Cricket 1907

the matches. From 1875 to 1880 he could play only iu the holidays, but his successes were so many, and his form so promising, that it was felt an effort ought to be made to secure his services permanently. For many years he as regularly as clock­ work headed the Surrey averages, scoring more and more heavily each j ear until in 1885 he reached high water-mark, and the Wisden and Lillywhite of the time compared his doings for Surrey with those of the greatest of all players for Gloucestershire in his very t e it days. Iu 18S3 his average for Surrey was very high, but the mistake made by the animals, of including matches with Minor Counties amongst the first-class averages, has always been persisted in. And here I might be allowed to men­ tion that those statistics of mine in the November issue of Cricket, in which I compared the figures of other most famous batsmen with those of “ W .G.,” did not include, so far as Walter R eal was concerned, a single minor match. In 1885 Walter Read was at his very best and had the greatest aggregate (1880) of the year : his average was 44. " W.G.” sored 1,688 that year, with average of 43, whilst Shrewsbury, with 56, headed the averages but played only about half the innings of the other two great bats­ men. In all matches in 1885, as “ Wan­ derer” gives them, Mr. Read scored 2,134 runs, and averaged 59 27, but these tigures, of course, include his scores of 214 not out and 143 against Essex, which was not then first-class. In 1886 Mr. Rsad and Shrewsbury were bracketed together first in the averages, though tie firmer scored 400 more runs. “ W.G.,” however, both that year and the following, had the highest aggregate. In 1887, Mr. Read’s form was so astonishing that for a time it seemed as if he would break all recoids. In suc­ cession be scored : 118, Surrey v. Oxford University, at Oxford. 74, England v. M.O.C., at Lord’s. 247, Surrey v. Lancashire, at Manchester. 244*, Surrey v. Oambridge Univ., at the Oval. He made 491 for once out in a week. A series of failures in August brought him down, but he still was vary near the top at the end of the season. Proceeding to Australia with Lord Hawks's team, he headed the first-class batting averages with 65 at the end of the tour, and thrice exceeded three figures. The writer well remembers a match of that tour on the Melbourne ground, and the wild cheers which arose (they must have been music in Bojla’s ears as the Melbourne larrikins had been yelling to him to take himself off) and the cries of “ Well bowled, Harry ! ” when Boyle dismissed the great Surrey crack for 12 before he had got properly set. The cheers must have reminded Boyle of those which rang out 14 years before, when he bowled an even greater than “ W .W .” — “ W.G.” himself when in bis prime. Harry Boyle bad a great re­ spect for Walter Read’s abilities, and many a time has the writer, when the English mail came in, prccaeded to Boyle’s shop (the shop he had 16 years ago, where he 2 CRICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE sold cricket things and kept a billiard room), when after “ W .G.” ’s doings had been noted, Boyle always asked “ And what has “ W.W.” done in his matches?” The next year saw “ W.W.” still in great form, when he actually headed the batting averages, though far behind “ W.G.” in aggregate. It was the wettest season ever known, that of 1888, and yet it was the year of Walter Read’s highest score, his 338 v. Oxford University, at the Oval. This occupied him only 6J hours, and he hit a 5 and no fewer than forty- six 4’s. In 1889 he was not quite so prominent, but in 1890, with “ W.G.,” ' Shrewsbury, Gunn, and Ulyett, was again a scorer of over 1000 runs, and was selected to play in all the matches for England v. Australia. The wet season of 1891 did not find him in his best form, but in 1892 and 1893 he did very well indeed and played some splendid innings, being chosen again for England at the Oval in 1893, when he played a fine innings of 52. From that time until he ceased playing for Surrey, in 1897, he was not the brilliant player of his best day. Still, he was quite worth his place in the Surrey eleven, and still good enough for the Gentlemen, whom he last played for at the Oral in 1896, and there were not a few people who thought that he should not have retired so soon as he did from first-class cricket. Amongst Mr. Read’s finest innings were his 159 against the Players in 1885, when the crowd 6Djoyed a rare treat in seeing ‘ ‘W.G.” and ‘ ‘ W.W.” in partnership together to the extent of some 140 runs ; his 109 for the Gentlemen against the Australians in 1888 in the match in which “ W .G.” made his famous 1C5, at one time scoring 50 in 25 minutes; his 160 v. Kent, at Maidstone in 1881, which included three 6's and twenty-nine 4’s ; his double century against the Phila­ delphians (105 and 130) in 1889, which, however, being made for Gentlemen of Surrey, did not rank as a first-class match; but the innings, which has always been considered his very finest as to merit, was his much-written-about 117 for England v. Australia in 1884. This was the match when all the English bowlers, even including Shrews­ bury and the wicket-keeper, Hon. A. Lyttelton, had to take a turn with the ball, as the Australians compiled the huge total of 551 and Murdoch played his great innings of 211. When England went in, their Cnampion, “ W. G. ” — what was rare with him—was run out for 19, and wickets fell so fast that eight were down for 181. It was then that Walter Read, who had begged to be sent in late, partnered Scotton, who had been stonewalling all the time, and had then made 53. Mr. Read scored with astonish - ing freedom all round the wicket, hitting as many as twenty 4’s in his innings of 117 from the bowling of Spofforth, Palmer, Boyle, Giffen and Midwinter. Mr. Read scored his runs in about 2J hours; Scotton batted 5f hours for 90; England’s total was 346, and the match was saved. This was not the only match in which GAME. J an . 31, 1907. the famous Notts stonewaller justified his selection for England, as two years after­ wards he helped “ W.G.” to put on 170 for the first wicket, of which Scotton’s share was 34, iu the match in which “ W.G.” scored 170 out of 216, and England won easily in an innings. In this second match Walter Read also did well, play­ ing a baautiful and faultless innings of 94. Scotton, at one time, had been a free h itter, though he developed in to a “ stonewaller ” of as pronounced a type as Barlow, though he had a far more Btylish method of play than the old Lancashire batsman. Barlowwas cramped in his movements and played back when­ ever he could; Scotton had an upright style, and used to stretch his left leg out and play nearly every ball back to the bowler, or to mid-off or on. But very bad balls, long-hops and full pitches to leg, Scotton could crack to the boundary as well as any man. But Punch’s lines, a la Tennyson, may here be quoted, as expressive of the feel­ ings of most spectators in connection with Scotton’s play : — Oh ! well for the howler, my hoy, That each ball, like a barn-door you play, And well for the fieldsman too, That you stop at the wickets all day ! And the clock’ s slow hands go on ! And you still keep up your sticks, But oh ! for the lift of a smiting hand, And the sound of a swipe for s ix ! Block, block, b lock ! A t the foot of the wickets, ah do ! But an hour of Grace or of Walter Read Were worth a week of you ! Yet iu the matches Lreferred to above> if it had not been for poor Scotton, they might not have enjoyed their hour of Grace or Walter Read ! From the figures in the November issue of Cricket it will be seen that W. W. Read batted 686 times in first- class cricket, and had an average of over 30 for every innings he played. He was Surrey’s greatest batsman. Everyone who ever saw him will recollect his habit of twisting his bat and placing the ball on the leg-side. As a leg-hitter he has been likened to George Parr; he did not cultivate the square-cut much, though his late cuts between the slips weremucti admired; but his most famous stroke, apart from the characteristic pulls of his later days, was the stroke witn horizontal bat which sent the ball between point and cover like a shot from a gun. W. W. Read and Wm, Barnes, of Nottingham, were the two greatest exponents of that particular stroke that I have ever seen, and only men of fine physique and un­ erring eye would dare to attempt it. Tne exercise of great power with little apparent effort was the characteristic of Walter Read at his best. Strong- wristed, he seemed to push the ball to the boundary. What Daft wrote about “ W.G.” in tiis “ Kings of Cricket ” may also be applied to W. W .:—“ There was never any show about his play, and only supreme judges of the game could appre­ ciate his immense ability.” As regards comparing him with Abel and Hayward in more recent years it will be sufficient to note that the gulf which