Cricket 1907

J une 13, 1907. CRICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 195 Full details of the construction of the Demon=Drivers and other information of interest to GricKeters, w ill be found in the booKlet entitled The Evolution of a Cricket Bat, which may be obtained upon application, and from which the following extracts are taKen :— D OUBTLESS buyers frequently wonder why it is that some bats are sold as low as 5s., while others cannot be bought for less than 27s. 6d., both being made of similar material. The reason is yery simple. The higher-priced bats, which must relatively be few in number, have to provide for the loss incurred in manufacturing the lower- priced bats, which are necessarily numerous. The figures here given approximately show the proportions of the various grades for 1,000 bats. They are based upon the average results produced in the ordinary course of manufacture. First or Best Division. 1st grade 2nd grade 3rd grade 4th grade 20 60 100 150 Second or Common Division. 5th grade Lower grades 250 430 1,000. It will thus be seen that the manufacturer who intends to meet the ever-increasing demand for really good cricket bats must carry an enormous stock of timber. The stock held by Geo. G. Bussey & Co., Ltd., represents 100,000 bats. The question is sometimes asked why the “ Demon Drivers” are not more associated with the names of leading cricketers. It may be said, without presumption, that the answer involves a question of ethics which it is not intended to enter into beyond mentioning the fact that Geo. G. Bussey & Co., Ltd. (or their predecessors, Geo. G. Bussey & Co.) have never published a testi­ monial relating to a cricket bat not purchased and paid for in the ordinary way of business. Cricketers all over the world are informed that orders for Bussey’s goods should be placed with Dealers on the spot. Their manufactures are graded according to a properly devised system, which provides for cricketers purchasing from the dealers in the provinces or colonies receiving the same selection as if sent direct from the Factory, which is the largest and most up-to-date for the manufacture of Requisites for Sports and Games. GEO, G. BUSEY& CO., LTD., 36 & 38, Queen Victoria St., LONDON. Manufactory: Timber Mills : PEOKHAM, S.E. ELMSWELL, SUFFOLK. AT THE SIGN OF THE W ICKE T . By F. S. A shlby -C oophr . The truth of the saying that sometimes a defeat is almost as meritorious as a victory was illustrated last week, when Essex were beaten by Nottinghamshire at Leyton by 7 runs. It was a bowlers’ match throughout, Hallam and Wass on the one side being pitted against Mead and Reeves on the other. Con­ sidering the state of the wicket, Wass was not, perhaps, quite as deadly as usual, but any lack of effect there may have been on his part was fully compensated for by Hallam, who took thirteen wickets in the match for 56 runs— figures which have quite an old-world flavour about them. Wass, on the other hand, claimed but half-a-dozen victims at a cost of a fraction over 12 runs each, which was by no means a remarkable performance in a match wherein forty wickets fell for 345 runs. So ably did Mead and Reeves bowl that Essex suffered defeat by the very small margin stated, Nottinghamshire coming within an ace of experiencing their first reverse of the season. The pair bowled unchanged through­ out the match, and Mead especially performed admirably. The last-named maintains his form wonderfully well, considering that he completed his thirty-eight year last March. Players now-a-days, owing chiefly to the heavy programmes arranged, do not last nearly so long as they did in the early days of the game, when great matches were com­ paratively few and far between ; thus, when the Young played the Old in 1810, all under the age of 38 were qualified for the former. Mead’s career has been a long, as well as a brilliant one, yet never before had he obtained so many wickets in an innings of a great match at so small a cost as he did in the first innings of Nottinghamshire last week. The eleven instances in which he has taken as many as eight wickets in a single innings in important cricket are as follows :— Wkts. Runs. Year. 8 l'°1' 1 69 ^ J Essex v. Australians, at Leyton 1893 a 19 <> JM.C.O. and Ground v. Cam- » \ bridge Univ., at Cambridge 1893 8 „ 67 a i Essex v. Hampshire, at South- 9 „ 526 1 ampton ................................ 1895 o 7r j Essex v. Leicestershire, at J \ Leyton ............................... 1896 q j Essex v Hampshire, at South- ” | ampton ............................... 1900 o I Essex v. Leicestershire, at 8 » \ Leicester................................ 1900 r, } M.C.O. and Ground v. South ” 1 Africans, atLord’s ............ 1901 Q I Essex v. Leicestershire, at 8 ” j Leyton ................................ 1903 8 „ 39 ...Essex v. Notts, at Leyton ... 1907 a Signifies 1st innings, and b 2nd innings. In beating Lancashire at Manchester, and giving Nottinghamshire such a good game, Essex have clearly shown that they are a team to be feared. The story of the past week’s cricket deals chiefly with a series of bowling triumphs. In almost every part of the country batsmen have had to struggle for their runs, the heavy rains experienced having, with barely an exception, rendered the grounds altogether against heavy scoring. At Southampton, however, Hampshire accomplished nothing less than a triumph in defeating Kent by five wickets after being set over three hundred to win. Kent were certainly deprived of the services of Blythe, but it was nevertheless a most meritorious feat on the part of their opponents. Hampshire is a county which can boast a glorious history, and therefore its successes are always welcome. Whilst they were laying the foundation of their success, Sussex were collapsing in a most marked manner against their ancient foemen, Surrey, at the Oval. J. N. Crawford and Rushby, like Mead and Reeves at Leyton, bowled unchanged throughout, thus doing so for Surrey in three consecutive innings, which amounted to 90, 43, and 90. There are only the following instances upon record of two players bowling unchanged through both completed innings of a match for the County : slierrnan^ j v’ Sussex, at ^ie ^ val ...............1856 Griffith j.T_Kellt> at TlinM(ige Wells .1856 Martingell Griffith ) v‘ Sussex, at tlie Oval Caffyn Griffith Street;61^011 \ v‘ Kent>at Maidstone ..........1872 Lo“ ‘ }v . Kent, at the Oval Lohmann Sharpe Bharpe” 11 } v. Somerset, at the Oval...1891 Smith (F.’nE ) |v' Q'o’sterehire, at the Oval 1894 u S , jv . Derbyshire, at Derby Hayward Richardson ... 1857 |v. The North, at Sheffield ...1857 ... 1889 [ v. Lancashire, at Manchester 1890 v. Leicestershire, at Leicester 1897 \ v- Gloucester, at Cheltenham 1904 RushbyraWf°rd jv. Sussex, at the Oval ..........1907 This is a surprisingly small list considering the number of fine bowlers Surrey have had during the past six decades. A curious circumstance concerning last week’s match with Sussex was that the latter, who batted one short, bad six of their side dis­ missed without scoring in the first innings, yet not one obtained spectacles. When they played Kent at Sevenoaks in 1828 they also had six men disposed of without a run in their first innings, in addition to which the not-out failed to register a notch; altogether, three players made “ a pair,” and, including the two not-outs, there were fourteen “ ducks ” on the Sussex side ! At Lord’s, a year later, eight men were dismissed ere making a run in the first innings of the Players against the Gentlemen, and such fine men as Hooker, Saunders, Pilch, and Howard obtained spectacles. Dennett’ s performance at Gloucester the day before yesterday created almost as much interest as did Trott’s double hat-trick earlier in the season. For any bowler to take eight wickets in a first-class match at a cost of but nine runs is a feat of the rarest occurrence. Dennett, however, not only did this, but caused Northamptonshire to collapse for a dozen runs—the smallest aggregate score ever made in a great inter-county match. (See “ Gossip.” ) Dennett’ s performance occupies so prominent a position among the records of the game that only a few lines are necessary to show how remarkable his bowling really Wkts. Runs. Year. 9 for 2, G. Elliott, Victoria v. Tasmania, at Launceston...................................... 1858 8 „ 5, Peate (E.), Yorkshire v. Surrey, at Holbeck ...................................... 1883 8 „ 7, Bickley (J.), England v. Kent and Sussex, at Lord’s ................. 1856 8 „ 7, Lohmann (G. A.), England v. South Africa, at Port Elizabeth .......... 1896 8 „ 9, Clarke (W.), The England Eleven v. XVI. of Sussex, at Chichester ... 1853 8 „ 9, Wootton (G.), M.C.C. and Ground v. Sussex, at Lord’s ........................ 1863 8 „ 9, Dennett (G.), Gloucestershire v. Northants, at Gloucester .......... 1907 In the second innings he took seven more wickets for twelve runs (performing the hat trick), making his record for the day fifteen for twenty-one —a unique achievement. It was unfortunate for him that no further play was possible yesterday. A correspondent wrote a few days ago asking on how many