Cricket 1907

J u l y 25, 1907. CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 299 20. A. E. L aw ton, D erb ysh ire v. L e ice ste r­ s h ire (a t D erby) ...................................... 20. T. H ayw ard, S u rrey v. L an cash ire (a t the O val ) ........................................................ 20. C. Woodbridge, Stoke v. Burnham .......... 20. Smith, Upper Tooting v. Oxted ................. 20. Tappenden, Boston Park v. Mortlake 20. E. F. Tonge, All Saints’ Gymnasium v. Castle ..................................................... 20. Gardiner, Virginia Water v. Stoics .......... 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . 20 . Powell, Lloyd’s Register v. Alleyn .......... F. Parke, West Green v. Ealing Dean......... Edwards, North Middlesex v. Brunswick... L. O’Brien, Paddington v. Shepherd’s Bush Daniels, Ep 3 om v. Banstead Asylum.......... A. J. Green, Epsom v. Banstead Asylum ... Bamford, South Hampstead v. Finchley ... Harrison, Green Lane Amateurs v. Anlaby Kemp, Granville(Lee) v. BrixtonWanderers N. Cockell, Granville (Le&) v. Brixton Wanderers............................................. D. H. Batcher, Upper Tooting v. Trojans... J. P. Sargent, St. Paul’s School v. M.C,C. and Ground...................................... ... S. J. Croft, Gravesend v. Northbrook.......... Shaw, Press Association v. Sleaford ......... R. L. Finnis, Chiswick Park v. Lancing Old Boys ............................................. W. H. L. Horton, Chiswick Park v. Lancing Old Boys ............................................. H. C. Grenside, Sir R. Nicholson’s XI. v. Middlesex County Council ................. Capt. W. L. O. Twiss, Staff College, Cam- berley, v. Heathlands ........................ E. L. Jones, Fulham v. Neasden................. Howell, Belsize v. Ealing ........................ Boles, Spencer v. Ibis .......... ................. Brodie, Spencer 3rd v. Ibis 3rd ................. P. Crouch, Oberon v. Royal Savoy ......... J. C. Clay, Pallingswick v. London Scottish S. A. Trick, Essex Club and Ground v. Wanstead ............................................. J. P. Meston, Essex Club and Ground v. Wanstead ............................................. W. Hanwell, Brondesbury v. Willesden Park .................................................... Tarrant, M.C.C. and Ground v. United Services ............................................. F. A. Barrs, Beckton v. Ilford .......... ... C. Benham, Beckton v. Ilford ............... W. H. Evans, Pennsylvania University v. Tonbridge School ............................... F. W. Baker, Pennsylvania University v. Tonbridge School ............................... V. Trangmar, Brighton Commercials v. National Telephone............................... A. H. Brown, Arundel v. Portsmouth Alliance ............................................. Haulkin, Littlehampton v. Poling and Lyminster ................. ........................ E.R. Hopewell, Lancing College v.Worthing R. Easten, Newport Grammar School v. Saffron Walden Grammar School.......... E. Wiley, Newport Grammar School v. Saffron Walden Grammar School.......... T. Simpson, Rochdale v. Glossop................. Mead (C. P.), Hampshire Club and Ground v. E. J. Morant's XI (at Brockenhurst) R. H. Spooner, Folkestone v. Free Foresters (at Folkestone)........................ .......... A. C. Edwards, Folkestone v. Free Foresters C. F. Lance, Gifford House v. Occasionals J. P. Collins, Harlequins v. Royal Artillery (Woolwich)............................................. P. A. Fryer, Wellingborough Masters v. Warwickshire Gentlemen ................. F. N. Bird, Wellingborough Masters v. Warwickshire Gentlemen ................. C. S. Ball, Incogniti v. Milton Park .......... A. E. V ogler , S outh A fricans v . S cot ­ land ( at E dinburgh ) ........................ P. W. S herwell , S outh A fricans v . S cot ­ land ( at E dinburgh ) ........................ H. K. F oster , W orcestershire v . H amp ­ shire ( at P ortsmouth ) ........................ B owley , W orcestershire v . H ampshire ( at P ortsmouth ) ............................... J. Dean, St. Lawrence v. Oxford University Authentics............................................. E. L. Thomas, Lansdown v. Somerset Stragglers ............................................. W. G. M. Sarel, Northumberland Gentle­ men v. Yorkshire Gentlemen (at New­ castle) ...................................................... R. G. Mortimer, Northumberland Gentle­ men v. Yorkshire Gentlemen .......... W. T. White. Yorkshire Gentlemen v. Northumberland Gentlemen ......... J. D. Munby, Scarborough v. Forfarshire... B. Hamilton, Woodbrook Club and Ground v. Pennsylvania University................. A. E. L awton , D erbyshire v . N orthamp ­ tonshire ( at D ersy ) ........................ 106 114* 133 110 * 137* 100 107 114* 104 100 128 114 101 110 100 * 194 123 101 101 119 102 * 141 101 * 153 105* 139* 159 119 115 161 115* 124 100 * 127* 147 107* 111 * 143* 104 120 104 102 * 100 103* 110 * 221 142* 108* 135 141* 111 102 103 109 152 110 101 * 117 200 117* 122 102 128* 112* KENT v. SURREY. Played at Blackheath on July 22, 23, and 24. Kent won by ten wickets. Although Kent had been showing poor form just previously, whereas Surrey had beaten the South Africans and Lancashire in succession, supporters of the home side had much faith in their County doing well, as it generally does when opposed to Surrey. The visitors substituted Knox for Rushby, whilst Kent, although having the assistance of Mason and Blaker, lacked the services of Marsham, who was injured. Surrey, upon winning the toss, decided to go in first on a wicket rendered very soft by recent i*ain, the first ball being sent down at ten minutes to one. Before a run had been made, Hayward was missed by Humphreys at short-leg off Fielder, but it was not long before the wickets began to tumble. In Blythe’s second over Hobbs was stumped, in his third Marshal was caught at mid-off off a skyer, in his fourth Holland was caught, and in his fifth Hayward was held at leg in trying to pull, whilst two later Crawford was caught in the slips off Dillon, half the side then being out for 32 in forty minutes. Lord Dalmeny and Hayes hit well and successfully, and ere the latter was out to a very fine catch at mid-on off the last ball before lunch, had put on S9 in twenty - five minutes. Hayes might have been stumped when 5, but, fortunately for the visitors, he remained to score 19. Three later, at 74, Lees was caught at point, but Strudwick, who followed in, proved so useful a partner to his captain that during their association 49 were added for the eighth wicket in half-an-hour, the wicket-keeper, who claimed only four of the number, being then caught in the slips. Lord Dalmeny, having made 70 out of 101 in an hour, was caught by Huish at short- leg off a skyer. His lordship, considering the state of the wicket, had given a remarkable display, for his innings was quite without blemish, and con­ tained a 6 and eight 4’s. At the start he was rather uncomfortable against Blythe, but later he punished that bowler for 15 in an over. He hit most power­ fully forward and to leg, and played a very valuable game for his side. Blythe took seven wickets for 56 runs, and, but for the punishment he received from Lord Dalmeny, would have had a remarkable analysis. With only 6 runs scored Kent lost Humphreys at third man, Crawford then obtaining his one- hundredth wicket of the season. Dillon, when 13, was missed by Hobbs, and almost immediately after­ wards bad light and rain combined to stop play for the day with the Kent score standing at 28 for one wicket. On Tuesday, so saturated had the pitch become, that it was not until twenty minutes past four that the game could be proceeded with. Dillon and Seymour, finding themselves upon a wicket which handicapped the bowlers, continued their partnership with such success that, in all, they remained together one hundred and fifty minutes and put on 102 for the second wicket. Seymour played admirable cricket, but Dillon, though his innings was a most valuable one, was rather fortu­ nate, seeing that he was twice missed : he hit eight 4’s during the one hundred and five minutes he was in, and was third out at 112 , owing to a superb running catch by Marshal. After his dismissal Crawford bowled with such success that by the time stumps were drawn eight wickets had fallen for 138. He dismissed Mason, Blaker, and Har­ dinge in five balls, and delivered his last nine overs and two balls for 15 runs and four wickets. Yesterday, thanks to a partnership of 43 by Blythe and Fairservice for the ninth wicket, Kent were able to claim a lead of 51 on the first innings. Con­ sidering the state of the wicket, the advantage was a very great one. Both men played vigorous cricket, but Blythe, when 12, was missed by Knox at mid- off off Crawford. The last-named nevertheless came out with a capital analysis, his seven wickets cost­ ing a fraction over seven and a-half runs each. Woolley and Blythe shared the bowling when Surrey went in for the second time, and they proved so effective that Hayward was bowled at 4, and Hobbs run out and Holland stumped off successive balls at 15. Marshal fell to a brilliant catch by Mason in the slips when he had scored only half-a- dozen, after which Hayes and Crawford took the total to 27 before the latter was caught at third man. Half the side were then out, and when Lord Dalmeny was bowled four later, the outlook was decidedly discouraging. Crawford made a few good hits, but was caught at short-leg off a skyer at 41, and in the same over Lees was bowled. With eight wickets down, Surrey still required ten to save the innings defeat, and, when it appeared likely that Kent would prove successful without having to bat a second time Strudwick and Smith hit resolutely and put on 36 in a-quarter of an hour. Woolley was punished for 14 in over, and a few minutes later Blythe was similary treated. Until Strudwick and Smith came together Blythe had taken five wickets for 12 runs, and, although he was afterwards punished, he came out with the fine analysis of five for 34. Kent were left only 29 to I win, and that number they succeeded in making without loss, gaining a splendid victory by ten wickets. Score and analysis:— S urrey . First innings. Second innings. Hayward, c Seymour, b Blythe...............................21 b Blythe ............ 4 Hobbs, st Iluish, b Blythe 5 run out .......... 5 Marshal.cWoolley, b Blythe Holland,cSeymour.b Blythe Hayes, c Humphreys, b Fairservice........................ J. N. Crawford, c Dillon, b Fielder ........................ Lord Dalmeny, c Huish, b Blythe............................... Lees, c Fielder, b Blythe ... Strudwick,cMason,bBlythe b Blythe c Mason, b Wool­ ley ................. st Ilui 8 h,b Blythe c Fairservice, b Blythe .......... c Humphreys, b Blythe .......... b W oolley.......... b Blythe .......... c Dillon, b Wool­ ley ................. b W oolley.......... not ou t................ No-ball.......... Smith (W. O ), c W oolley, b Fielder .......................... 4 N. A. Knox, not out ............ 0 B 1,1b 4 .................... 5 Total ................. 136 K ent . Humphreys, c Hobbs, b Orawford .......... 4 E. W.Dillon,cMarshal, b Lees ..................61 Seymour(.Tas.),cOraw- ford, b H obbs..........47 Hardinge,cStrudwick, b Crawford ........... 0 Woolley,cHayes,b Lees 3 J. R. Mason, c and b Craw ford.........< ... 0 1 Second in n in gsH u m p h reys, npt out, 15 ; E. W Dillon, not out, 14.—Total (no wicket) 29. Total ... 79 R.N.R.Blaker, b Craw­ ford ........................ 6 Huish, b Crawford ... 9 Fairservice, b Craw­ ford ........................33 Blythe, not o u t......... 23 Fielder, lbw, b Oraw­ ford ........................ 1 Total .187 S urrey . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Fielder ... ... 10.1 2 42 2 ... Fairservice ... 6 0 33 1 ... Blythe ... ... 16 3 56 7 ... 11 2 34 5 Woolley... ... 103 3 44 4 Woolley bowled a no-ball. K bnt . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Lees.......... ... 17 3 52 2 ... Crawford ... 28 2 10 60 7 ... 3 1 6 0 Smith ... 12 1 54 0 ... Knox . . 2 0 10 0 ... 3 0 13 0 Hobbs ... ... 2 1 11 1 ... Dalmeny 2 0 6 0 Hayes... ... 1 0 4 0 LONDON AND WESTMINSTER BANK (3) v. LONDON AND COUNTY BANK (2).—Played at Norbury on July 16 and 17. L. & W. B ank (3). H.H.Keeping,c Gibbs-, b White ................. 2 W. E. Smith, c Sachs, b White .............. ,.31 Go. Anson, c Gibbs, b Musin ................. 4 F. L. Sharpin, b White 17 S. A. Ellerm, b White 4 L. E. Hunt, not out... 19 L. & C. E. J. Stiff, c Reid, b Hunt........................ C. W. Gibbs, c Ellerm, b Smith ................. E. A. Tealby, run out T. Allnutt, b Hunt ... C.de Rheims,c Ellerm, b Smith ................. H. A. Francis, b Smith 24 T. C. Sampson, c Sachs, b Musin .................16 J. T. Merry, b Musin 5 W.C.Livermore,bWhite 0 W. A. Reid, b White 4 J. L. Challis, b White 0 B 3, lb 4 .......... 7 Total ..........109 Bank (2). R.T.S. Sachs, c Ellerm, b Hunt ................. 11 H. G. White, b Smith 6 H. S. Tapley, b Smith 1 E. Ga. Musin, not out 8 V. P. Bourke, b Hunt 2 B 2‘ lb 4, w 1 ... 7 Total 83 LONDON AND WESTMINSTER BANK (3) v. BLACKHEATH (3).—Played at Norbury on July 20. L. & W. B ank (3). L. E. Hunt, b Onslow 0 G. O. Anson, b Mahon 42 W. E. Smith, retired hurt ........................ 4 S. A. Ellerm, not out...100 A. Anson, b Mahon ... 0 T. C. Sampson, b Bland 0 H. H. Keeping, run out ........................ 3 S. Wood, b Foster ... 6 J.T. Merry,cValentine, b Foster................. 4 F. L. Sharpin, b Skinner.................13 R. S. Daw, b Foster... 4 B 7, lb 6 , w 2 ... 15 Total ...191 P. Bland, c Hunt, b W ood........................ 2 H. Quarterman, c Ellerm, b Daw.......... 68 A. L. Stokes, b Wood 0 R. W. Foster, b Hunt 76 Rest did not bat. B lackheath (3). G.H.Valentine,b Hunt 2 H. W. Mahon, b A. Anson .................24 P. F. Griffiths, not out 12 B 12, lb 2, w 4 ... 18 Total (6 wkts)...202