Cricket 1905

J une 8, 1905. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME 18? receive the ball. I daresay that dozens of instances of absent-mindedness on the cricket field could be given. O n June 1st J. N. Crawford, the young Surrey cricketer, made 191 out of a total of 289 for seven wickets for Eepton School against Burton-on-Trent. This is said to be a record for the sjhool. Surrey men, who are more interested in Craw­ ford’s bowling than his batting, would have been glad if he had taken more than two wickets in the Burton innings. A n o t h e r young Reptonian, by the way, is meeting with success which will give pleasure to Cricket readers every­ where in Greater as well as in Great Britain, if only for the fact that he is his father’s child. E. W. Murdoch, who made 25 and took two wickets for Eepton in the match referred to, is the son of the grand old player whom Australia first sent over here in 1878, and who, as a judge as well as an exponent of the game, in his day, had only one superior, our own W.G. to wit. In the eternal fitness of things one can hardly look for any­ thing better than to see the cricket ability of W. L. M. worthily reproduced in the person of his son. F r o m the Liverpool Daily Post :— The quick despatch of the Ormskirk side hy Formby was a big surprise for the natives of how things can be done when you are in the humour. They fairly stood aghast at the destructiveness of J. S. Kimmer’s bowling and the marvellous backing up of his fielders, after they had wallowed, as it were, in what they looked upon as a grand performance onthe part of their own men, W . P. Barnes in particular. It may be stated that Formby made 69, and Ormskirk 43 (Barnes 24). F r o m the Manchester Guardian :— One notes how promptly the justification of A. 0. MaeLaren in playing the younger Hornby has come. At Birmingham, as at Derby a fortnight since, Hornby silenced the critics by his brilliant fielding and his sturdy batting at the most critical time. He and Hallows on Saturday undoubtedly saved the Lancastrians from sustaining their first defeat in county cricket since 1903. If there is one characteristic of the younger Hornby’s cricket it is that he does not allow it to be influenced by the despondencies of any part of the general play. He apparently cares nothing for averages. If it is a “ bam door” exhibition that is wanted he can out-Quaife Quaife, as we saw at Leeds in the memorable stonewalling contest against Yorkshire last year, and as a fieldsman he is not surpassed even by Tyldesley. It is the possession of these qualities which gives young Hornby his strength on the side. T h e r e seems to be something the matter with Australian fielding this year. It has always been held as an axiom that any member of an Australian team is a fine field in any position, but this year several men seem unable to hold catches. In the match against Yorkshire on Monday Denton was missed in the slips four times in ten minutes off Noble’s bowling. He was also missed two or three times in his second innings. A co r r e spo n d e n t w r i t e s I n a club match on Saturday, a ball was hit into the pocket of the umpire, who was standing at square leg. A fieldsman promptly rifled the umpire’s pockets, and, obtaining possession of the ball before it touched the ground, appealed for a catch. The umpire said “ not out.” Was this right ? [In the M.C.C. decisions and inter­ pretation one of the notes to laws 33a and 33b says:— “ The ball does not become ‘ dead’ on hitting the umpire.” Presumably “ an umpire’s pocket ” counts as “ an umpire” in this case, and as the ball would therefore be “ alive” when the fieldsman held it, the batsman would be out. But I should imagine that most cricketers would agree that in giving the batsman not out, the umpire made a common-sense decision.] O n Monday there was continuous rain from early morning till late at night, so that no play could take place at Lord’s or the Oval. There was no play at Cambridge; only three-quarters of an hour at Northampton, an hour and three- quarters at Bath. W h e n a side has to go in for a few minutes' batting just before stumps are drawn on the first day of a match there is often a bad time in store for it, but seldom does one hear of such a break down as that of the Australians at Brad­ ford on Monday. Yorkshire had made 324, and the Australians had to bat for a quarter of an hour, with the result that they lost three wickets for two runs, one of which was a leg-bye. Their score on Monday evening was as follows:— F. Laver, c Grimshaw b Ringrose ... 1 W. P. Howell, b Ringrose ................. 0 J. J. Kelly, b Rhodes ........................ 0 S. E. Gregory, not o u t ........................ 0 A. J. Hopkins, not o u t ........................ 0 Leg b y e ............................... 1 Total (for 3 wickets) ... 2 I t is stated that L. C. H. Palairet, the Somersetshire cricketer, who recently accepted an appointment in Derbyshire, will in the autumn become Agent to the Earl of Devon, at Powderham Castle, Exeter. T h e match between Jockeys and Ama­ teur Athletes, which proved such a remarkable success on its institution last year, is to be repeated at the Oval on July 3rd next. The whole of the pro­ ceeds this time will go to the Belgrave Hospital for Children, which is situate in Clapham Eoad, within a few hundred yards of the Surrey ground. All the principal jockeys will take part in the game, and with the other side again in charge of Mr. W. Lotinga, the cricket capacities of the Athletes are sure to be seen to the best advantage. How Surrey’s record would have been affected had the weather held up suffi­ ciently to allow the match with Lanca­ shire to be played out to the bitter end, will be, of course, a matter of opinion. Still, the Surrey Eleven have beyond a doubt completely disproved the gloomy predictions of the majority of their dear friends the critics, and have yet to undergo the chastening experience of an actual failure this season. Whatever the intrinsic merit of the performance the fact remains that the Surrey Club has not met with defeat in any match, First Eleven, Second Eleven, or Club and Ground, this summer. A n inter-County match of three days in which the stumps cannot even be pitched, as was the case this week when Surrey and Lancashire ought to have met in “ cricket’s manly toil,” is happily the rarest of occurrences. Yet this is not Surrey’s first experience of the kind. In the early part of the season of 1898, they were even worse treated by the weather. In neither of their matches, against Derbyshire at the Oval on May 19, 20, and 21, and v. Warwickshire at Birming­ ham on May 23, 24, and 25 that year did the rain allow a ball to be bowled, so that they had two games in succession without any play, meaning six days of enforced inactivity. Two other first-class matches at the Oval within the last four years were abandoned without a ball being bowled. These were Surrey v. Yorkshire for Lockwood’s benefit on July 25, 26, and 27, 1901, and Surrey v. Hampshire on May 7, 8, and 9, 1903. In the former case, the Yorkshiremen, good sportsmen that they are, played an extra match at the end of the season to make up for Lockwood’s disappointment. A n amusing instanca of declaring at the wrong time occurred in a single wicket match at Trent Bridge between H. Woodland and W . Heath, A. O. Jones being one of the umpires. Woodland won the toss, but was bowled without scoring. Heath made 20, and declared his innings closed, taking the law into his own hands, since the M.C.C. rules do not provide for declaring in single wicket matches. His opponent then ran up a total of 94 in about an hour. Heath again made 20 in his second innings, and was thus beaten by 54 runs. HAMPSTEAD v. MARLBOROUGH BLUES.— Played at Hampstead on June 3. M arlborough B lues . T. E. Etlinger, run out 0 W. Prest, c Moon, b Hebert .................21 M. S. Rogers, b Spof­ forth ........................23 L. N. Rogers, b Spof­ forth ........................10 H. M. Rogers, b Spof­ forth ........................ 0 M. O. Lewis, c Moon, b H ebert................. 0 J. P. C. Coast, lbw, b Spofforth.................21 F. W.Bellamy, c Bacon, b Hebert.................11 A. M. Black, c and b Barron .................64 E. Pullein-Thompson, c Moon, b Hebert... 0 A. N. Rogers, not out 17 B 10,1b 1 "... 11 Total ...178 H ampstead . F. W. Orr, lbw, b M.S. Rogers .................69 D.J.Crump,cA.Rogers, b Black .................12 H. Greig, c and b Coast........................26 II. H. Walters, b Lewis 21 F. R. Spofforth, c L. N., b M. S. Rogers ... 11 Total (8 wkts) 190 W. R. Moon, b Coast... 26 A. A. Barron did not bat. F.W.Bacon,bEtlinger 1 B. S. Foster, c M. S. Rogers,bThompson 13 D. McGregor, not out ........................ 1 H. R. Hebert, not out 3 B 4, lb 1, w 1, nb 1... 7