Cricket 1906

442 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. O ct. 25, 1906. on Saturdays, when they would be avail­ able all day. J. N. C raw ford , the Surrey cricketer, has been playing hockey for Staines this autumn, and seems to have shown excellent form, but a strain received in a recent match has placed him hors de comlat for a time. Another well-known cricketer, Capt. B. J. T. Bosanquet, is the honorary secretary of the B.M.C. Hockty Club. A lo n g and disappointing letter reft r- ring to the recent disputes in Australia appeared in the middle of October in the Daily Chronicle, from the pen of Victor Trumper. The letter throws absolutely no new light on the question, which has been fully examined in Cricket during ihe past cricket season. In the course of a speech at the annual dinner of the Cranleigh C.C., Lord Alverstone, speaking of Surrey ciicket, said :— It was very easy to compare county with county, hut people, he thought, who did that quite forgot that although they had a great many cricket grounds in Surrey, yet they were not grounds which were 'always calcu­ lated to produce first-class cricketers. Surrey had only one county ground, the Oval, a glorious ground. But Yorkshire had four or five county grounds, and even Kent had Canterbury, Tonbridge and Catford, and one or two others. It really was extremelymore diificult for a county situated as Surrey was to get out young first-class ciicketers than for many other counties. They must not think that the Surrey Committee were not doing all they couldto get young cricketers ; hut it wouldhe very much easier if they had a secondandperhaps a third groundonwhich first-class cricket might he played in the county. A t a meeting of the Essex Committee on October 16th it was decided that “ as no less had been incurred during the past season, the Committee are of opinion that it is unnecessary to call a meeting Of the Club, but they still feel that a largely increasedmembership is absolutely essen­ tial for the satisfactory working of the Club.” The following is from the Jamaica Times :— A new discussion is proceeding round the old question of why we cannot finish our cricket matches. It has beensuggested that the solution ofthe troublelies in the factthat our cricket is not brisk enough and that everything should he done to increase this briskness, and to make it good formto score quickly. It has been suggested that the cup shouldgo to the clubwhichmakes thelargest number of runs during the season. This would he an interesting experiment,, but before it is triedwe think the less sensational method might he adopted of beginning matches earlier and not wasting time by breaks. T he Oxford University Golf Team this term will have a strong and almost pre­ ponderating cricket element in its compc- ition. The Hon. C. N. Bruce, of New College, will be the captain, with a younger member of the Foster brother­ hood, G. N. to wit, as one of the three old choices at his disposal. J. H. Gordon, the old Wykehamist, who got his cricket blue as a Freshman last sum­ mer, and has latterly been winning high honours as a golfer at Ashdown Forest, should also be a valuable addition to the University side. The death of Mr. John Maddox Walker eight days ago has removed a keen supporter of Surrey and, indeed, of county cricket generally. His son, Livy Walker, played for Surrey for two or three seasons and captained the Surrey eleven one summer—that of 1904. Mr. J. M. Walker, who died at Bexhill, had just reached his three score of years. The recordof the Northamptonshire XI- last summer was, on the whole, so full of promisethateveryonewillbepleasedtofind the executive able to extend their match list for next season. New fixtures have beenarranged with Gloucestershire, Kent andLancashire, in additionto therenewed engagements with Derbyshire, Essex, Hampshire, Leicestei shire, Notts, Surrey and Warwickshire. This means a little matter of ten home and home matches for the Northamptonshire players in the First-Class County Championshipof 1907. Th ere seems after all to be a little un­ certainty as to the appearance of a team representing the Gentlemen of Philsdel- phi» in England next summer. A recent cablegram fromAmerica seems to suggest doubts on this score, and I am given to understand that the work of arranging a programme which had already been begun has, for the moment at all events, been suspended. Though, so far, the arrangements for the Marylebone team now on its way to New Zealand are known, perhaps, only to the authorities on the other side, the New Zealand Cricket Council that is to say, it is understood that three matches will be played against the full strength of New Zealand. The team, who Bhould arrive at Wellington in the first week of December, are timed to reach England again at the end of April. M b . F. F. K e lly , of New York, kindly draws my attention to a capital run- getting performance in British Columbia on the part of H. N. B. Cobbett, who, in one week, played the following innings in succession :— August 21.—Victoria v. New Westminster ... 143 August 22.—Victoria v. Nelson ........................ 49 August 23. -Victoria v. B urrard........................ 114 August 25.—Victoria v. United Eleven .......... 152 From the following remarks by “ Not Out” in the Sydney Referee it would seem that the disappointment caused by the inability of the M.C.C. to send a teamout to Australia this season was by no means so great as various cabled messages had led people here to suppose: Twelve months hence Australia will cor­ dially welcome a thoroughly representative English teamunder the control of the Mary­ lebone C.C. As must have been generally believed and anticipated prior to the latest message from fcngland, the possibility of a visit this year vanished two or threemonths ago. The Marylebone C.C. has not been carried away by a feverish desire to get a teamtogether at anypriceatthelastmoment. There can be no doubt as to the wisdomof now deferring the visit. The interests of Australian cricket will suffer in no way by this postponement, a viewthat appears to he practically general among lovers of the sport, though of course the natural desire to see International cricket would ensure ahearty welcome to a teamat any time. A r e c e n t issue of the Daily Telegraph contains a letter from Mr. J. B. Payne, whose name will be familiar to readers of CricTeet. Mr. Payne refers to the present system of scoring in the County Championship, and suggests a method which is so simple and direct, and at the same time so sensible, that it is not likely to be adopted. At any rate, the same method has from time to time been suggested in the Press for years, without making the slightest impression on the authorities. None the less, Mr. Payne’s scheme deserves to be carefully con­ sidered. He says:— “ When, on the admission of five new counties in 1895, it became impossible for all the competitors tomeet each other, a system of percentages was introduced whereby the county that could show the greatest propor­ tion of points in finished matches was ad- judgedchampioncounty. Thefact, however, was wholly lost sight of that scoring by ‘ points,’ with its attendant inconveniences of ‘ minus’ quantities and deductions for losses, was nowno longer necessary, that it was, in fact, a needless complication, and that precisely the same order of merit would be obtainedin a far simpler form by taking the proportionof wins only.” M r. Payne then gives a table to prove his contention. Thus:— COUNTY CHAMPIONSHIP, 1906. Percentage Percentage Wins. Losses. of Points. of Wins. Kent.......... 16 ... 2 ... 77-77 .... ... 8888 Yorkshire.. 17 ,... 3 ... 70-00 .... ... 8500 Surrey 18 ... 4 ... 63-63 .. . ... 81-81 Lancashire. 15 ... 6 ... 42-85 .. . ... 71-42 Notts......... 9 ... 4 ... 38-46 .. . ... 69-23 Warwick... 7 ... 4 ... 27-27 .... ... 63 63 Essex......... 9 ... 6 .... 2000 .. . ... 60 00 Hants 7 ... 9 .... —12-50 .. . ... 4375 Gloucester. 6 ... 10 ... —25-00 .. . ... 37-50 Sussex ... 6 ... 12 ... —33-33 .. . ... 33-33 Middlesex. ) Northants. 4 ... 10 ... -42-85 ... ... 28-57 Somerset...,f Worcester.. 2 ... 8 ... —6000 ... ... 2000 Leicester ... 3 ... 14 ... —64-70 .... ... 17-64 Derbyshire 2 ... 17 ... —78-91 ..., ... 10-52 Of this table he says:— “ Worcestershire, for instance, are shown to have won 20 per cent, of their finished matches, whereas their present percentage is represented by a clumsy debit balance of 1minus sixty ’ points. Again, where a county has won and lost the same number of matches, it seemsfarmore obvious towrite it down as having won 50 per cent, of its engagements than to credit it with ‘ 00.00.’ . . . . It is claimed that the above is the