Cricket 1908

IO O CRICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. A p r il 30, 1908. and 74, and headed the batting averages at the end of the tour, he and Hardstaff shar­ ing the honours of the trip. The Englishmen opened their programme in great style, beating both West Aus­ tralia and South Australia with ease, play­ ing a fine up-hill game with Victoria, obtaining a wonderful victory over New South Wales, and beating Queensland with­ out the least trouble. After winning the second Test match by a.single wicket, how­ ever, their only other successes were against Tasmania and a side which was practically, though not nominally, the second eleven of Victoria. It was a very disappointing finish to a tour which opened in most pro­ mising fashion, but, as already mentioned, there were extenuating circumstances. Crawford, Fielder and Barnes bowled ex­ tremely well in the Test matches, and, not­ withstanding that Rhodes’ wickets cost 60 runs each and Braund’s 92, and that Blythe took only one and had 88 runs scored from him, the attack was only once really mastered—by Hill and Hartigan at Ade­ laide. It was in batting that the side failed. How weak the Englishmen were in this department of the game compared with their opponents is*very evident from the fact that the former had only five players who averaged 25 an innings whilst the Australians had eleven. England in­ variably started well in the Test matches, but it would surely have been wiser not to have commenced the attack so frequently with Fielder and Barnes ; either of the fast bowlers with a left-hander or a slow bowler at the other end would have provided a contrast and so have prevented the batsmen settling down so soon. In the circum­ stances, it was not altogether surprising that the slow bowlers should prove ineffec­ tive, for they were generally put on when batsmen had got their eye in and become set. Missed catches—all part of the game —contributed in no small measure to the loss of the rubber, though defeat in the first match was obviously due to the in­ judicious substitution of Young for Hum­ phries as wicket-keeper. It has been said that the umpiring was frequently at fault, but that is a matter one would rather not dwell upon ; besides, umpires are but human and, therefore, always liable to err, and one is apt to remember an irritating decision whilst forgetting a mistake which causes one to benefit. Although our sole success in the series was by a single wicket, it was a splendid victory considering the up-hill game which had to be played in the last innings. The result naturally gave rise to no little enthusiasm in this country, but Australia’s win by two wickets in the previous game, at Sydney, was little less meritorious, for Saunders, the only man left to go in, was notoriously unreli­ able as a batsman. We lost the rubber on our merits. The majority of the English­ men had little, if any, experience of repre­ sentative cricket, and, however promising a young cricketer may be, he cannot be ex­ pected to blossom all at once into a Test- match player. Disappointing as the tour undoubtedly was, good will come of it, as it has enabled some of those who will be England’s Test-match players in future years to obtain experience of big cricket. A careful study of the matches leads one to imagine that present-day Australian bowl­ ing is not particularly strong, but what there was was splendidly handled by Noble, who captained his side with rare skill and discrimination. Little was seen during the tour of Duff, Diamond and Hopkins, and nothing of Mackay and Garnsey, but it Lost. Drawn. Total 4 ... 0 ... 5 0 ... 1 1 0 ... 1 ... 1 0 ... 1 ... 2 0 ... 0 ... 1 0 ,.. 1 ... 2 0 ,.. 1 ... 2 0 ... 1 ... 2 0 ... 1 ... 1 0 1 ... 2 4 7 18 0 1 1 4 8 19 w as m ade abu ndantly clea r that A u stralia possesses m an y y o u n g players o f the grea test possibilities. T h e E n glish m en played 19 m atch es— o f w h ich , by-th e-w ay, C rick et w as the on ly paper in the w orld to g iv e the com p lete scores and analyses— w ith the fo llo w in g r e s u lts :— Against. W on. A u stra lia .................... t Australian XT., An 0 Bendigo X V III. ... 0 New South Wales 1 Queensland ... 1 South Australia ... 1 T asm ania.................... 1 Victoria .................... 1 Victorian X I., A ... 0 W est Australia ... 1 First-Class ... 7 Against Odds... 0 Totals ... 7 Appended are the particulars of the games in the order in which they were played:— v. W est Australia, at Perth, October 26, 28 and 29. England, 402; West Australia, 152 and 116. England won by an innings and 134 runs, v. South Australia, at Adelaide, November 9, 11,12 and 13. South Australia, 343 and 134 ; England, 660 for eight wickets, innings declared closed. England won by an innings and 183 runs, y. Victoria, at Melbourne, November, 15, 16, 18, 19 and 20. Victoria, 233 and 463; England, 19S and 422 for nine wickets. Drawn, v. New South Wales, at Sydney, November 22, 23 and 25. England, 304 and 301; New South Wales, 101 and 96. England won by 408 runs, v. Queensland, at Brisbane, November 30 and December 2. Queensland, 78 and 186; England, 308. England won by an innings and 44 runs, v. An Australian X I., at Brisbane, December 6, 7, and 9. An Australian X I., 299 and 110 for two wickets ; England, 223. Drawn, v. A u s t r a lia , at Sydney, December 13, 14, 16, 17, 18 and 19. England, 273 and 300; Australia, 300 and 275 for eight wickets. Australia won by two wickets. v. A Victorian X I., at South Melbourne, December 21, 23 and 24. England, 503 for nine wickets, innings declared closed; A Victorian X I., 488 for nine wickets. Drawn, v. X V III. of Bendigo, at Bendigo, December 26, 27 and 28. England, 213; Bendigo, 55. Drawn, v. A u s t r a l i a , at Melbourne, January 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7. Australia, 266 and 397 ; England, 332 and 282 for nine wickets. England won by one wicket, v. A u s t r a lia , at Adelaide, January 10, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 16. Australia, 285 and 506; England, 363 and 183. Australia won by 245 runs, v. Tasmania, at Launceston, January 18, 20 and 21. E d gland, 321 and 249; Tasmania, 276 and 174. England won by 120 runs, v. Tasmania, at Hobart, January 24, 25 and 27. England, 465; Tasmania, 113 and 317 for eight wickets. Drawn, v. Victoria, at Melbourne, February 1, 3 and 4. England, 338 and 241 for four wickets, innings declared closed; Victoria, 77 and 172. England won by 330 runs, v. A u s t r a lia , at Melbourne, February 7, 8, 10 and 11. Australia, 214 and 385 ; England, 105 and 186. Australia won by 308 runs, v. New South Wales, at Sydney, February 14, 15, 17, 18,19 and 20. England, 298 and 456 ; New South Wales, 368 and 375 for nine wickets, innings declared closed. Drawn, v. A u s t r a lia , at Sydney, February 21, 22, 24, 25, 26 and 27. Australia, 137 and 422; England, 281 and 229. Australia won by 49 runs, v South Australia, at Adelaide, March 2, 3 and 4. England, 404 and 134 for four wickets; South Australia, 445. Drawn, v. W est Australia, at Perth, March 13, 14 and 16. W est Australia, 256 and 265 for seven wickets ; England 362 for seven wickets, innings declared closed. Drawn. AVERAGES FOR THE TEAM IN TEST MATCHES. (A .)—B a ttin g A v e r a g e s . Not Inns. Out. Most. Total. Aver. Gunn CG.) ... 10 ..,. 1 .. 122V. . 462 ... 51*33 Hobbs (J. B.) ... 8 ... 1 .. . 83 .. . 302 .. . 43*14 Hardstaff (J.) ... 10 ... 0 .. . 72 ... 311 .. . 31*10 K . L. Hutchings ... 10 ... 0 ... 126 .. . 273 ... 27 30 Braund (L. C.) ... 10 ... 1 ... 49 .... 233 ... 25-F8 F. L. Fane ... ... 8 ... 0 .. . 50 .. . 192 ... 24 00 Rhodes (W .) ... ... 10 ... 0 .. . 69 .,. 205 .. . 20*50 J. N. Crawford ... 10 ... 1 .. . 62 .. . 162 .. . 18 00 A . O. Jones ... ... 4 ... 0 .... 34 .. . 68 .. . 17*00 Barnes (8 . F.) ... 10 .. 2 .... 38*... 121 . . 15*19 Fielder (A ) ... ... 8 ... 4 .... 20 .. . 53 .. . 13-4 Blythe (C.) ................ 2 ... 0 ... 15... 20..1 0 00 Humphries (J.) ... 6 ... 1 ... 16 ... 44 ... 8*80 R. A . Y ou n g................ 4 ... 0 ... 13 ... 2 7 ... 6*75 Hayes <E. G.) did not play in a Test match. * Signifies not out. (B.)—B owling A verages . Overs. Mdns. Runs. Wkts. Aver. J. N. Crawford ... 237.4 ... 36 ... 742 ... 30 ... 24*73 Fielder (A.) ... 218.3 ... 31 ... 627 ... 25 ... 25-08 Barnes (S. F.) ... 273.2 .. 71 ... 626 ... 24 ... 26 08 Rhodes (W .) ...157.4 ... 42 ... 421 ... 7 ... 60*14 Br*und (L. C.) ...129 ... 21 ... 462 ... 5 ... 92*40 The following also bowled :—• K. L. Hutchings... 11 ... 1 ... 6 3 ... 1 ... 63*00 Blythe (C.) ... 31 ... 6 ... 8 8 ... 1 ... 88*00 Hobbs (J.B .) ... 7 ... 3 ... 13...0 ... — The Englishmen scored 2,584 runs (including lit extras) in the five matches for 99 wickets, average 26’10; the Australians 3,187 runs (including 145 extras) for 98 wickets, average 32*52. AVERAGES AGAIN ST THE TEAM IN TEST MATCHES# (S. A. signifies South Australia, V . Victoria, N .S.W New South Wales, and Q. Queensland.) (A .)—B atting A verages . Not Inns. out. Most. Total. Aver. W . W . Armstrong ( V .) ........................... 10 ... 1 ... 133*... 410 ... 45 55 H. Carter (N.S.W .)... 10 ... 3 ...66...300 . 42*85 R. J. Hartigan (Q.)... 4 ... 0 ...116...170...42*50 M. A. Noble (N .S.W .) 10 ... 0 ...65...396... 39*60 C. Hill (8.A.) 10 ... 0 ...160...360...36*00 S.E. Gregory (N.S.W .) 4 ... 0 ... 56 ... 139 ... 34*75 V. T. Trumper (N.S.W .) ............... 10 ... 0 ... 166 ... 338 ... 33*80 V. Ransford (V.) ... 10... I .. 54 ... 288 ... 32*00 G. Hazlitt (V.) ... 4... 2 ... 34'.. 56 ... 28*00 C. G. Macartney (N.S.W .) ............... 10... 0 ... 75 ... 273 ... 27*30 A. Cotter (N .S.W .)... 4 .. I .. 33*... 79 ... 26*33 P. A. McAlister (V.) 8 ... 0 ... 41 ... 155 ... 19*37 J .A .O ’Connor (S.A.) 6... 1 ... 2 0 ... 65..1 3 00 J. V. Saunders (V,)... 9... 2 ... 9 ... 13 ... 1*85 * Signifies not out. (B .)—B owling A verages . Overs. Mdns. Rns. Wkts. Aver. J.V . Saunders (V.) 267.1 ... 52 ... 716 .. 31 .. 23 09 J. A . O’Connor (S.A.) ............... 107 ... 21 ... 300 .. 12 .. 25*00 W . W . Armstrong (V.) ............... 180.1 ... 63 ... 361 ... 14 ... 23*78 C. G. Macartney (N.S.W .) ... 102.1 ... 20 ... 266 ... 10 ... 26 60 M. A. Noble (N.S.W .) ... 147 ... 42 ... 299 ... 11 ... 27*18 A . Cotter (N.S.W .) 108.5 ... 8 ... 426 ... 14 ... 30*42 The following also bow led: — R. J. Hartigan(Q.) 2 ... 0 ... 7 ... 0 ... — G. Hazlitt (V.) ... 28 ... 6 ... 9 8 ... 0 ... — AVERAGES FOR THE TEAM IN A L L FIRST CLASS MATCHES. (A .)—B atting A verages . N ot Inns. out. Most. Total. Aver. Gunn (G.) ............... 18 ... 3 ... 122*... 817 ... 54*46 Hardstaff (J.) ... 28 ... 2 ... 135 ...1360 ... 52 30 Rhodes (W .) ... 27 ... 8 .. 119 ... 929 ... 48 89 Hobbs (J. B.) ... 22 ... 1 ... 115 ... 8/6 ... 41*71 A. O. J o n e s ............... 15 ... 1 ... 119 ... 518 ... 37*00 Braund (L.C.) ... 25 ... 3 ... 160 ... 7 3 ... 35 59 K. L. Hutchings ... 28 ... 0 ... 126 ... 953 . 34 03 F. L. F a n e ................ 24 ... 1 ... 133 ... 774 ... 33*65 J. N. Crawford ... 24 ... 1 ... 114 ... 610 ... 26*52 Barnes (S. F.) ... 19 ... 4 ... 9 3 .. 312 ... 22*80 R. A . Young ... 15 ... 0 ... 59 ... 260 ... 17*33 F ie ld e r(A )............. 16 ... 8 ... 50*... 134 ... 16'75 Hayes (E. G.) .. 14 ... 0 ... 98 *230 ... 16 42 Blythe (C.) . ... 14 ... 1 ... 27*... 145 ... 11*15 Humphries (J.) •• 13 ... 1 ... 16 ... 92 ... 7 66 ‘ Signifies not out. The following individual scores of 50 or over were made for the side:— Barnes (S. F.) v. West Australia, at Perth ... 93 Braund (L. C.) v. South Australia, at Adelaide 160 Braund (L. C.) v. New South Wales, at Sydney *132 Braund (L. C.) v. Victoria, at Melbourne ... 62 Braund (L. C.) W est Australia, at Perth 59 J. N. Crawford v. South Australia, at Adelaide 114 J. N. Crawford v. Victoria, at Melbourne ... 69 J . N. Crawford v. Australia, at Adelaide ... 62 J N. Crawford v. South Australia, at Adelaide 54 F. L. Fane v. West Australia, at Perth....... 133 F. L. Fane v. New South Wales, at Sydney ... 101 F. L. Fane v. Tasmania, at Hobart ........ 62 F. L. Fane v. South Australia, at Adelaide ... 59 F. L. Fane a Australia, at M elb ou rn e....... 59 Fielder (A.) v. A Victorian X I., at South Mel­ bourne .............................................................. Gunn (G.) v. Australia, at Sydney *50