Cricket 1906

O ct . 25, 1906. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OP THE GAME. 439 LAW 45. The following “ case” is taken from the Adelaide Register :— In February last, owing to a dispute in a match between Sturt and Adelaide district clubs, adiscussion took place in the columns of The Register on the interpretation of Rule45 of theLawsof Cricket, whichreads:— “ They (the umpires) shall allowtwo minutes for each striker to come in and 10 minutes between each innings. When they shall call ‘ Play ’ the side refusing toplay shall lose the match.” Our cricket writer “ Recorder ” Btatedat the time that the Rule meant that if there was a delay in the hatting sidebetween the fall of wickets the penaltyattachedto the side and not to the incoming batsman. He also said that both umpires should take the time, andnot the arbiter at the bowler’s end, as contended. On account of the diversity of opinion “ Recorder” wrote to headquarters at Lord’s for an opinion, and a reply came to hand this week. The three questions sub­ mitted were :—“ 1. Has an umpire any authority to declare aman out for exceeding the time limit ? If so, under what Law, and how is he out? 2. Must an umpire declare the side to which the defaulting batsman belongs to have lost thematch? 3. Is it the duty of the umpire at the bowler’s end, or of both, to take the time between the fall of a wicketandthecoming ofthe next batsman?’’ The replies by Mr. F. E. Lacey (Secretary to theMarylebone Club) are :—“ 1and2. The authorityof theumpire is definedbyLaw 45. 3. The umpires, before play, should agree uponwhat timepiece shouldbe followed, and both umpires should see that Law45 is not infringed.” It is clear, therefore, that by the mechanical operation of the Laws the batting side loses the matchwhen its bats­ menbreak the rule regarding the time limit. This is strengthened by the reading of the end of Law 2—‘‘ No match is won unless played out or given up, except in the case provided in Law 45.” That contemplates the summary actionwhichisplainlyprovided for. THE COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP. The cricket season has again come to an end after one of the best of its kind, not only in the generally fine weather prevalent all over the country but also in the number of finished matches. Thus it is evident that, under stricter conditions as to the observance of time and general smartness in various directions, the many reproaches which have been levelled againBt the game in many quarters are now nolonger applicable. It is perfectly true that certain counties are still prone to draw their matches in consequence of the very steady character of some cf their batsmen, but still even some of them are improving and have actually been seen to score quite 30 in the hour on several occasions. Of the number of matches played, viz., 172, only 43 were drawn, Worcestershire heading the list with 10 andWarwick­ shire following closely with 9. Both these counties play what might be called a slow game, though the latter obtains the highest prestige in this respect, and the recent exposure of financial affairs demonstrates that their policy is not a paying one. Derbyshire, who stand at the bottom of the list, finished all games but one, but they were undoubtedly the weakest of all the counties engaged. The premier position was, up to almost ihe very last, an open question and, favouredsomewhat by fortune, ultimately fell to Kent’s lot. Yorkshire, Lanca­ shire and Surrey all played a lot more matches, and thereby ran the greater amount of risk from defeat, the failureof Kent in their last match against England fully demonstrating this fact. The amount of controversy regarding the counting of points adopted by the M.C.C. has led to a lot of suggestions. It is undeniable that a defect does exist, and it is somewhat difficult to remedy it. Drawn games are altogether ignored, but totally without reason, as evidenced in the Minor Counties’ Competition. There is no reason why in drawn games one point shonld not be assigned to the side leading on the first innings, two points be given to an ordinary win, and three points to a single innings’ victory. The aggregate number of points would then be of value to those teams who engage in the most matches, and run tha greater amount of risk from defeat from being a bit “ off colour,” and, maybe, a bit stale from overwork. Thus Kent, in May, played only a couple of matches, and so missed nearly a month of hard work. Let us take the M.C.C. method of scoring, and the result is as follows:— Per- Plyd.Won. Lost. Dm. Pts. centage. K en t.................... 22 ...16... 2 ... 4 ... 14... 7777 Yorkshire............. 28 ...17... 3 ... 8 ... 14... 70-00 Surrey ............. 28 ...18... 4 ... 6 ... 14... 63‘63 Lancashire. ... 26 ...15... 6 ... 5 ... 9... 42‘85 Notts.................... 20 ... 9... 4 ... 7 ... 5... 3846 Warwickshire.. 20 ... 7 ... 4 ... 9 ... 3... 27-27 Essex.................... 22 ... 9... 6 ... 7 ... 3... 2000 Hampshire ... 20 ... 7... 9 ... 4... —2... —12"50 Gloucestershire 20 ... 6 ...10 ... 4 ... —4... —25-00 Sussex .......... 24 ... 6 ...12 ... 6 ... —6... —3333 Middlesex.......... 18 ... 4 ...10 ... 4 ... —6... —4285 Northampton ... 16 ... 4 ...10 ... 2 ... —6... —42'85 Somerset..........18 ... 4 ...10 ... 4 ... —6... —42'85 Worcestershire 20 ... 2 ... 8 ...10 ... —6... —60-00 Leicestershire... 22 ... 3 ...14 ... 5 ...—11... —64‘70 Derbyshire ... 20 ... 2 ...17 ... 1 ...- 15... —78-94 According to the rule laid down by the M.O.O., “ One point shall be reckoned for each w in; one deducted for each loss; unfinished games shall not be reckoned. The county which during the season shall have in finished matches obtained the greatest proportionate number of points shall be reckoned the champion county.” Now let us take the reckoning mentioned above respecting the 3, 2, and 1 points respectively, and the result is as follows:— Surrey and K e n t................. ... 33 Points. Yorkshire ........................ ... 32 „ Lancashire ........................ ... 23 N otts...................................... ... 11 Essex ............................... ... 10 Warwickshire........................ ... 3 Gloucestershire and Sussex ...-10 „ Somerset............................... ...-11 Middlesex and Hants.......... ...—12 Northamptonshire .......... ...—14 Worcestershire ................. ...-18 „ Leicestershire ................. ...-25 ,, Derbyshire, ........................ ...-33 Here we get Kent, Surrey and York­ shire practically level. Yorkshire beat Kent once, and almost won onthe second occasion. Surrey beat Yorkshire easily the first time, and succumbed the second match. Kent won by onewicket against Surrey, and caught them on the hop the second time. In this triangular duel Kent score 1,522 runs for 76 wickets, or an average per wicket of 20’02. York­ shire score 1,762 runs for 80 wickets, an average of 22 02. Surrey total 1377 for 70 wickets, or an average of 19*67. There is nothing much in it that way at any rate. Putting the two methods of reckoning side by side, we get a better insight into the relative positions of the other counties, and perhaps a fairer position as regards their merits. M.C.O. Method. 1. Kent. 2. Yorkshire. 3. Surrey. 4. Lancashire. 5. Nottinghamshire. 6. Warwickshire. 7. Essex. 8. Hampshire. 9. Gloucestershire. 10. Sussex. /Middlesex. 11. |Northamptonshire. ISomerset. 14. Worcestershire. 15. Leicestershire. 16. Derbyshire. Essex turn out A lternative M ethod . ) Kent. Surrey. Yorkshire. Lancashire. Nottinghamshire. Essex. Warwickshire. Gloucestershire. Sussex. Somerset ii (Hampshire. ' ( Middlesex. 13. Northamptonshire. 14. Worcestershire. 15. Leicestershire. 16. Derbyshire. Warwickshire, and I-! 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 10. deserve the move; and Gloucestershire, Somerset and Sussex may claim to be superior to Hampshire, and North­ amptonshire occupies a more fitting place. Middlesex remains stationaryand Leicestershire occupies anabsurd position for a county of such sporting proclivities with such a phalanx of brilliant bats. Middlesex also holds an unsatisfactory position. On the whole, in the championship contests this year the bowling has been better and the fielding quite brilliant. Captaincy in some directions has been much at fault, and has accounted for several failures. So few captains can take themeasure of individual opponents and their weak spots. J.C.C. CKICKET IN AMERICA. CORINTHIANS v. NEW YORK (M r . R. S t . G e o r g e W a l k e r ’ s XII.). Played at Livingstone, Staten Island, on September 7. NewYorkwon by 109 runs. For the local teamA. G. Laurie performed the hat trick. Score and analysis :— C orinthians . W.U.Timmins.cRush­ ton, b Laurie..........19 C. O. Page, b Laurie... 2 N.S.Comelius,bLaurie 14 G.S.Harris, c Laurie, b Morice .................55 S. H. Day, b Laurie ... 0 G. O. Vassell, b Laurie 0 P. R. May, c Morice, b Laurie ................. 4 J. D. Craig, b Laurie.. 0 N ew Y ork. R. E. Bonner, c and b Harris ................. 1 Archie Gunn, b May 33 A.G. Laurie, c& b May 10 W. N. Morice, b May... 11 J. A. Lester, not out... 40 O. P. Hurditch, b May 68 C. H. E. Griffith, b Vassell ................. o R.T. Rokeby, b Vassell 20 C orinthians . B. M. R. W. Laurie ... 90 1 55 9 Lester Rushton ... 34 2 13 1 |Morice T. S. Rowlandson, b Laurie .................14 B. O. Corbett, lbw, b Laurie ................. 0 E. G. D. Wright, b Rushton................. 0 O.W reford-Brown,not out ........................13 Extras................. 6 Total ...127 P. E. Bousfield, c May, b Vassell ................. 0 N. S. Walker, jun., b Harris .................25 R. St. George Walker, b May ................. 7 H. Rushton, b Harris 4 Extras.................17 Total ...236 B. M. R.W. ... 30 2 37 0 ... 24 2 16 1 N ew Y ork . B. M. R. W. B. M. R.W. May...... 108 1 97 5 Vassell ... 66 0 56 3. Harris ... 74 0 47 3 jW.-Brown. 24 1 19 0