Cricket 1904

M ae . 31, 1904. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. when, after the Marylebone Club had suddenly delighted the cricket world by announcing that it would be responsible for a team, it was found that several men, who in the opinion of all the world were among the most famous players of the day would be unable to accept the invitation of the M .C.C. to go to Aus­ tralia, it seemed as if the fates were playing into the hands of our opponents. Not that the M.C.C. team as finally chosen was regarded as weak or likely to be ineffective, for on the contrary it was admittedly strong from the standpoint of cricket as it is played in England. But the question arose— what would the bow liog be like when it was in operation on the hard and perfect wickets of Aus­ tralia ? Where would Rhodes and Hirst be then ? A ll these things were naturally much discussed before the team went out, and although the general opinion was strong that this would be a fighting team, it was easy to read between the lines written by critics in Australia that Australians felt that their adversaries would be delivered into their hands. Never were speculations more sur­ prisingly at fault. The Australian season turned out to be almost as wet as some of the seasons to which we have of late become accustomed in England, and in the great majority of the matches the English bowlers must have felt as happy as if they were on their own grounds. Even the wicket at Adelaide, so famous as being the fastest in the world, was found to have lost much of its pace, despite absence of rain, and some of the English­ men seem to have thought that other teims which had spoken of its extreme pace must have been mistaken. But they may take it that the conditions have changed in Australia, and that they arrived at a fortunate time for them, for it is unreasonable to suppose that all the previous teams, as well as all Australian cricketers, should have been utterly wrong in their estimate that good Aus­ tralian wickets were very much faster than those in England. In previous tours in Australia many Englishmen have failed to mas'er the extreme pace of the wickets —not only in one match,but in match after match during the tour. But the mem­ bers of the M.C.C. team hardly ever played a match in which rain did not play some important part, and Rhodes, admittedly the finest bowler in the world on a sticky wicket, had chance after chance of distinguishing himself. And hardly a chance did he miss throughout the tour. Hitherto Australian teams have been able to produce at least one man, often two or three men, who could hold their own with Eaglish bowlers on sticky wickets, but in the recent tour Rhodes simply towered above every other bowler on either side. Some of his records were magnificent; as good as any that have ever been made in big matches. Undoubtedly he had much to do with the success of the tour and the victories in the test matches. But this is b y no means to say that the team consisted of Rhodes and no one else. It has been ungrudgingly admitted by the Australian players that the English­ men won on their m erits; that in a wet season they proved themselves to be all that had been anticipated of them ; that they were a fighting team all th rou gh ; and that they were ably led. Fewer men than is usual in these tours damaged their reputations, partly no doubt because they were not greatly tried under con­ ditions to which they were unaccustomed. It is true that Hirst was altogether a dis­ appointment as a bowler, but, except when they occasionally had to bow l on really fast wickets the other bowlers in the team did exceedingly well. What is more, there was generally found one man at least in every match who rose to the occision in the most marked manner. Arnold and Braund were often particu­ larly useful. Warner adopted the system, which was followed by Noble, of chang­ ing his bowlers very frequently, and on the whole the method seems to have worked admirably for the Englishmen; not quite so admirably for the Aus­ tralians. In batting most of the Englishmen up­ held their reputations, and although there was no one among them of such commanding powers as Fry, Ranjitsinhji, or Maclaren, there were so manjr men who made useful scores that this did not so very much matter. Nothing during the tour, not even Rhodes’ w on ieifu l bow ling, stood out as promiuently as R. E . Foster’s famous innings of 287 in the first test match at Sydney, an innings which placed him easily at the head of the averages, a position which would otherwise have been held by Hayward, whose consistently good batting was of the utmost value to the side. Tyldesley did well, but was often disappointing. Hirst upheld his reputation as one of the most useful batsmen in the world when his side was in a tight place; Warner proved conclusively that he is a man for a big situation; Bosanquet and Braund occisionally did fine things; while Rhodes’ average of 19 by no means shows the value of the very useful innings which he played when runs were needed. The rest of the team all played much below their own standard. The one gre*t fault which was to be found with the team was that the fielding was not at all up to the standard of former teams, and there are in this respect several ni table failures, who, if their names are mentioned when future test matches are to be played will probably be passed over, for in test matches it is unpardonable that the fielding should^be anything but excellent. And what of the Australians ? They were undoubtedly caught at a time when they were not as strong as they have been for many years; they had four great batsmen and four only. Except on the rarest occasions the other men played far below their reputation. True, they often had to bat on difficult wickets against bow ling of the most deadly kind, but when every possible excuse is made for them it is indubitable that they were all a class or two below Trumper, Duff, H ill and Noble, Jn bow ling the Australians were sadly deficient. Trumble and Noble once or twice did a splendid perform ance, and Cotter made an excellent debut, but neither Trumble nor Noble was as skilful as of old, while Saunders, Howell, Armstrong and the rest seemed as a rule harmless. Just at present Australians must be a little anxious for the future, for there seems no sign of com ing men who will make a glorious name for themselves like Spofforth, Turner, Trumble, Palmer and J W is . But if one thing is more certain than another it is that no stone will be left unturned b y the Australians to discover new bowlers and new batsmen, and it will be a surprising thing if, when the next Australian team visits England, it does not include new m en— bowlers as well as batsmen— who will give a brilliant account of themselves. Trumper, Duff and H ill are all so young that they may do even greater things than before, and such fine batsmen are bound to make other fine batsmen; it is in the bowling chiefly that there may possibly be cause for anxiety. After all, the Australians won two out of the five test matches, and it would, perhaps, be better not to think abont what m ight have happened if the season had been like that usually ex­ perienced in Australia. W . A. B. OBITUARY. M r . J ohn SrANNlNd. Mr. John Stanning, of Leyland, wild died at Luxor, on the Nile, at midnight on the 5th inst., had been for several years a great supporter of Lancashire cricket. He had for some time been travelling on account of his health, but was attacked by malaria, and, pneumonia intervening, he died in Egypt. Several professionals who have made their mark in Lancashire cricket, e.g., Albert Ward, J. Sharp, I ’Anson, etc., owe their success as cricketers to the generosity of Mr. Stanniog, who was always willing and anxious to do his utmost for the welfare of the county. Mr. Stanning, who was born at B jlton in 1840, was educated at the Manchester Grammar School, Rugby, and Trinity College, Cambridge, graduating B.A. in 1863, and proceeding M .A. two years later. Although he was so keen an enthusiast, he never gained distinction as a player. His name, however, will De found in a few minor matches played at Rugby in 1858 and 1859, whilst in 1860 and 1861 he appeared for the 2ad X I . of Old Rugbeians against the School 2nd X L It is evident that he was played more on account of his bow ling ability than for his skill as a batsman, although in the Past 2nd X I . v. Present 2nd X L match in 1860 his score of 22 proved the highest in the first innings of the Past. Mr. John Stanning, juu., who was educated at Kugby and Cambridge, and has played for Lancashire and for Lord Hawke’s team iu New Zealand and Aus­ tralia, is 4 son of the deceased.