Cricket 1909

CR ICK E T : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. J an . 28, 1909 wicket putting 011 140. Noble was then out to a fine running catch by C. Hill for a faultless innings of 213 made out of 432 in two hundred and seventy-five m inutes: he hit twenty-two 4’s and thoroughly deserved his success. E. F. Waddy made 04 in a couple of hours but his brother failed to score. Barnes played a good game and, with the second half of the side making useful scores, the innings, after lasting eight hours and a-half, closed for 713. At the end of the day South Australia made 21 for the loss of Mayne's wicket. There was rain during Sunday night which ruined the wicket, and the only question was by how much would the visitors win. Gobi's, owing to indisposition, was unable to bat in either innings, and, apart from Pellew’s excellent 37, the batting calls for no remark. New South Wales woh by an innings and 527 runs. Score and analysis:— N ew S outh W ales . A. J. Hopkins, cWood- ford, b O ’Connor ...218 W. Bardsley, c L. R Hill, b Whitty ... 50 M. A. Noble, c C. Hill, b O’Connor ............213 Iiev. E. F. Waddy, b Q u ist..............................04 E. L. W a d d y , b O’C on n or................... 0 S. E. Gregory,c Mayne, b O’Connor ..............21 1 2 3 4 5 J. C. Barnes, c and b Pretty ...................44 C. G. Macartney, b W hitty ...................29 H. Carter, b Pretty .. 15 A. Cotter, n otou t .. 24 S. Emery, b Pretty... 5 B 0, lb 11, w 1, 11 b 0 24 Total 713 131 414 503 570 581 592 008 070 703 713 S outh A u str a lia . First innings. Second innings. E. R. Mayne, c Cotter, b c Barnes b Ma- Emery.................................. 8 cartney ........... 0 K. H. Quist, st Carter, b M acartney.......................... 8 b Noble ........... 0 J. H. Pellew, c Gregory, b Hopkins ...........................11 c Cotter, b Noble 37 C. Hill, c E. L. Waddy, b c Macartney, b Hopkins ...........................28 Noble ............. 1 C. E. Dolling, lbw, b Noble 0 c Bardsley, b Ma­ cartney ........... 11 L. R. Hill, run out ...........11 st Carter, b Ma­ cartney ........... 0 J. A. O’Connor, c Emery, b Hopkins .......................... 0 c Barnes,b Emery 10 J. R. H. Woodford, not out 18 b Noble ........... 4 A. H. Pretty, c Barnes, b M acartney. ................... 1 runout................... 0 W. J. Whitty, b Macartney 4 not out ........... 3 D. R. A. Gehrs, absent ill — absent ill ...........— Byes 5, lb 2, nb 1 ........... 8 Byes 9, nb 2 ... 1-1 Total ...................97 N ew S outh W ales . Total O. M. R. W. O’Connor... 54 11 173 4 IPellew ... 11 0 74 0 L. R. Hill... 27 3 90 0 |Quist .. 10 1 50 1 W hitty ... 29 3 142 2 1C. Hill ... 2 0 11 0 Pretty .. 23-3 0 113 3 Dolling... 2 0 12 0 Gehrs ... 7 2 18 0 | L. R. Hillbowled six 110 -balls, and Gehrs a wide. S outh A u str a lia . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Cotter ........... 5 1 7 0 ............ 0 1 15 0 Emery ........... 5 2 12 1 ............ 2 0 0 1 Macartney ..11-1 2 32 3 ............ 15 4 28 3 H opkins........... 14 3 31 3 ............ 2 0 8 0 Noble ........... 5 2 7 1 ............ 9’4 1 21 4 Macartney bowled two no-balls and Cotter one. At Melbourne 011 December 29tli Victoria beat New South Wales by an innings and 47 runs, scoring 30'.' against 17(5 and 140. Vernon Ransford made 94. At Melbourne on January 7th South Australia defeated Victoria by 15 runs. The total scores were South Australia, 127 and 351 (E. B. Mayne, 142 ; D. R. A. Gehrs, 75) ; Victoria, 340 (V. Ransford, 171 not out) and 117. At Sydney 011 January 12th New South W7ales beat South Australia by nine wickets. The total scores w ere:—New South Wales, 447 (W. Bardsley, 119; C. G. Macartney, 100; S. E. Gregory, 94) and IS for one w icket; South Australia, 272 (D. It. A. Gehrs, 102) and 192. In the match now in progress at Sydney between New South Wales and Victoria the former scored 815 ; Noble making 213, Bardsley 192, and S. E. Gregory 179. ------------- The Athletic Kcics says:— “ The bound volume of Cricket for 1908 is well worth the money of any enthusiast, as it is an exact and chronological record of the game all over the world for the past year. Beautifully illustrated and well printed, we know of 110 book so valuable to players and enthusiasts and so suitable for presentation.” Price 0s., ]>ost free 0s. Od. Offices: 108, Upper Thames Street, London. CORRESPONDENCE. [The Editor does not hold himself responsible for the ojiinions of his correspondents .] THE MANAGEMENT OF CRICKET IN AUSTRALIA. To the Editor of C r ic k e t, S ir , —To people in England it must seem as if all who are concerned with cricket in Australia are a rather quarrelsome set. So also it has appeared to the Australian public, which ha«? often vainly pleaded for a com­ posure of differences. Now, though the players, in their collisions with Boards and Associations, are often regarded in an unsympithetic light, they are not character­ istically obstructive, and from personal acquaintance with several of them I know that they, too, are heartily tired of the exist­ ing condition of friction and would gladly end it. The trouble that is most prominent at the moment concerns money, the division of the surplus of profits on English tours ; but if, therefore, one jumps to the conclusion that individual cupidity on the part of the players is the obstacle to its settlement it shows that he does not understand the whole question, nor the precise point of view of the players in their opposition. The solution of the ques­ tion is not easy, and what the players are fighting for is not always clearly understood. The contest is really betweenwhat is practical and what is merely ideal. The Board of Control, which consists of very worthy gentlemen, but hardly those who have had most expeuence of international cricket, wants the latter, the players the former. It has to be remembered that for Australia to make a match with England she must send the very best side she can produce. It is on this sole condition that she gives herself a chance of winning a Test match. If the three or four best elevens of England met the corresponding ones of Australia, the latter country’s weakness would be found out. Now, to get this absolutely best side over here for eight months at intervals of three years is the problem to which the minds of the players are most directed. In their eyes it is vital—I am here only repeating what has often been expressed in Australia—that the conditions as to finance and everything else must be such as to secure this. The division of the surplus that a side worthy to be matched with England’s first eleven is sure to make has in the past enabled such a side to appear and play in England. If that system be abandoned in favour of some other which the Board of Control may think more desirable there is a risk that truly representative teams will be no longer possible. Unrepresentative sides are not wanted here, and if they come the financial difficulty is likely to change its form ; the question to be considered will not be the division of a surplus but the meeting of a deficit. This is what I mean in describing the contest as one between the practical and the ideal. The leading players are the persons most concerned. They know the con­ ditions of tours, and exactly what they mean. They know the feelings which the invitation to join one excites. Every player is eager and keen for the first opportunity to travel and to play cricket on the historic grounds of this country, and to see its sights. But they also know how, as youth passes into adoles­ cence with its necessity of securing a position in the world, the prospect of a second and still more of a third or fourth tour is a very different thing from that of a first. And yet, unless certain individuals consented to go, the Test matches would be robbed of all interest, because of the absence of the repre­ sentative men. It is always assumed that the best players in Australia will be con­ tinuously available for selection. This is not necessarily the case, and those who have had most experience in touring—the leading players like Darling, Noble, and Hill—know it. One of these has “ passed the chair,” aud though, therefore, no sinister reflection concerning personal interest can be relevant, his attitude is strongly conservative and opposed to the Board of Control. The latter takes the position that if a given player refuses selection a substitute can be easily found. This is manifestly absurd. It will not suffice to select merely an Australian eleven: it must be the be*t Australian eleven. Difficulties exactly similar beset the organi­ sation of the game on any high plane of excellence such as is shown in competitions for County Championships, etc. Where the maintenance of the highest standard of play is imperative the sport cannot be conducted on the lines befitting cricket weeks in country-house grounds. Arrangements to secure the best talent become necessary. It is this that the players realise ; by refusing to admit it the Board of Control renders itself an inefficient instrument for its work. The present series of still unset­ tled troubles in the Australian cricket world began over the constitution of this body. That an effective institution of the kind is desirable is universally admitted, but at the time of the formation of the present Board the counsel of men of such ability and experience as Darling, Noble, Armstrong and others was unwisely rejected by well-meaning but mistaken persons in whose hands an unsatisfactory condition of divided control had placed the balance of power. It is con­ solatory from the point of view of common- sense to perceive from a recent telegram from Melbourne that public opinion has come to realise that an impotent Board is useless, and that a reconstruction of the present one is imperative. In its collisions with leading players the present Board has always claimed to hold public opinion on its side. With that manifestly against it an opening for composure at once becomes apparent. Englaud should recognise its pood fortune in having the M.C.C. estab­ lished on unquestionable foundations. Australia’s experience shows how hard it is to evolve an authority of the kind. When the Australian Board of Control is made representative of cricketing interests from all sides it will work well enough, but it assur­ edly will fail in its office until this is done. On the assumption that real tests of the respective cricket ability of England and Australia are the objective point, the players have the better sense on their side. They did not make the conditions under which the game has to be played—conditions involving a journey of 28,000 miles—but they know them better than anyone and they most justifiably refuse to ignore them. Feasibility is the proper criterion by which to test the disputed points. I enclose my card, and am. Sir, Yours faithfully, “ An Australian in England.” L on d on . New Year’s Day, 1909. R IOHARD DAFT’S “ Nottinghamshire Marl.”— Particulars apply, ltadcliffe-on-Trent, Notts. [A dvt .