Cricket 1907

A ug . 8, 1907 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 331 31. J. K. Matthews, Worthing v. Steyning ... 129* 31. E. H. Killick, E. W. B. Holt’s XI. v. East Grinstead ................. ........................ 108 AUGUST. 1. W. G. Grace, London County v. Cyphers... 102* 1. P. G. Gale, London County v. Cyphers ... 101 1. B aker (A.), S urrey v . E ssex ( at S outhend - on -S ea ) ..................................................... Ill 1 . B. H. Marriott, C. E. Hambro’s XI. v. Old Wykehamists ...................................... 105 1. C. Palmer, C. E. Hambro’s XI. v. OldWyke- hamists..................................................... 120 1. B. Meakin, Old Cliftonians v. Blue Mantles 150 1. F. G. Robinson, Old Cliftonians v. Blue Mantles.................................................... 188 1. Corpl. Ridewood, 1st Welsh Regiment v. 2nd West Yorks Regiment ................. 185 1. H. T. C. Blackwood, Stade Frangaise v. H.A.C........................................................ 103 1. H. K. F oster , W orcestershire v . K ent ( at W orcester ) ...................................... 123* 1. R. E. F oster , W orcestershire v . K ent ( at W orcester ) ...................................... 174 1. R. B. Heygate, Southgate v. Old Foresters 165 1. O. T. Norris, I. Zingari v. Woolwich, R.A. 114 1. R. Lee, H.J. Powell-Edward’s XI. v. Sussex Martlets ............................................. 105* 1. Rev. T. H. Williams, Sussex Martlets v. J. Powell-Edward’s XI............................... 12G 1. C.Watson, Stamford Hillv. North Middlesex 105 1. H. S. Kaye, Pontefract v. York ................. 130 1. R. A. Sheppard, R. M. Bell’s XI. v. Old Johnians (Leatherhead)........................ 102 1. T. J. Wheeler, Pelham v. Parr ................. 102* 1. H. D. Watson, J. S. Day’s XI. v. Cuckfield 107 2. G unn (J.), N ottinghamshire v. N orthants ( at N ottingham ) ............................... 107* 2. Davis, Surrey 2nd XI. v. Wiltshire ......... 107 2. Spring, „ v. ,, .......... 135 2. C. B. F ry , S ussex v . D erbyshire ( at B righton ) ............................................. 187 2. A. H. Du Boulay, Royal Engineers v. I. Zingari.................................................... 115 2. G. A. F aulkner , S outh A fricans v . L ancashire ( at M anchester ) ......... 106* 2. S. Brutton, Sidmouth v. Oxford Cygnets... 110 2. A. C. Edwards, Folkestone v. West Kent... 109 2. F. R. R. Brooke, Royal Artillery v. Free Foresters ............................................. 166 3. K. L. H utchings , K ent v . W orcestershire ( at W orcester ), 1 st . inns ..................... 109 3. K. L. H utchings , K ent v . W orcestershire ( at W orcester ), 2 nd inns ..................... 109* 3. J. M. Campbell, London County v. Clapham 105 3. J. Le Fleming, M.C.C. and Ground v. East Gloucestershire...................................... 124* 3. Lee, Pinner v. Harrow Weald ................. 132 3. R. Woodgate, Kingston Town v. Hampshire Montrose ............................................. 108 3. Weatherall, Belle Vue v. Addlestone......... 126 3. Bartlett, Eastbourne Wanderers v. Old Town ... .......... .............................. 102* 3. Gilbert, Ocklynge v. Eastbourne................. 101 3. Watson, Old Ipswichians v. Felixstowe . . 120* 3. A. J. Graham, Liverpool v. Rock Ferry ... 127* 3. F. Furze, Beckenham v. Upper Tooting ... 102* 3. Major E. R. Bradford, Capt. Heywood- Lonsdale’s XI. v. Whitchurch ......... 104* 3. Hon. R. B. Watson, Rougham Hall v. Bury and West Suffolk ............................... 132 3. C. J. Parton, Streatham v. H.A.C................ 102* 3. Rev. A. R. Hoare, J. A. Bernie’s XI. v. Royal Welsh Fusiliers ........................ 100* 3. F. H. Holl, Chetnole Chappies v. Chard ... 118 3. R. T. Woodgate, Kingston Town v. Hamp­ stead Montrose...................................... 108 3. Wm. Churchill, Free Foresters v. Royal Artillery ............................................ 101 3. P. A. Buchanan, Turnham Green v. Forbes’ XI. (at Tumham Green)........................ 236 3. G. Ball, Turnham Green v. Forbes’ XI. ... 109* 3. P. C. Scott, Lowfield Heath v. East Grin­ stead............................................................ 117 3. C. Pinkham, Neasden v. Brookfield ......... 137 3. C. Ward, White Company v. Priory Park... 101* 3. F. Phillips, Rye v. Hastings Gas Works ... 100 3. A. Latter, Canterbury Pilgrims v. Hothfield Place .................................................... 159 3. L. Wilson, Hothfield Place v. Canterbury Pilgrims ............................................. 120 5. J. D ouglas , M iddlesex v. S omerset ( at T aunton ) ............................... ......... 180 5. T arrant , M iddlesex v. S omerset ( at T aunton ) ............................................ 147 5. N eedham , D erbyshire v . H ampshire ( at D erby ) .................................................... 119 5. V. J. Woodward, Spencer v. Fulham .......... 102 5. Capt. H. S. Bush, Blackheath v. Charlton Park .................................................... 114 5. B. L. Bisgood, Richmond v. Barnes ........ 101* 5. B. L. Peel, Bedfordshire v. Cambridgeshire 109 5. R. W. Awdry, Witshire v. Bucks................. 104 5. Capt. F. Wilson, Suffolk v. Kent 2nd XI.... 145 5. W. G. Grace, London County v. Catford ... 118 5. T. Powell, Alleyn v. Roupell Park .......... 100 5. C. F. Hipwell, Brondesbury v. West Green 100 H. Prentis, Southend v. Coningsby ......... F. D. Thorowgood, Sussex 2nd XI. v. Middlesex 2nd XI................................... L. Barratt, Norfolk v. Hertfordshire.......... A. K. Watson, ,, v. ,, .......... E. W. Elliot, Durham v. Northumberland P ayton, N otts v. S u rre y (a t th e O va l) J. R. M ason, K ent v. Sussex (a t C a n ter­ b u ry ) ...................................................... R e lf (R. R.), Sussex v. K en t (a t C a n ter­ b u ry) ................................................................ V ine , S ussex v . K ent ( at C anterbury ) ... H ayw ard , S urrey v . N otts ( at the O val ) H ayes , S urrey v . N otts ( at the O val ) ... P earson , W orcestershire v . W arwick ­ shire ( at E dobaston ) ............................. * Signifies not out. 140* 141 115 105 121 149* 210 108 131* 104 100 * ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS. “ T asman .” — He was educated at Win­ chester, but did not proceed to either University. “ R ecorder ” (Sydney).—Many thanks. “ H.G.G.” —Against Somerset, at Taunton last year, Kent at one time made 244 in seventy-seven minutes. “ H.S.S.” (Krasnoyarsk, Siberia).—We will make enquiries. Glad that C ricket reaches you regularly. P.A. M asters (Kimberley).—In the official “ Decisions and Interpretations ” of the Laws of Cricket it is remarked—“ Whether the ball is “ finally settled” is a question of fact for the Umpire only to decide.” KENT v. SUSSEX. Played at Canterbury on August 5, 6 , and 7. Drawn. In the opening match of the 66 th Canterbury Week, Kent were obliged to take the field without Blythe, who was unwell, and Marsham, who was suffering from a strain. Sussex won the toss and went in, and from Fielder’s first over Fry obtained a 4 and a 2, but directly afterwards Woolley disposed of Vine, caught in the slips, and Young, bowled. Killick was sent back at 29, and Nason, after helping to put on 42 for the fourth wicket, saw Fry stumped at 71 after batting an hour and a-quarter for 39. The latter was once all but bowled, and when 34 was almost run out, but he gave no actual chance. Neither the elder Relf nor Smith scored, and the total was only 72 when the sixth wicket fell. At this point Robert Relf went in, and began a very valuable innings. At 93 he lost the company of Nason, who scored his 25 out of 64 in an hour and a- half, but afterwards found very useful partners in Cox and Leach, adding 80 in fifty-five minutes with the former and 30 in twenty with the latter. He hit well all round the wicket, and when the innings closed for 210, carried out his bat for 67, made out of 138 in two hours. When Kent went in Humphreys was out in an unusual manner before reaching double figures: he was run out through a ball returned by Dillon glancing off the hand of the bowler (Cox) into his wicket whilst he was out of his ground. Dillon was out shortly afterwards, but Seymour and Hutchings compensated for the early disasters to a certain extent by adding 42 in twenty minutes, the latter, who was then sent back by means of a fine running catch at long-on, claiming 32 of that number. At the end of the day three wickets were down for 63, and on the second morning the bowlers met with such success that the total was only 101 when the seventh wicket fell. Blaker quickly made 19, bftt never looked like settling down. With Mason and Huish together the long-desired stand was made, and after play had been in progress one hundred and ninety minutes the 200 was reached. The pair remained together eighty- five minutes during which time they added 90, and with Fairservice at the wicket the lead of the home side was quickly added to. The ninth wicket put on 98 in fifty-five minutes and the last 35, the result being that Kent could claim an advantage of 143 on the innings. Mason, who scored well all round the wicket and made many fine drives, carried out his bat for 121, made out of 253 in three hours and a-quarter. He was missed when 51 and again when 97, but played delightful cricket. His chief hits were seventeen 4’s. Near the end of the innings Fry resented being ironically cheered whenever he fielded a ball, and it was not until Mason spoke to the offenders that the nuisance was abated. Young and Vine opened the second innings of Sussex together, and played so well that, before the former was bowled, 95 had been made in an hour and a-half. When play ceased for the day the total had been taken to 104 without further loss, Sussex then being only 39 behind with nine wickets in hand. On tho third day Vine and the younger Relf played admir­ ably, despite frequent bowling changes. The pair batted steadily but attractively and were still together at lunch time, when the score was 237 for one wicket. After the interval they remained together until 286, when Vine was caught for 108. The partnership had put on 191 for the second wicket in 185 minutes. Vine hit nine 4’s, but might have been caught when 89 and again ten later. Relf continued to play well, and was not sent back until he had made 210 —the highest score of his career. He made his last 110 in 70 minutes and gave only one chance—when 188, to Mason at square-leg. Ho hit 33 4’s, and, with Fry (37 not out), added 150 for the third wicket in 65 minutes. A draw being regarded as inevitable, the play lacked keenness, but Relf’s hitting was much appreciated. In the last 100 min­ utes Kent made 112 for three wickets, Day, who hit eleven 4’s, carrying out his bat for 60. Score and analysis:— S usshx . First innings. O. B. Fry, st Huish,b Mason 39 Vine,cMason, b Woolley ... 0 R. A. Young, b Woolley ... 0 Killick.c Seymour,b Fielder 12 J. W. W. Nason, b Fielder 25 Relf (A. E.), c Mason,bHum- phreys.......... .......... 0 C.L.A.Smith, b Humphreys 0 Relf (R.), not out................ 67 Oox fG.), b Humphreys ... 34 Leach, c Day, b Fairservice 30 Dwyer, run out ................. 0 Lb 1, nb 2 ................. 3 Second innings. not out................... 37 c Mason, b Wool­ ley ..................108 b Dillon .............60 Seymour, Dillon ... b ...210 B 15, lb 2, w 4 21 Total........................210 Total (3 wkts)*436 •Innings declared closed. K ent . First innings. E. W. Dillon, c R., b A. Relf 9 Humphreys, run ou t.......... 9 not out... Seymour (Jas.), run out .. 36 K. L. Hutchings, c Leach, b A. E. Relf .................32 S. H. Day, c Young, b Oox 3 Woolley, c Cox, b Leach ... 15 J. R. Mason, not ou t..........121 R. N. R. blaker, c Young, b Killick...............................19 Huish, o Young, b Leach... 39 Fairservice,c and b Killick 50 Fielder, b A. Relf ......... 11 Leg-byes ................. 9 Second innings. 10 notout.................60 stYoung.bKillick 11 b Leach b Leach 23 6 B 1, nb 1 Fielder ... Woolley ... Humphreys Mason Fairservice Total....................... 353 Total (3 wkts) 112 S ussex . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W . 23 19 13 11 6 5*5 1 4 75 2 3 44 2 ... 2 42 3 ... 24 1 ... 22 1 ... Dillon... Seymour Blaker ... 27 ... 20 ... 23 ... 15 ... 21 ... 17*4 ... 11 ... 1 7 75 0* 3 69 1 10 50 0 3 52 0 6 56 0 3 58 46 0 9 0 Fielder delivered two wides, Humphreys and Woolley one, Field and Woolley one no-ball. C o x .......... Relf (A. E.) Dwyer ... Leach Killick ... K ent . First innings. O. M. R. W. ...... 31 10 89 i 341 11 105 Second innings. O. M. R. W. 18 19 0 31 0 ... 4 67 2 ... 4 52 2 ... 1 0 5 161 52 2 153 53 1 Leach delivered one no-ball. C RICKET Report Sheets, lOd. per dozen, post free. Order of Going-in Cards, 7d. per dozen, post free; Cricket Score Books, 6 d. and Is. each; postage 2d. extra.—To be obtained at the Offices of “Cricket,” 168, Upper Thames Street, London, E.O.