ground v. Leicestershire 29. Brighton, Sussex v. Northamptonshire. 29. Leeds, Yorkshire v. Worcestershire 29. Cambridge, Cambridge University v. Surrey JUNE. 1. Lord’s, Middlesex v. Yorkshire 1. Cambridge, Cambridge University v. Australians 1. Bath, Somerset v. Gloucestershire (Bath Week) 1. Worcester, Worcestershire v. Hampshire 1. Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Lancashire 1. Derby, Derbyshire v. Sussex 1. Leyton, Essex v. Surrey 2. Oval, Surrey (2nd XI.) v. Lancashire (2nd XI.) 5. Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Worcestershire 5. Bradford, Yorkshire v. Australians 5. Dublin, Dublin University v. Essex 5. Bath, Somerset v. Hampshire (Bath Week) 5. Northampton, Northamptonshire v.Leicestershire 5. Nottingham, Notts v. Sussex 5. Cambridge, Cambridge University v. Gentlemen of England 5. Oval, Surrey v. Lancashire 8. Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Australians 8. Northampton, Northamptonshire v. Sussex 8. Cork, All Ireland v. Essex (Provisional) 8. Cambridge, Cambridge University v. Yorkshire 8. Oval, Surrey v. Gloucestershire 12. (Whit Monday), Lord’s, Middlesex v. Somerset 12. Leicester, ILeicestershire v. Australians 12. Brighton, Sussex v. Gloucestershire 12. Worcester, Worcestershire v. Warwickshire 12. Leyton, Essex v. Kent 12. Southampton. Hampshire v. Derbyshire 12. Nottingham, Notts v. Surrey 12. Manchester, Lancashire v. Yorkshire 12. Oval, Surrey (2nd XI.) v. Kent (2nd XI.) 15. Lord’s, England v. Australia (Second Test Match) 15. Derby, Derbyshire v. Yorkshire 15. Birmingham, Warwickshire v. Cambridge Uni­ versity 15. Manchester, Lancashire v. Kent 15. Brighton, Sussex v. Somerset 15. Leicester, 1Leicestershire v. Surrey 19. Lord’s, Middlesex v. Surrey 19. Tonbridge, Kent v. Sussex (Tonbridge Week) 19. Northampton, Northamptonshire v. Derbyshire 19. Taunton, Somerset v. Lancashire 19. Southampton, Hampshire v. Leicestershire 19. Sheffield, Yorkshire v. Notts