Cricket 1905

J une 22, 1905. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME 217 lin University. Thus so far the only matches in June which they have won are those against two Universities. I t is not often that a man who has missed a catch off a good batsman so amply atones for his mistake as did R. H. Spooner on Thursday last at Old Trafford when playing against Kent. He missed E. W. Dillon at cover point, but picked up the ball and returned it so quickly to the bowler that Humphreys, who had started for a run, could not get home in time. Almost immediately afterwards Spooner had the pleasure of running out Dillon. On the morning of the first day’s play in the test match at Lord’s the following appeared in the Daily Chronicle : — An excellent topical oath to-day would be “ By the Elevens ! ” It is to be found in “ She Stoops to Conquer,” but its origin is unknown. The natural conjecture that it has some connection with the Eleven Disciples does not account for the final “ s ” ; and it would be anachronistic to detect an allusion to cricket. Why is a cricket team made up of eleven men, by the byef Probably so that there may be just ten wickets to fall, leaving one man over as not out. A cricket team thus exactly brings out the meaning by derivation of “ eleven.” It corresponds to the Gothic “ ainliff” as “ twelve” does to “ twalif,” “ ain ” meaning one and “ twa” two, while the “ l i f ” signifies “ left” —the one or two left over after the ten figures have been exhausted in counting. With reference to this interesting ex­ planation of the reason why a cricket team should consist of eleven players instead of six or fifty, I should imagine that quite early in the history of the game it was discovered that with either more or less than eleven men in the field the results were unsatisfactory. But perhaps some of the statisticians can account for the number in another way. From the American Cricketer : — One of the best things that could have possibly happened for New York cricket is the purchase of the property occupied for the last two years by the Livingston i'ield Club, on the part <f W . J. Gordon, who has invited an advisory board to aid him in organising and conducting a permanent proprietary club devoted to the interests of cricket and tennis, and to be known as the Staten Island Cricket and Tennis Club. A g a in st a score of 98 by the Malvern C.C. last week at Worcester, the Worces­ ter Cathedral School lost nine wickets for 14 runs. The last two men, W. A. Jarrett and E. J. Castley, then put on 106 runs, and thus their side was victor­ ious by 22 runs. F o r the Everett C.C. (Boston, U.S.) a bowler named J. C. Murray had the following remarkable analyses during the month of May in the Massachusetts Cricket League:— 0. M. E. W. May 6th. v. Boston ................ 2 ... 2 ... 0 ... 5 „ 13th. v. Westlndia .........10 ... 0 ... 35 ... 7 „ 20th. v. U. S. Bunting ... 11 ... 3 ... 30 ... 6 „ 27th. v. Brockton .........10 ... 5 ... 14 ... 7 A CURIOSITY :—In the match between Notts and Kent at Gravesend on May 25 and 26 the Kent score was as follows when two wickets were down :— E. W. Dillon, run out ............ ... 4 Humphreys, run out ............................... 4 Total ............................... 8 In the match between Kent and Lm ct- shire at Old Trafford last week, the Kent score when two wickets were down was :— E. W. Dillon, run out ............ ... 19 Humphreys, run out ..................................27 Extra ................................ 1 Total ...47 I t is an excellent sign of the times that so many severe remarks should have been made about the slowness of ofthe scoring of Englandon the first dayof the test match at Lord’s, for these remarks show that critics and public alike have become accustomed to faster play than prevailed a few years ago. But there is another side of the question which seems to have escaped general notice—it was a remarkable thing that any side should have been able to make 258 runs for eight wickets on so dead a pitch against Australian bowling with the ball travelling so slowly. If a score of 150 had been made for the whole ten wickets by dashing cricket, it would have been deemed satisfactory. I t may also be noted that there was not very much difference between the totals made on the first day in the test match and in the other matches, all of which were played on very much faster wickets, with the ball going quickly to the boundary. The totals are as follows : England v. Australia, 258 ; Somerset v. Sussex, 273; Surrey v. Leicestershire, 280; Yorkshire v. Derbyshire, 313 ; and Kent v. Lancashire, 327. At Lord’s on Monday in Middlesex v. Surrey 256 runs were made (two less than the England score). Some interesting diagrams in the Daily Express show the direction of each of the hits made by C. B. Fry in scoring his 73, Maclaren in his 56, and Darling in his 41 in the test match at Lord’s. A n analysis of these three diagrams shows that Fry in his 73 made forty-four scoring hits (twenty-two at each end). When batting at the pavilion end he made seven strokes to the off and fifteen to the on. From the other end he made twenty to the on and two to the off. Total, thirty-five to the on, and only nine to the off. The inference to be drawn from this seems to be, not so much that Fry can only score on the on-side, but that the Australians gave him very few opportunities to score on the off. I n Maclaren’s 56 there were twenty- six scoring strokes. From the pavilion end he made ten to the off and five to the on. At the other end he made five to the off and six to the on. Total, eleven to the on, and fifteen to the off. Darling made seventeen scoring strokes : eight to the off and three to the on from the pavilion end, and four to the off and two to the on from the other end. Total, twelve to the off and five to the on. A c a r e f u l study of some of the criti­ cisms on the state of the wicket in last week’s test match forces one to the con­ clusion that it was a wicket such as no man has ever seen before or will ever see again. During the whole of the first day, when England was batting, it was soft and quite easy. It continued to be soft and quite easy until the innings of England was over. Then it suddenly became very difficult indeed, and con­ tinued to increase in difficulty to so remarkable an extent that our bowlers ought to have been ashamed of themselves for allowing any runs at all to be made against them. But the very moment that the Australians were out the wicket became easy again and remained easy until the end of the day. B y the two following extracts one is reminded of the old saying, “ Who shall decide when doctors disagree p ” It may be pointed out that in the first extract the writer states that he does not criti­ cise, but merely explains his point of view. Fifthly, the Australian bowlers, other than Armstrong, bowled chiefly at the leg stump, with five, or sometimes six men on the on side, thus making it very difficult to score. In fact, the plan of campaign amounted to defensive rather than aggressive tactics on the part of the bowlers. This is, of course, legitimate enough ; hut it is bound to make cricket dull for the spectators. I am not criticising the Australian captain’s plans, but explaining -why the scoring was slow’. I am quite certain that had the English batsmen tried to force the rate of scoring, the side would have made a poor total. C. B. F k y , in the Daily Express (June 16th). I think, without doubt, the climax has been reached this morning when a well- known writer gives as his fifth reason for the slow play that the bowlers, by bowling at the leg stump, were adopting defensive more than aggressive tactics. With all due respect to the judgment of this writer, I think this is very absurd, and I am sure he is attribut­ ing to the Australian captain certain plans that have never been thought of. Even if it were so, has the time come when an Australian captain has to be dictated to as to the way his bowlers must bowl? If batsmen are beaten by a good ball kept from scoring by good length bowling, or they do not care to take ordinary risks, let them be candid and admit it, and give credit where credit is due. W . L. M u r d o c h , in the Daily Mail (June 17). W h a te v e r may be the technical ad vantages of the mode of attack adopted of late by Australian bowlers it is quite certain that to the ordinary spectator the Australians seem rather to be trying to keep down the runs than to get wickets, long before they can reasonably be sup­ posed to be playing for a draw. But it is perfectly legitimate for any bowler to keep the ball off tbe wicket if he likes, and it is clearly for the batsmen to dis­ cover a way in which to punish him for