Cricket 1905

194 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. J u n e 15, 1905. to improve at all— after he is thirty years old. Laver may be, and it is to be hoped that he is, a brilliant exception. He has a good length, and varies his pace with much judgment and skill, and although these qualities alone do not make a great bowler, a man cannot be great without them. Laver’s progress will be watched with extreme interest by Australians and Englishmen alike, and if he continues to meet with success so much the better for his side, and so much greater will be the interest in the re­ maining test matches. Cotter has not at present come up to expectations which had been formed of him. To a great extent his reputation was made by the high praise which was bestowed on his bowling by journalists among the members of the M.C.C. Australian team, and but for their enthusiasm about him it may be doubted whether he would have been chosen to come to England. As far as can be seen at present he is exactly what the best critics in Australia said of him— a fast, tear-away bowler, who will get men out on fiery wickets, and will occasionally do a fine performance, but will not go through a side on a wicket which is not greatly in his favour. If he can get a length, and can succeed once or twice in creating a panic on a decent wicket he may develop into a great bowler, whose arrival at the opposite end causes a timid batsman to tremble iu his shoes. But it looks as if h i will have to create a panic first if he is to be as effective as Spofforth, or even Jones. Of the other bowlers, Nob’.e is in his thirty-third year, Howell iu Lis thirty-sixtb, and McLeod also in his thirty-sixth. They oan hardly be as good as they were six years ago. Hopkins was said to have improved vastly, but the improvement has not as yet been noticeable, and Armstrong, like all leg-break bowlers, has his day. One can never quite understand how it is that Noble has not made a reputation second to no Australian as a bowler. He seems to possess all the qua'ifications which go to make a famous bowler, length, accuracy, conceal­ ment of p ce, brains, determination— every quality which one can think of. And yet although he has done very many great performances both in England and Australia he has never quite come up to the standard of the greatest Australiin bowlers. Daring the preseat tour he has bowled many loose balls. Howell has shewn that on a certain kind of wicket which helps a bowler he is perhaps the most effective man of the day, while McLeod, also on a bowler’s wicket, has two or three times done exceedingly well. After the downfall of the Gentlemen of England at Lord’s on May 29th it required some pluck for one of the English­ men who failed iu the match to say that there was nothing much in the Australian bowling, but A. C. Maclaren, who always has the courage of his opinions, wrote in the Daily Chronicle as follows:—“ There was nothing terrible about our opponents’ attack, and several overtossed balls were let off. Laver varied his pace well, and kept a good length, but there was little devil behind Noble’s deliveries.” As far as the present tour has gone, it would seem that Englishbowlershave very little to learn from the Australians of 1905. If this is the case, it is greatly to be regretted, for it cmnot be said that English bowling is altogether satis­ factory just now. So far the Australians have not won a match in which the wicket has not at some time or other helped their bowlers considerably. It will be remembered that the matches against the Gentlemen at the Crystal Palace, Notts at Trent Bridge, Surrey at the Oval, and Yorkshire at Bradford— all played on good wickets—were drawn, and that the first of themwas the only one in whioh the Australians could claim a moral victory. The other match in which the bowlers were not considerably helped by the wicket was at Trent Bridge against England, and this match was lost. On the whole, as far as the bowling was concerned, the outlook does not seem as promising as Australians would wish. But there is one thing which has not been explained this year in connection with Australian bowling. Once or twice Englishmen have scored against it at a reasonable rate when the wicket has been good, but in the maj ority of matches nearly every plaver who has encountered it has acted chiefly on the defensive. It is true that most of the amateur journalists have said that “ we ought to have scored faster,” but it may have been noticed that not one of them has ever said this when he has made a decent soore himself. It is only the men who have not had sufficient time to sample the bowling, or have not sampled it at all, who have felt it their duty to inform the public of the want of enterprise shown by their more fortunate com­ panions. This want of enterprise, or inability to obtain any command over extraordinarily accurate bowling, or an exaggerated dread of it,—call it what you will—has been a noticeable feature of the E lglish bitting during the present tour. At the beginning of the tour it was felt by the Australians as well as English­ men that the great strength of the team lay in its batting, and although Trumper and Duff have neither of ttiem showed the form which was expected of them, Armstrong for a time did so brilliantly as almost to make up for their failure to get into their stride. But of late the batting has not been altogether satis­ factory, and large scores have not been forthcoming with any frequency. Noble has once more shown that he is one of the most dangerous batsmen in the world when a fine effort is required, and D-irling aud Armstrong liave also proved themselves invaluable at a pinch. But Hill does not quite seem the Hill of old, and Gehrs has been a complete failure, although it stands to reason that he must be a fine batsman. Gregory has been useful, and Cotter seems to be better with the bat thau the ball, but Hopkins, Howell (whose batting was considered to be vastly improved), Laver, Kelly, Newland, and McLeod, have hardly kept up the reputation which Australian teams have for so long held as possessing no tail. But it is pretty safe to say that this state of affairs will not continue for long. Trumper, Hill and Duff must soon begin to make hundreds. Gehrs cannot make small scores much longer, while D trling and Armstrong, and Noble are not the sort of men to fall off. Hence we very reason­ ably expect that before another month has pished the Australian batting will be the subjeot of admiration in all the news­ papers, in match after match. It is noticeable that whereas the individual innings of a hundred Bcored by members of most of the recent Australian teams have outnumbered by at least two to one those scored by their opponents, only five have been made by the team of 1905 against four by Englishmen. But in the nature of things this state of affiirs must surely be altered before long, and the Australians will most likely make des­ perate fights in the remaining test matches, even if they do not win most of them. W. A. B k tte sw o rth . LONDON SCOTTISH v. OLD MILLIIXLLIANS.— Playocl at Brondesbury on June 12. L ondon S cottish . W. G. Henderson, b Dumbleton .......... H. J. K. Pope, c Farqu- liarson, b Swain ... L. J. Bush, b Dumble- ton ........................ F. R. Connell, cFarqu- harson, b Swain ... J.S.Chown.b Dumble­ ton ........................ R.A. Bennett, c Adam­ son, b Sw ain.......... T. S. Taylor, st Farqu- liarson, b Lamont... P. Child, not out C.Koe-Child,cViuey,b Lamont ................. H.Ohown, c Adamson, b Pearson................. H. F. Thompson, c & b Swain ................. Byes ................. Total ...117 O ld M ilhillians . G. G. Dumbleton, b Connell .................35 H.R.Pearson,cThomp- son, b Connell ... 11 K. Bramall, run out... 10 W. M. Penny, c J. S. Chown, b Connell... 6 J. Lamont, c Thomp­ son, b Pope .......... 9 P. Swain, c and b Con­ nell ........................ 2 J. MacGowan, b Con­ nell ........................ H. H. Grlndley, b Pope T. A. B. Farquharson, lbw, b Connell J.II. Adamson, not out H.B. Viney, c & b Pope Byes ................. Total 2 0 0 0 1 2 78 HAMPSTEAD v. UNIVERSITY" COLLEGE SCHOOL.—Played at Neasden. U. C. S chool . F. Goodyear, c Brachi, b Price-Williams ... G. H. Weller, lbw, b Price-Williams F. H.Wadham.c Price- Wllliams, b Brachi C. H. Mediock, not out 5 Total (3 wkts) 14 J. D. Jones, M. J. Susskind, A. J. Swanson, E. R. Downe, E. F. Dickens, R. Heywood and C. K. Roberts did not bat. H ampstbad did not bat. HAMPSTEAD v. IIORNSEY.-Played at Hornsey on June 10. H ampstead . E. W. H. Beaton, c & b Grimsdell....................10 A. R. Trimen, c Thorn­ ton, b Grimsdell ... 19 W.T. O. H. Danby, not out ........................26 H. S. Maclure, R G. Hebert, L. N. H. Bailey, R. D. Robertson, H. G. Dunkley, J. C. Toller and J. Greig did not bat. T. M. Farmiloe, not out ........................20 Byes ................. 7 Total (2 wkts) ... 82 H ornsey did not bat. C RICKET Report Sheets, lOd. per dozen, post free. Order of Going-in Cards, 7d. per dozen, post free ; Cricket Score Books, fid. and Is. each ; postage 2d. extra.—To be obtained at the Offices of “ Cricket,” 168, Upper Thames Street, London, E.C.