Cricket 1905

244 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. J uly 6, 1905. GEO. G. BDSSEY & CO, 36 & 38, QUEEN VICTORIA STREET , E.G, Manufactory—PECKHAM, S.E. TIMBER MILLS— ELMSWELL , SUFFOLK, AGENTS ALL OVER THE WORLD, AT TITK SIGN OF THE W ICK E T . By F. S. A s h l e y - C o o p e r . Had anybody prophesied on Thursday morning last that Kent would defeat York­ shire in the match which commenced that day at Hull he would have been ridiculed, for Yorkshire, although not nearly so strong now as a few years ago, are nevertheless a f-ide to be feared, whilst Kent’s performances this season had been very disappointing, b'urther- more, Hull had always proved one of York­ shire’s luckiest grounds, inasmuch as the side had never experienced defeat there. But Blythe bowled so well on a wicket to his liking, and A. P. Day, of the Malvern Eleven of 1903 and 1904, batted in such a masterly manner on the soft ground, that Kent were enabled to triumph by six wickets. Of the twelve matches which Yorkshire have played at Hull, they have won eight and lost one, the remaining three having been left undecided. In 1892 Staffordshire were beaten by an innings and 285 runs, whilst eight years later Hampshire experienced defeat by an innings and 271: Surrey were beaten by an innings and 10 in 1879, and Notts by 227 runs in 1902. Somerset, it may prove of interest to add, are the only opponents of Yorkshire who have played at Hull on more than one occasion, they having appeared there in 1899 and again in 1904. SYNOPSIS OF RESULTS OF MATCHES PLAYED BY THE YORKSHIRE ELEVEN AT HULL. • 1 rO2 d Against. Cj u > i « Total Cheshire......... 1886 . 1 . . 0 .. 0 . . 1 Derbyshire 1893 . . 0 . . 0 . 1 . . 1 Gloucestershire. 1901 . 1 . . 0 . 0 . . 1 Hampshire 1900 .. 1 . . 0 . . 0 . 1 K en t................ 1905 .. 0 . . 1 . . 0 . 1 Notts................. 1902 .. 1 . . 0 . . 0 . 1 Somerset......... 1899 .. 1 . . 0 . . 1 . 2 South Africans. 1904 .. 0 . . 0 . . 1 .. 1 Staffordshire ... 1892 .. 1 . . 0 . . 0 .. 1 Surrey ........ 1879 .. 1 . . 0 . . 0 .. 1 Warwickshire.. 1903 .. 1 . . 0 . . 0 .. 1 Total ... - .. 8 . . 1 . . 3 .. 12 Sixty matches have now been played between Yorkshire and Kent, Yorkshire having won 32 and Kent 14, and it is a curious fact that the two sides have faced each other on as many as nineteen different grounds. Some hard remarks have been made of late concerning the County Championship, chiefly to the effect that far too much importance is attached to it, and that it is not beneficial to the game itself that such a competition should exist. That very great interest indeed centres in the Championship cannot be denied, and it must be admitted by everybody who troubles to consider the matter that, but for the Competition, the number of first-class matches played would be far less than it is. The public would not flock to the grounds in their thousands, as they do to-day, if nothing depended on the results, and if the executive of one of our leading clubs arranged for a dozen such games to be played in succession they would probably find their outlay considerably greater than their receipts. In the old days, when inter-county matches were comparatively few, the games were well patronised, and it was then considered suffi­ cient reward simply to defeat your opponents, for in the majority of cases the county eleven was composed of home-born men, the playing of “ mercenaries ” not then being considered altogether sportsmanlike. But times have changed, for as the county clubs have grown, and so proved more expensive to maintain, they have found it necessary not only to increase their programme, but also to devise a means whereby the interest of the publie might be secured for all the matches. The County Championship scheme has proved able to do the latter, and, this being so, who should not rejoice ? The abolition of the Championship competition would mean many bankrupt county clubs and few first-class county matches in consequence. The method of deciding the Championship may not be an ideal one, and many of us may never trouble to scan the Championship table—the writer never does, nor did he even when Surrey, the county of his adoption, headed the list year after year—but that is no excuse, and certainly no justification, for any­ body to say harsh things about the scheme. People have seldom contended at games or at athletic pursuits solely in order to arrive at a result: at Rome the gladiators fought for their lives, in Greece a great athletic success was rewarded by a gar­ land, wagers have always been identified with horse-racing, prize-fights, billiard- matches, &c. So if such a harmless thing as a Championship—which costs nothing, involves nothing, and, perhaps, signifies nothing—is identified with modern cricket, and proves a guarantee of the continuance of first-class matches being played, who shall grumble ? This week’s Test match should provide food for thought for those followers of the game—consisting mostly of laudatores temporis acti —who are never so happy as when main­ taining that cricket has deteriorated sadly during the past few decides. It would, f r instance, be impossible to imagine any bats­ man playing a greater or sounder innings than S. J.ickson did on Monday last, for he made his runs when the bowlers were fired with success, when failure might have meant the collapse of the whole side, and against fielding which was always reliable and often brilliant. It is not too much to say that the player named is the most useful batsman we have had for many years, so far as Test matches are concerned. Perhaps only “ W . G .” in his best form could have scored more largely and more consistently than the Yorkshire amateur has done in this series of matches. Murdoch has more than once said that the Australians were very fortunate never to have toured England whilst “ W .G .” was in his prime, for the champion was a man to be more dreaded by his opponents than any player of the present generation could possibly imagine. Had Jackson never made a hundred in his life prior to Monday last, his great effort on that day would alone have proved sufficient to cause his name to always occupy an honoured position in cricketing annals. As it is, however, it must be regarded as the best of his many excellent performances. The exact value of England’s score of 301 was not apparent until half-past three on the second afternoon, when the Australians had been disposed of for 195. The collapse of the Colonials was quite unex­ pected, and that it was not due to the wicket was plainly shown when the home side went in again and ran up 169 for the loss of but two wickets ere play ceased. Yesterday the Englishmen maintained their advantage to the end, and, after a display of some of the best all-round cricket seen for some time, the game was drawn immensely in their favour. To Jackson the honours of the game belonged, but Warren, Tyldesley, and Hayward also accomplished much ex­ cellent work for the home side, whilst for the Australians Armstrong, Noble, Hopkins, and Duff performed with distinct credit. It was a splendid game from start to finish, but, as the last ball was bowled, one could not help feeling that the Australian team is the weakest which has visited us since 1893.