Cricket 1908

D e c . 24, 190 8. CR ICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 467 The construction of the Demon Drivers is fully described in 7 he Evolution of a Cricket Bat , which may be obtained free upon applica­ tion. IMF ROVED WAKE KEEP THEIR SHAPE-LAST LONCER| ^ CATALO GU E UPON APPLIC ATION . CATALOGU E UPON APPLICATION . CATALOGU E UPON APPLIC ATIO N . M p RWHfLLS IMPROVEDMAKE-KEEPTHEIR SHAPE-LASTLONGER V P CATALO GU E UPON APPLICATION . CA TA LO GU E UPON APPLICATION TO GEO. G. BUSSEY & Co., L td ., 36 & 38, Queen Victoria St., LONDON. Manufactory— Timber Mills— PECKHAM, S.E. ELMSWELL, SUFFOLK. Agents all over the world. ABOUT THE CHAMPIONSHIP. T h e r e was published in the November issue of Cricket an article by “ H. P.-T.,” entitled “ About the Championship: A New Divisional Idea,” wherein the suggestion was made that the present list of first-class counties should be divided into groups, as in the Football League. Copies of the article were sent to several well-known persons in the cricket world, who were asked to favour us with their views on the subject for reproduc­ tion in Cricket. The great majority of those communicated with have responded to the appeal and are thanked veryheartily for allow­ ing their opinions to be made public. Doubt­ less the other players and officials would have expressed their views also bad they not feared that their opinions might in some quarters be taken as those of the Counties they repre­ sent either on the field or in a secretarial or administrative capacity. The fact should, therefore, be emphasised that the views set forth in the letters which follow are unofficial so far as the County Clubs with which the various writers are identified are concerned. As was only to be expected, there is much diversity of opinion concerning the proposal: in fact, judging from the letters which follow, the suggested change has not been very favourably received. It is evidently felt that the meetings of first-class counties in matches outside the Championship Competi­ tion would not attract the public. It may also be doubted whether, in the event of the proposal ever being taken up officially, the counties would consent to a scheme which in any way interfered with their free choice of opponents: at the same time, financial considerations in the way of “ gate ” might compel them to consider the fancies of the public, for “ He who pays the piper can call the tune.” Lord Harris writes :— As long as the Kent XI. plays good cricket I am very indifferent to the method by which the merits of the County Elevens are computed. The present system has been criticised adversely ever since it was instituted, and efforts have been made to alter it, but unsuccessfully ; from which I am led to infer that in the opinion of the majority of representative cricketers it is, at the worst, as good a system as any alternative that has been sug­ gested. As to forming “ Divisions ” of the first-class coun­ ties I do not see any particular advantage in it as far as Kent is concerned. As long as we can afford it, I suppose we shall go on playing about the same number of counties, because we try to arrange that the County Eleven shall visit all parts of the county and so suit the convenience of as many subscribers as possible. Sir Home Gordon, Bart., in tbe course of the following interesting crmmunication, points out that he has at various times made similar proposals, and that he is therefore naturally in favour of the scheme. He says:— In reply to your invitation asking for my views on the article by “ H. P.-T.” entitled “ About The Championship: A New Divisional Idea,’ 1 beg to deny any novelty except the change in dividing the two divisions into nine counties and seven respectively, which gives the second division too limited a number of matchcs. At least five years ago I brought forward in the liadminton Mugazine a proposal for dividing the championship into two classes, A and B, each of eight counties, each county to play out and home engagements with every other of the same division, whilst at the close of the summer the champion county of the B division should play out and home fixtures with the lowest county of the A division to decidc which county should be in A in the following season. I have repeatedly re-published this proposal, last cricket season for instance in my “ Chat ” in Cricket , in a letter to The Sportsman, in the National Review , in The Taller , and elsewhere. Naturally, 1 am therefore a cordial advocate of what “ H. P.-T.” brings forward in such able fashion. The matter was discussed at length when I lunched with the Essex amateurs and Lord Hawke on the third day of Yorkshire v. Essex at Leyton. Tho only opponent was Mr. Douglas, because he believed the gates of the Second Division would be affected if matches with Yorkshire and Surrey were ex­ traneous. This I do not agree with, and the gate for, say, Supsex v. Derbyshire or Essex v. Leices­ tershire would certainly be trebled. Obviously, only prompt and active agitation at once initiated can cause the Divisional scheme to be tried in 1910. I anticipate its adoption about 1916, when the old gang will have gone, when counties no longer decline to meet other counties because the captains do not like one another, and when “ What was good enough in our young days ” is no longer a Law of the Medes with some individuals on and off Com­ mittees. When all play for their side and not for themselves, when sham amateurs are excluded and average-mongers are discouraged, there will be in­ ducements for the new men of the highest class to come forward, whereas their regrettable but quite natural absence in 1909 will make the England Eleven be composed entirely of the old stagers— then the Divisional scheme will prove the salvation of first-class cricket. Mr. P. F. Warner says :— I am dead against two divisions. Old counties who have done a great deal for the game, like Surrey for instance, should not be put into the Second Division because of one bad season. Middle­ sex, fourteenth in 1902, were first in 1903 ! And, further, would anyone care to see Second Division cricket ? Mr. F. C. Toone, the Yorkshire Secretary, sends the following:— So much discussion has taken place on the present system of deciding the County Championship that the controversy is really becoming too tiresome. I have always held—but perhaps I am considered a little too conservative in this matter—that the present method of deciding the County Champion­ ship is not one to be readily disturbed. I mean if all the suggestions, some sound and some other­ wise, were taken seriously into account, then our glorious game would bear the same fate as some other pastimes one could mention. But, fortunately, the true tenets of our National Game have not been materially disturbed by the “ advice” given by certain writers on what they consider to be the correct and proper way of deciding this all-important matter. You will see by the above observations that rather than take up the suggestion to formulate a scheme for the better (?) management of this Competition— I dislike the word— I prefer to defend the present method of playing county cricket. I am, personally, not opposed to any alterations that would not unduly affect the game, nor is my Committee in any way opposed to reasonable alterations. As proof of this, I need only remind your readers that some little time ago the Yorkshire County Committee moved a resolution that the number of first-class counties should be limited, and, in order to encourage the minor counties, and to test the feeling of the first-class county clubs, suggested that, at the end of each season, the winner of the Minor Counties’ Competition should take the place of the last in the First-Class Counties’ Competition. This was quite as far as the Yorkshire County Committee felt justified in going. For these reasons :—First, Yorkshire feel that the game is played in that spirit which appeals to the true lover of English sport, and not altogether to appease the “ competitive ” demands of a few. Secondly, new first-class counties have been created from time to time with a view to increasing the interest in the game, and this, I think it will be generally conceded, has proved successful. And another reason is that the majority of the counties, if not all, are in favour of the game being conducted as it is at present. These reasons, I venture to submit, form the crux of the whole matter. It may be that before long some alterations will be effected, but I contend that there must be stronger arguments introduced, other than those which have already appeared, before the cricket legislators are convinced that the general public, who love and appreciate the game for the game itself, require “ educating” to the “ Cup-Tie ’ principles in county cricket. Whenever there appears to be a tendency amongst the first-class counties for a change of policy, York­ shire, you may be sure, will be one of the first to adopt means to suit those requirements, but while the present feeling with the shires exists, my Com­ mittee regard it as a duty, in the best interests of the game, and in the interests of those counties less fortunately situated, to favour the continuance of the Championship on its present lines. The points awarded for a win, the method of scoring, &c., arc, really speaking, side issues com­ pared with a wholesale reduction of first-class