Cricket 1905

J an . 2(5, 1905. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 5 111; Storer, W ., 110; A. J. Turner, 102; Webb, A , 1*2*; Wheldon, F., 103; G. C. White, 115; Whittle, A., 101; H. Wilkinson, 113; E. G. Wynyard, 147. N ote .—' Thera were nineteen individual scores of 200 or more hit during the season. The following is the complete list:— P. A. Perrin ... . Hayes, B. G............. Ireraonger, J........... C. B. Fry ............. C. A. Olllvierre C. B. Fry ............... 0. H. McGahey .. . Tyldesley, J. T. R. H. 8p>oner ... . V. B. Fry .............. * Signifies not out. T able No. 13.—TABLE 8 ^ 0 WING THE NUM­ BER OF BATSMEN WHO 8COMED A HUNDRED OR MORE RUNS IN ONE INNINGS ON THEIR FIR8T APPEAR­ ANCE IN FIRST-CLASS CRICKET DURING THE SEASON. Batsman. Match. Ground. Score. J. H. Hunt... Gents v. Players ... Oval ... 128 |104 843* Tyldesley. J. T. 210 273* K. S. Ranjit inbji .. *207 272 G. L. Je^sop ......... *.0? 229 Hayward, T............. 203 229 Knight. A. E............ 203 226 L. C. H. Palairet .. 203 225 Rev.F. H Gillingham 201 225 J. E. Raphael........ 201 215 Q,uaife, W. G............ *.03 211 King, J. H.... Players v. Gents ... Lord’s ... 109* Their first appearance in a match between Gentle­ men and Players. King (J. H.) was included in the Players’ XI. at Lord’s at the last moment, he taking the place of Tyldesley, who was unable to appear. All three inniogs mentioned above were chanceless. • Signifies not out. T able No. 14.—TABLE SHOWING THE NUM­ BER OF BATSMEN WHO SCORED TWO SEPARATE HUNDREDS IN A FIRST- CLASS MATCH DURING THE SEASON. Scores. Batsman. Match. Ground. | Hayward, T.... Surrey v. Sussex .. Brighton J King, J. H. ... Players v. Gents ... Lord’s 136* | ®eymour>Jaa> Ke&t v. Worcea. ... Maidstore N ote .— For Sussex v. Lancashire, at Brighton, K. S. Ranjitsinhji scored 99 and 207*. * Signifies not out. T able No. 16.—TABLE SHOWING THE NU 4. BE i OF BATSMEN WHO SCORED THREE SEPARATE CENTURIE8 OR MORE IN CONSECUTIVE INNINGS IN FIRST-CLASS MATCHES DURING TdE SEASON. Batsman. Scores. Match. Ground. (189** Notts v. Mdsx ... Lord’s Iremonger, J. <272 Notts v. Kent ... Ncttingh’m \ 142 Notts v. Derby ... Chesterfield ( 13S Kent v. Yorks ... T. Wells J. R. Mason 1 126 Kent v. Someset... Beckenham (. 123 Kent v. Essex ... Canterbury 1 103 Lancs v. Somerset Manchester Tyldesley, J.T. •<225 Lancs, v. Notts ... Nottingh’m ( 196 Lancs. v. Worces. Worcester • Signifies not out. T able No. 16.-T A B L E SHOWING THE NUM­ BER OF MATCHES IN WtilCH THREE INDIVIDUAL CENTURIES OR MORE WERE bCORED IN ONE INNINGS. (a)—Four Centuries. Match. Century Scorers. at Manchester Essex > at tk Gents v. Players, at the Oval at the Oval+ Essex v. Notts, at Leyton ( A. C. MacLaren .......... 151 JA. H. Hornby ........ 114 VTyldesley, J. T. ........ 103 ( Cuttell, W. R. ........ 101 ‘inree Centuries. ( Carpenter, H ......... .. ... 199 { C. H. McGahey ........ 173 I Sewell, E. H. D. .......... *108 ( B. J. T. Bcsanquet ... 146 <W. L. Murdoch ........ 140 ( J. fl. Hunt ... . . ... 128 ( Tunnicliffe, J. . ... *139 ■J Hirst, G. H ............ ........ 108 ( Denton, D............... ... 105 i C. H. McGahey .. ... 225 < F. L Fane ........ ........ 126 ( Buckenham, C. P ........... 100 + in second innings of match. T abls N°. 17.—TABLE SHOWING THE NITM- HEU o t BATSMEN WHO MAJJE TWO SEPARATE SCORES OF H F IY OR MOKE £SL ^?r1KBT-ULA88 MATCH DURING THE o-bASON. at a Arnold. E. II7 an5 S9» Worcestershire v. Surrey, at Worcester ah and 86, Worcestershire v. Gloucestershire, at Worcester. E. M. Ashcroft, oo and 62, Derbyshire v. Surrey, at the Oval. .. _ R. N. R. Blaker. and 62, Kent v. Essex, at Canterbuiy. Bowley, F. 53 and 60, Worceiten-hire v. Gloucestersl ire, at Worces'er. J. F. B)rne. 83 and 55, Warwickshi e v.CambridgeUniversity, at Edg astm. K. M. Carlisle. 107* and 71, Ox Univ. v. ^ ’rcestersh.,at W ’rcesfcr. S. H. Day. 81 and 65, Kent v. Essex, at Canterbury. 62 and 152*, Kent v Gloucesershire, at Bristol. Danton, D. 91 and 69, Yorkshire v Middlesex, at Sheffield. W. H. B. Evans. 64 and 69, Oxford Univ. v. S irr^y, at the Oval. 65 and *6*, Ox. Univ. v. Camb. Univ., at Lord’s. H. K. Foster. 107 and 53, Worcestershire v. South Africans, at Worcester. Goatly, E. G. 76 and 63, Surrey v. South Africans, at th3Cval. W. G. Grace. 73 and 54, London County v. Leicestershire, at the Crystal Palac3. Bathern, M. 69 and 6^, South Africans v. An England X I., at LordV. Hayes. E. G. 50 and58, Surrey v. Essex, at the Oval. 66 and5i, Surrey v. Middle ex, at Lord’s. Hayward, T. 59 and f3. Surrey v. Worcestershire, at the Oval. 127 and 50*, Surrey v. Oxford Ui iv., at ihe Oval. 64 ard 161*, Surrey v. Warwickshire, at E ’gt aston. 89 an-l76, Surrey v. Yorkshire, at the Ova’. 106and 1 2, Surrey v. Sussex, at Br ght m. 81 and {8, Surrey v. Sussex, at the Oval. A. J. F. Hill. 98* and 117, Hampshire v. Worcesterehiie, at Wor­ ces*er. Humphreys, E. 97 and 131, Kent v. Notts., at Nottingham. 83 and 79, Kent v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol. Iremonger, J. 97 and 74, Notts, v. Middlesex, at Nottingham. Hon. F. 8. Jacksoa. 68 and 8\ Gentlemen v. Players, at Lord’s. A. O. Jore°. 76 and 60*, Notts, v. Lancashire, at Nottingham. 71 and 187, Notts, v. Gloucs., at Nottiughtm. Kihg, J. H. 104 and 109*, Players v. Gentlemen, at Lora’s. 5> and 72, An England X L v. Sjuth Afr cans, at Lord’s. 60 and 65, Leiceetersbira v. N-jtts., at Leicester. Knight, A. E. 80 and 65, L‘ iceatershire v. Derbyshire, at Derby. Lewis, A. E. 101 and 97, Somerset v. Hampshire, at Taunton. W. L. Murdoch. 74 and 67, London County v. Leicestershire, at the Crystal Palace. C. A. Ollivierre. 83 and 51, Derbyshire v. Leicestershire, at Derby. 229 and 92*, Derbyshire v. Essex, at Chesterfield. E. S. Phil ip?. 107 and 68, Cambridge University v G J. V. Wt igall’s X I., at Cambridge. K. S. Rar j tsinhji. 69 and 166*, M.C.C. ana Ground v. Cambridge University, at Lord’s. 93 and 207*, Sussex v. Lancashire, at Brighton. J. E. Raphael. 71 and 123, Oxford U; iversity v. Sum y, at the Ova1. 75 and 111, Oxford University v. Worcestershire, at Worcester. Rawlin, J. T. 63 and 62, Middlesex v. Essex, at Lord’s. Rudston, H. 164 and 69, Yorkshire v. Leicestershire, at Leicester. Seymour, Jas. 108 and 136*, Kent v. Worcestershire, at Maidstone. R. H. Spooner. 90 and 102*, Lancashire v. Sussex, at Manchester. E. M. Sprot. 75 and 67, Hampahira v. Warwickshire, at Bourne­ mouth. Trott, A. E. 67 and 56, Middlesex v. Lancashire, at Manchester. Tyldesle’y. J. T. 102 and 61, Lancashire v. Middlesex, at Manchester. Vine. J. 97 and 74, Sussex v. Oxford University, at Erighton. P. F. Warn* r. 106 and 63*, Middlesex v. Surrey, at the Oval. 69 and 145, M.C.C. and Oround v. Yorkshire, at Scaiborough. C. J. B. Wcod. 90 and 56, Leicestershire v. Derbyshire, at Derby. Wrathall, H. 88 and 54, Gloucestershire v. South Africans, at Bristol. * Signifies not out. T able No. 18.—TABLE 8H O *IN 3 THE NUM­ BER OF PLAYERS WHO SCORED “ SPEC­ TACLES” DURING THE SEASON IN F it ST-CL V8S MATCHES Anthony, G , Notts v. Yorkshire, at Nottioglnm. Bestwick, W., Derbyshire v. London County, at Chesteifield. W. Br^aiby, Latcashue v. Kent, at Tonbridg-*. Charlesworih, C., Warwickshire v. Yorksnire, at E ‘gbaston. J. Dinie*ll, Somerset v. Yorkshire, at Taut.ton. J. W. H. T. Dou'las, Es ex v. Kent, at Leyton. Fie’d r, A., K^nt v. South Afiicans at Ctnt*roury. Gill, G., Leic st^r.-hice v. r>u sex. at Brighton. Hallam. A. W., Notts v. Derbyshire, at Welb^ck. Hallam, A. W., Notts v. South Afiicans, at Nottirg- ham Haroirge, Kent v. Lancashire, at Minchest' r. L. V. Huper, Surrey v. Lancashire, at the Osral. Hu?gins, J. H., Gloucestershire v. Worcestershire, at Brist -1. J. H. Hunt, Middlesex v. Kent, at Ca'ford. G. L. Jessop, M.C.C. and Ground v. L ;ndoa Coun'y, at Lord’s. Langford, W ., Hampshire v. Leicestershire, at Southampton. Lewis, A . K., Somerset v. Lancashire, at Manchester. Montgomery, W.,Surr-y v. Gloucestershire, at Chel­ tenham. G. Newport, Somerset v. Oxford University, at Oxford. N e»8tead, J. T., M.C.C. and Ground v. South Africans, at Lord’s. K. I. Nichol), Mid lesex v. South Africans, at Lord’s. R. W. Nicholls, Mi Idleiex v. Keat, at Catford. R. W. Nicholls, Mi ld escx v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol. F. H. Nugent, Hampshire v. Worcestershire, at Worcester. F. A. Phillips, Somerset v. Kent, at Taunton. Q,u<if.», w. G., Warwickshire v. South Afiicans, at E 1gbaston. J. Randall, M.C.C. and Ground v. London County, at Lord’?. Reeves, W., Essex v. Derbyshire, at Chesterfie’d. Reeves, W., E*s<x v. Middlesex, at Leyton. Setl, a ., Sussfx v. Notis , at Noitmgham. Seymour, Jas., Kent v. M.C.C. and bround, at Lord’s. R. H. Spooner, Lancashire v. Worcestershire, at Manch' ster. D. A. Steele. Hampshire v. Kent, at Tonbridge. G. Tosetti, Essex v. Yorkshire, at Leyton. Tunnicliffe, J., Yorkshire v. Derbyshire, at SheAfield. Tunntcliffe, J , Yorkshire v. Gloucestershire, at Cheltenham. G. J V. Wei<all. H. D. G. L'veson-Gower’s X I. v. Oxf rd University, at Oxford. Wheidon, F., Worcestershire v. Warwi kshire, at Worcester. {To be continued.) W IS D E N ’S A L M A N A C K * Since the year 1901, when James Lillywhite’s Cricketer’ s Annual ceased to appear, “ Wisden” has had to contend with no serious opposition, for although there are several excellent annuals in the field, notably Ayres’ and Bussey’s, their aims and objects are not the same as “ Wislen’s.” But despite the absence of all competition the editor, Mr. Sydney Pardon, has not relaxed his efforts to make “ Wisden ” attractive; on the con­ trary he has given us an annual which is better than any of its predecessors —if such a thing can be possible. O.ie always turns with interest to the notes by the editor, who, when occasion requires, is not afraid to speak his mind freely. But, as he observes, no serious matters of a controversial kind disturbed the cricket world during the past year, and hence he has not been called upon to make stirring comments on any phase of the game. But his remarks about suggestions which have been made that the League system should be adopted in first-class cricket are worthy of note. He says, “ If the second-class teams realise that if they * “ John Wisden’s Cricketers’ Almanack” for 1905. Edited by Sydney H. Pardon. London: John Wisden & Co. la. Forty-second year of issue.