Cricket 1906

106 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. M at 3, 1906. he had the making of a very great bo wler. Yet the same gentleman so despaired of the development of K. 8. Ranjitsinhji and Mr. C. B. Fry, that he prophesied in each case—one ’Varsity match, and then oblivion ! ” A t Wellington (N .Z.), on March 9th and 10th, Wellington defeated Hawke’s Bay by an inniogs and 322 runs, scoring 442 against 61 and 59. Every player reached double figures for the winning side, Redgrave, with 165, being the only one to make as many as 50. T he Melbourne Olub team which toured New Zealand recently had an extremely narrow escape at Dunedin on March 19th. A correspondent has kindly forwarded me the following account of the incident :— ‘ ‘ When Melbourne went in for their second innings, with 112 runs to get, there remained 85 minutes for play. It was generally ex­ pected they would get the runs. In the first over, however, Armstrong was bowled by the third ball for nil; in the second over Mailer was out second ball; and in the third over Henty, a forcing batsman, was out, the first three failing to score a run. After that the team scratched at the bowling, and were playing defensively. Ransford, Wilkinson, and McLeod made short stands, but then there was a collapse, and eight wickets were down for 59, when, five minutes before time, Armstrong intervened and claimed the appli­ cation of a local Australian rale under which, if two men have to go in with only five minutes remaining to play, the innings is left unfinished.” It is sad to be obliged to add that the Otago captain consented to Armstrong’s proposition, and thereby created the dangerous precedent of allowing an im­ portant match in New Zealand to be governed by local Australian rules. M b . C huckerup writes: — “ I see as how in the Sporter on Monday Major Philip Trevor Dux says, ‘ The batsman is to be given the benefit of the doubt, and the ‘ padsman ’ (masquerading as the batemin) always tries to conjure up that doubt in the umpire’s mind, and very often succeeds.’ Do you happen to know a pro who would come and teach our club to 1try to conjure up that doubt in the umpire’s mind, and very often suc­ ceed ’ ? We would give him ten bob a day for two days, and his beer.” C ricketers in Australia have been discussing two interesting questions which have arisen in connection with the interpretation of the laws of the game. In the first a batsman, not being quite ready to receive the ball, stepped back in the usual way, but in so doing went over the crease, whereupon the wicket-keeper knocked off the bails. The batsman was given out, but I should certainly say that directly he stepped back the ball was out of play—it could not be counted in the over. I n the second case Hugh Trumble was concerned. He made a hit for which 5 would probably have been run if the fieldsman had not kicked the ball to the boundary. The umpire only allowed 4, and in so doing followed the instructions given in the supplementary rules of the M.C.C. under the heading of “ The Boundary.” Thus, “ If a ball hit or pass over or through the boundary, or is carried over it by the fieldsman, the umpire should call a boundary hit.” In this case the fieldsman did not actually carry the ball over the boundary, but the ball nevertheless passed it. And in most cases it would be practically impossible for an umpire to decide whether an extra run or extra runs would or would not have been made, or whether the fieldsman kicked the ball accidentally or wilfully. T he announcement that Prince Ran- jitsinhji is writing a book on “ Cricket, and how to play it,” will be welcome news to all embryo cricketers. The work will be issued in about three weeks, at the price of 6d., by the British Sports Publishing Co., of 2, Hind Court, as the twelfth number of the Spalding Athletic Library. T he members of the cricket fraternity in Melbourne are looking forward hope­ fully to the success of J. A. Seitz, of the East Melbourne Club, to whom recently was awarded the Rhodes Scholarship at Oxford. He has deservedly gained a high reputation in his school and college work in Melbourne. In addition to being a fine bat he is also a splendid field. As he is also a good footballer, he ought to make his mark in athletic circles at Oxford University. T he Devon and Somerset Wanderers have arranged the following matches for their East Yorkshire tour, which begins on June 21st:— JUNE. 21 & 22. Scarborough, v. Royal Garrison Artillery. 23. v. Pickering. ' 25. v. Whitby. 2fi. v. Scarborough. 27 & 28. v. Malton. 29. v. Bridlington. 30. v. Filey. The following players will most likely represent the Wanderers :— W. H. leaver, C. R. Batey, R. P. Wheadon, A. W. Stacey, W . H. McKerow, R. J. Savill, W. C. Veall, T. A. Brown, C. E. Brown, E. J. Lock, R. Stracey Smyth, W. H. Budge, W. Ashford, F. W. Cuming and W. S. Donne (captain). Though they have been touring annually since 1894 this will be the first visit of the Wanderers to Yorkshire. T he statisticians may be interested to know that in the South African test matches four players have ‘ ‘ made a pair. ’ ’ The quartet who have thus earned “ bold advertisement ” areG. A. Kempis, J. Willoughby, G. Wimble, and E. G. Hayes. The hat trick has only been done once in the fifteen matches. That was by Haigh, the Yorkshireman, in 1899, at Cape Town. Of the thirteen test matches, four have been won by the South Africans, and nine by English teams. T he Sydney Mail gives rather a doleful account of the ill-success of the New South Wales members of the last Austra­ lian team since their return from England. Hopkins and Howell, it says, have retired for the season; at least, Hopkins has, and Howell has not yet resumed. Sydney Gregory cannot get going, nor can Noble or Duff, Kelly has not had a knock except in the benefit match—though it is said he is going with Trumpei’s team to Queens­ land. Trumper has got some runs, but far below his reputation. S peaking to a representative of the Daily Graphic about the most interesting matches in which he has played, the Hon. F. S. Jackson said that the most exciting moment of his life was the end of the match at the Oral in 1893 (not 1897 as stated in the Daily Graphic) between England and Australia. He thus describes what happened :— “ I had been awfully pleased to come off in my first match for England at Lord’s, where I had knocked up 91, and helped Shrewsbury to put on 137. A month later at the Oval we had such a terrific batting side that ‘ W. (!.' said to me, ‘ Here, Jacker, you had your turn at Lord’s ; you’ll have to let someone else have a go this time.’ Thus it was that I was seventh on the list. ...............When Mold, the last man, came in, I was still just short of the hundred. Now Mold was an awful bitter—his average for Lancashire that year was 4 !—but some­ how he managed to stop the four balls left in the over. Then I got my turn, and played the first up to third man. Well, if you please, Mold shouted ‘ Come on! ’ and came pounding up the pitch. So he had four more balls to face, and was almost out to each of them. However, after Giffen had nearly finished me, I got hold of one and lifted it over the ring, ajid there was my coveted century.” M r . J ackson ’ s memory is at fault when he says that in the memorable match in which the Australians made 18 in their first innings against the M.C.C. in 1896, “ Pougher got a couple of wickets with long hops, balls that almost bounced twice.” As a matter of fact Pougher took each of his five wickets with a ball which was of a beautiful length, and I think that the most likely explanation of the failure of the Australian batsmen was that which was given by Harry Trott in Cricket of August 27th in the same year. Trott said, “ Pougher hardly turned the ball, but kept very low—it seemed that he must get some work on, but he came along nearly straight. Sometimes the ball came off the pitch at a great pace; at others it went along slowly—you will remember that three or four of us played on.” I n this interview Mr. Jackson occa­ sionally takes the reader behind the scenes. He disclaims the accuracy of the remark in “ Wisden” that “ Jackson palpably gave away his wicket (in the match between England and Australia at Lord’s in 1896). The encroachment of the crowd prevented Darling from catch­ ing him on the outside, and he at once gave the fieldsman a second effort.”