Cricket 1905

CR ICK E T , A W EEKLY RECORD OF T H E GAME. NOV. 30, 1905. 1 9ji ^ 1 (I i © ft l l “ Together joined in Cricket’s manly toil.”— Byron. S o 70S. VOL. XXIV. A GREAT UMPIRE. It has recently been announced that James Phillips, the well-known umpire, has definitely decided to give up Lis con­ nection with cricket at the conclusion of the M.C.C. South African tour, and (ake to the woik of a mining engineer. This announcement must have been received with great regret by every cricketer, for allhough Phillips has made more enemies during his career as an umpire than any other umpire since the insti­ tution of the game, he has deeeivedly gained the repu­ tation of being one of the best and soundest umpires of the day, perhaps the best of all of them. He is a man who can keep his head cn a great occasion, and his pret­ ence in a match between England and Australia is a guarantee that, at least atcne eud of the wicket, there will be an umpire whcse decisions will be absolutely impartial and unbiassed. No one who has seen the uplifted finger of Phillips in answer to an apptal of “ How’s th a t?” ever doubts that the umpire has given a decision which is entirely honest, although Phillips hin.’self would be the last man to claim that all his decisions have been accurate. But it is quite safe to say that for a great match Plillips is as nearly the perfect umpire as human nature will allow. A few years ago Phillips entered on what may be described as a career of no­ balling, and was naturally a target for abuse. It was pointed out that he had not no-balled his victims in previous matches in which he had been umpire when they were bowling, and his sudden conversion w h s com­ pared to the conversion of Mr. Gladstone to Home Rule. It was claimed that he was a mi re tool in the hands of M.C.C. faddist s THURSDAY, NOV. 30, 1905. who had a craze about throwing, and it was pointed out that the action of the men whom he no-balled was considered as perfectly legitimate by the vast majority of those who played iu first-class cricket. But Phillips was hardly to be JAMES PHILLIPS. (From a photo by E. Hawkins <5> Co., Biighton.) blamed for bis conversion. He may fora long time have had his private opinion as to the fairness or unfairness of the action of certain bowlers, but, until the M.C.C. Committee impressed it upon umpires that it was their duty to no-ball certain FBICE 2d. men, he may have considered that he was not called upon to act. Be this as it may, he no-balled several men who had for many years been allowed to bowl without let or hindrance. It is not necessary to mention the names of the victims, but among them were men who had never a suspicion that they were malefactors. But even the many enemies whom Phillips made at tLat time gave him credit for great pluck and a determination to be honest at all costs. If ever he has cccasion to use a coat of arms, he may rest assured that no one will dispute his light to choose as his motto “ Fiat justicia, ruat coelum.” But if he made enemies by his drastic measures with men about whose action he had his doubts, he made many friends, among them being some of the highest in the land, and the way iu which they championed his cause must have more than c mpensated him for the tiials which he had to undergo. The outcome of the throw­ ing controversy was a general concensus of opinion that the question of deciding whether a bowler’g action is not in accordance with the laws ought not to be left to the umpires to decide, but to the authorities of the game. It is not fair 1o an umpire to demand that he shall take an action which, as everybody knows, will probably have the effect of ruining the reputation of a brother professional. It is, moreover, absurd that any one man, by merely calling “ no-ball,” may have it in his power to blast the repu­ tation of another who, in his private opinion, is not acting in accordance with one of the laws of cricket. If it were generally recognised that an um­ pire, in no-balliug a man for throwing, is only expressing his private opinion,