Cricket 1905

476 (U u 'C CRICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. D ec 21, 1905. 13. Newquay, Cornwall v. Dorset 13. Norwich, Norfolk v. Oxfordshire 15. Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire v. Hertfordshire 15. Cambridge, Cambridgeshire v. Suffolk 15. Exeter, Devon v. Dorset 15. In Wiltshire, Wiltshire v. Surrey (2nd XI.) 16. Nottingham, Notts v. Middlesex 16. Oval, Surrey v. Lancashire lG.JCheltenham, Gloucestershire v. Sussex (Chelten­ ham Festival) 16. Harrogate, Yorkshire v. Warwickshire 16. Taunton, Somerset v. Kent 16. Portsmouth, Hampshire v. Worcestershire 16. Northampton, Northamptonshire v. West Indians 17. Newcastle, Northumberland v Bedfordshire 17. Reading, Berkshire v. Dorset 17. Cardiff, Glamorgan v. Surrey (2nd XI.) 17. Oxford, Oxfordshire v. Hertfordshire 20. Brighton, Sussex v. Notts 20. Sheffield, Yorkshire v. Surrey 20. Derby, Derbyshire v. Essex 20. Manchester, Lancashire v. Middlesex 20. Leicester, Leicestershire v. Warwickshire 20. Cheltenham, Gloucestershire v. Worcestershire (Cheltenham Festival) 20. Lord’s, M.O.C. and Ground v. Wiltshire 20. Darlington, Durham v. Bedfordshire 20. Cambridge, Cambridgeshire v. Norfolk 22. Lord’s, M.C.C. and Ground v. Dorset 22. Uttoxeter, Staffordshire v. Bedfordshire 22. In Hertfordshire, Hertfordshire v. Wiltshire 22. Oxford, Oxfordshire v. Norfolk 23. Canterbury, Kent v. Worcestershire 23. Leyton, Essex v. Notts 23. Bristol (probably), Gloucestershire v. Yorkshire 23. Manchester, Lancashire v. Derbyshire 23. Hastings, Sussex v. Warwickshire 23. Northampton, Northamptonshire v. Surrey 23. Southampton, Hampshire v. Leicestershire 23. Ripon, Yorkshire (2nd XL.) v. Northumberland 24. Cambridge, Cambridgeshire v. Dorset 24. Devonportor Plymouth,Devon v. Glamorganshire 27. Lord’s Middlesex v. Kent 27. Taunton, Somerset v. Yorkshire 27. Hastings, Sussex v. Essex 27. Oval, Surrey v. Derbyshire 27. Worcester, Worcestershire v. Gloucestershire 27. Penzance, Cornwall v. Monmouthshire 27. Watford, Hertfordshire v. Oxfordshire 28. Cambridge, Cambridgeshire v. Staffordshire 29. Exeter, Devon, v. Monmouthshire 30. Brighton, Sussex v. Gloucestershire 30. Bournemouth, Hampshire v. Kent 30. Oval, Surrey v. Middlesex 30. Scarborough, Yorkshire v. M.O.C. and Ground (Scarborough Festival) SEPTEMBER. 3. North v. South* 6. Gentlemen v. Players* *Provisional. THE WEST INDIAN TOUR. The following is the official programme as far as arranged by Mr. F. E. Lacey, the M.C.C. secretary:— JUNE. 11. Crystal Palace, v. London County 14. Leyton, v. Essex 25. Oval, v. Surrey 28. In Wiltshire, v. Wiltshire JULY. 2. Southampton, v. Hampshire 9. In South Wales, v. South Wales 12. Catford, v. Kent 16. Lord’s, v. M.C.C. and Ground 19. Derby, v. Derbyshire 23. Edinburgh, v. Scotland 26. Blackpool, v. An England XI. 30. Sunderland, v. Northumberland and Durham. AUGUST. 3. Harrogate, v. Yorkshire » 6. Leicester, v. Leicestershire 10. Norwich, v. Norfolk 13. Nottingham, v. Notts 16. Northampton, v. Northamptonshire CR ICK E T AN D TH E CLOCK. B y H. P.-T. {Continuedfrom p. 464.) The reason for 60 overs heing apportioned is that it would ensure generally that each side hatted half the time daily in a three-day match. This would do away with the inequity of one side, as frequently happens, having the use of a perfect wicket which the weather or wear have ruined ere the oppo­ nents can go in. The advantage conferred by chance on the side winning the toss would be considerably discounted when the side losing it were certain—weather permitting— of having the use of the same wicket to an equal extent on the same days. Batsmen would have ample opportunities to get set and going in 60 overs, and the opportunity to continue batting after an interval could hardly hinder them from compiling long scores, whilst their doing so under such cir­ cumstances could not unfairly handicap the opposition by wearying the field and bowlers before they had a chance to go in and attempt doing likewise. The daily programme of each player would have an assured variety, and ought to afford a more pleasant outlook than now, when a cricketer is never sure whether his own share will not be confined to fagging out to threadbare bowling for the greater part of a match, and fielding especially ought to brighten and tighten up under the new conditions. It would be so easy to keep alive for so many overs, and then------! The spectator would have the benefit of seeing both sides at the wicket the same day —no small blessing to a busy man who can spare only an occasional day for the purpose —and, once the t^-ss was decided, would know within a little what phase of the game to expect at any time, and when to turn up to see his own particular favourites performing. The number of overs bowled would be easily checked in couples; the thirtieth from the end opposite to that at which it started com- pleting a side’s daily allotment; and a figure indicating the number already sent down might, from time to time, he hoisted on the telegraph board. Exception (a), constituting a Portion of a first innings not running to 60 overs, would fulfil a double object. It would prevent one side from invariably possessing the morning and the other the afternoon wicket; except in cases where each side remained in so long that it would be evident there was little to choose between its state from hour to hour. And it would preclude a side, unfortunate in having to take first knock on a shocking pitch, from being obliged to use it twice successively. If the wicket were so bad that an eleven could not survive more than 20 or 30 overs on it, it would be obviously unfair to compel them to go in again to complete their Portion before the opponents had sampled it. That, under such circumstances, a team might be twice dismissed in a single Portion is not the unlikely thing it may seem. Northants were actually all out twice in 47 odd successive overs at the Ovalin 1905, and Leicester in 55 on the same ground one day in 1904. Other counties have passed in procession twice in a total of less than 60 overs; e.g ., Surrey were so shown up hy Kent at Beckenham (1905) in 58'2, and by Yorkshire at the Oval (1903) in 59' 1); Derby, in 55, by Leicester (1905); Gloucester, in 54, by Yorkshire (1903); Leicester, in 50-2, JOHN W ISDEN ’S CRICKETERS’ALIWACK For 1906. Edited by SYDNEY H. PARDON. T H E Record of First=Class Cricket. Being the ONLY Publication giving the full Scores and Bowling Analyses of every first-class Cricket Match. Price 1/- Post Free, 1/4. CONTAINS :— Mr.R.A.H.Mitchell—an appreciation by Lord Harris; Five Cricketers of the Year:—J. Vine, L. G. Wright, D. Denton, W. Lees, and G. J. Thompson; Public School Cricket by Capt W. J. Seton, and the Australian Tour. B eady E a rly in Jan uary. 21, CRANBOURN ST., LONDON, W.G. by Notts (1905); and Hants, in 44'4, by Yorkshire (1904). Exception (b) provides that a side shall not be disabled from beating its opponents out­ right by the intervention of the suspension rule. Thus, if the first three innings of a match had been of the collapsible variety, a side making a determined stand in the fourth would not be prevented from winning, when its ordinary allowance of 60 overs was up, by the fact that the other’s turn had come, when the others had no wickets remaining to fulfil the turn. Exception (c) ensures that the basis for awarding a victory shall be equal on both sides when the game has not been already decided. For instance: If one party had batted for three full portions (=180 overs) without being all out twice and the other party, likewise not all out, had played a short first portion [under Exception («)], the other party would continue batting (or go in again) to try and bring their total of overs to 180 so that, if successful,, an award might be made on the merits of the two sides during equal tenures of the wicket. Clause i G provides that stumps, instead of being drawn at a stated hour, shall be pulled up on the completion of so many overs, sub­ ject, as now, to daylight and weather con­ ditions serving. So long as these were fit, 120 overs a day would be bowled, each s:de receiving 30 as already explained. But directly the climate interfered it would be permissible to add the arrears to the duration of any day’s play. Thus, if further play becare impracticable after 100 o vers on a first'ay, 140 overs would become legitimate th^" econd day, and if only 200 overs could bt, jowled on two days, the balance of 160 migiit be attempted on the third, and the game only drawn when the umpires decided against a further continuance. The time of starting being prearranged, that of closing could be pretty well estimated, and the hours of play would equal those at present obtain­ ing only when an extension became necessary. In fact, the system of reckoning by overs would not only increase the number of definite results, but would shorten the ordinary length of matches. When an extension of play became necessary, the hour for resuming could be arrangedand announced the previous afternoon, and a side wanting to get away early would know within a very little at what time to arrange to start. Of course, when an impossible number of overs (as the full 360) remained due on the third day, the umpires could judge by the progress of the game at what stage it would be a waste of time to continue, which is already their province in cases of bad light, etc., before the hour for stump-drawing arrives. (To be continued.) XATIYFv GUANO. ■REST and CHEAPEST MANURE for LAWNS, 13 CRICKET and TENNIS GROUNDS and all Vegetables, Fruits, and Flowers. Price, £ 3 10s. per ton in bags; 2 ton lots carriage paid. Lots under 10 cwt., 4/- per cwt. at works. A 1 cwt. bag sent carriage paid to any station in England On receipt of P.O. for 5/-. Extracts from recent reports: W. A. WOOF, Member M.C.C. Staff, Glo’sterCounty XI., and now Cricket Coach, Cheltenham College, October lst, 1904.—“ I have great pleasure in strongly recommending your noted ‘ Native Guano.’ For cricket grounds, tennis courts, bowling greens, it has no equal. I have used it foryears on Cheltenham College Grounds with splendid results.” C. Kidman (Cheltenham).—“ A great success on cricket and tennis lawns” E. Bradshaw (Bolsover).—“ I can recommend it highiv for cricket grounds and g eneral garden crops. Orders to the Native Guano lo., Ltd., 29, New Bridge Street, London, E.G., where Testimonials, &c., may be obtained. Agents wanted. Printed and Published for the Proprietor by M b r b itt A H a tch b r L td ., 167 168 and 169, Upper Thames Street, London, E.O., Dec. 21st, 1905.