Cricket 1905

446 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. O ct . 26, 1905, true cricket does not necessarily involve more liveliness, the sixpence-paying spectator demands what he considers value for his money, and if he fails to obtain it at cricket, goes elsewhere. The Boer War has been held responsible for all our latter-day ills. And the falling revenue of the cricketing counties has naturally been laid to the discredit of the same cause. But the old excuse, “ people have not the money now to spend on cricket as formerly,” has by this time been exploded. Rightly or wrongly, if they need amusement the money is forth­ coming. If cricket fails to amuse they keep their money for football or some other more entertaining spectacle. And what a sermon is supplied to the county executives by the attendances recorded at the opening games of the football season—while cricket was practically with us. In three league matches up North the attendance represented as much money in sixpences as was taken in any of the Test matches, where, of course, a shilling admission prevails. And the invariable arguments, that cricket takes longer than football, and that up North the population is more sport-loving, do not apply here. For whereas 100,000 turned out to see ordinary league football, at the Test match played at Leeds some three or four months ago, a full day’s cricket, with the possibility of a definite result, between what should have been the pick of the world's cricket talent, altogether failed to induce more than a few thou­ sand to visit the ground. Undoubtedly if cricket is to continue on its present lines a remedy is impera­ tive. For the amount of capital invested in cricket has of late years grown to a sum undreamt of twenty yeirs ago. But whence may we look for changes ? It is batting that attrac'.s nine spectators out of ten ; so that any alteration in the implements of the game is unlikely. A glorified game of baseball shall not be seen yet awhile as the substitute for cricket in England. Is the game too long ? L ist year iu Vanity Fair the suggestion was thrown out that first- class matches should be restricted to two days, the laws of the game being so altered,—as they easily might be,—to render a definite result practically assured. And with the number of first-class matches as great as at present, and the prospect every year of new candidates for lirst-class rank, this appears to be one of the most likely solutions. Travel­ ling, it is said, would become too irksome, if counties suoh as Sussex and Surrey in the Sou h, and Line ishire and Yorkshire in the north, which play so many matches in the course of a season, had to play three instead of two matches a week. Surely by a proper grouping of the c o u u t y ’ B engagements this difficulty c u'.d be easily minimised. Take the case of the counties, for instance, which now play two London matches in the same week, the first half at Lord’s or the Oval, the second down at Oatford or Leyton. Where would the difficulty arise in so arranging it that all three counties, Middlesex, Surrey, Essex or Kent should be taken in the same week ? For another thing it is more than likely that, so far as attendances are concerned, two matches in the week beginning on Monday and ending on Tuesday, and on Friday and Saturday, leaving two days blank, would be far more profitable. From the point of view of the first-cliss player, who nowadays is always complaining of overwork, the plan, too, would be equally advantageous. When shall it be tried ? “ K ino W illow .” OB ITUARY . M b . W. P . P ick erin g . The younger of two brothers, both of whom played for Eton, Cambridge and the Gentlemen, Mr. William Percival Pickering died a short time ago at Van­ couver, British Columbia, at the age of 85. He was considerably older than his brother, and while E. H. Pickering played for Cambridge in the second match against Oxford in 1829, it was not until 1842 that W. P. appeared in the Cambridge Eleven. For the Gentlemen, E. H. played between 1836 and 1844 and W. P. from 1843 to 1846, although they never played for the Gentlemen in the same match. W. P. Pickering, who was known as “ Bull” Pickering, was a fine batsman and was universally recognised as the best cover-point of his time, being able to throw in with either hand with equal ease. He was a Surrey man and one of the original members of the pres­ ent county club as well as of I Zingari. He played sometimes for Surrey until he left England to live iu Canada. Of his life in Canada, the Toronto Mail and Empire has some interesting particulars as follows:— “ Mr. Pickering came out to Canada in the early fifties, and settled ia Montreal, where he soon identified himself with Canadian cricket. He played in the international match against the United States in 1853, 1854,1856 and 1857, there being no match iu 1855. In 1859 he was practically responsible for b;iuging out to Canada the famous team of English players captained by George Parr, and which comprised the then bast profes­ sional exponents of the game. He cap­ tained the team of twenty-two which played against Parr’s team in Montreal. He subsequently returned to England, where he was a stockbroker in London for some years, but he again returned to Canada, and took up his residence in Toronto, where for some years he was the agent of the Canada Life Assurance Company. While in Toronto he con­ tinued to manifest that keen interest in the game which had always distinguished him, although as a player he had by that time seen his best days. “ It may be of interest to note that he always played bareheaded, which, though a common enough practice now, was a remarkable innovation in the days when players wore top hats in the cricket field. “ Mr. Pickering was an uncle of the late F. P. U. Pickering, who visited Canada in 1872 with the team of English Gentlemen, captained by the late E. A. Fitzgerald, and which included among its members Dr. W. G. Grace. Mr. Pickering was always particularly inter­ ested in young players, and endeavoured by earnest counsel and patient instruction to teach them the game thoroughly and well, as many cricketers in Canada can testify. “ Iu British Columbia, Mr. Pickering was for several years in the service of the Canadian Pacific Railway at Vancouver, but for the past three years or so increas­ ing years and infirmity prevented him from engaging in any active work. Mr. Pickering married, but his wife died many years ago ; he had no children and no relatives in this country, but he had many friends in Toronto and Vancouver, and the kind offices of the latter were of much comfort to him in his old age and the loneliness of his latter years.” W illiam O scroit . The news of William Oscroft’s death, which occurred in a Nottingham hospital, has been received with the greatest regret by cricketers all the world over. He had appeared to be getting well over an operation which he had undergone some time previously, but a relapse succeeded, with a fatal termination. Oscroft was a connecting link between two widely- separated generations and schools of cricketers, having played with George Parr, who first assisted Notts as far back as 1844, and being iu his latter years a contemporary of William Gunn, who gave up first-class cricket in 1904. He was born at Arnold, in Notts, on Decem­ ber 16th, 1843, and made his first appearance in the Notts Eleven against Twenty-two Colts, at Trent Bridge, on September 28th and 29th, 1863. His introduction to Lord’s ground occurred in May of the following year, when he and Alfred Shaw figured on the side of eleven Colts “ who had never appeared at Lord’s or the Oral ” against the M.C.C. Oicroft made no fewer than 51 and 76, his cricket being thus described in John Lillywhite’s “ Companion” : “ The pick of the basket in batting was W. Oicroft (Notts), who played two really fine innings of 51 and 76 runs; for steady effective defence and good hitting these two innings were the best ever played in the Colts’ matches at Lord’s.” It was no matter for wonder that he was at once installed as a member of the Notts team for which he did useful work, his highest scores baing 31 against Yorkshire and 28 against Surrey. From thence until the dose of 1882 Oscroft was a shining light in the Notts eleven, and was usually deputed to open the batting. To enumerate his many big scores would be tedious, and* the following must suffice, v iz.; 140 v. Kent in 1879 (a very wet season but perhaps his most suc- csssful year); 107 v. Sussex in 1865;