Cricket 1909

212 CR ICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. J une 24, 1909. Among the many fine players turned out during Stephenson’s time were W. S. Patterson, A. P. Lucas, T. R. Fleming, D. Q. Steel, Huph Rotherham—“ Bother ’em,” as he was nicknamed after meeting with more than ordinary success on a Rovers tour—S. Christopherson, G. Mac­ Gregor, the brothers Whitwell. Gerald Bardswell, C. E. M. Wilson, and T. L. Taylor. H. B. Steel also was at Uppingham, but at the time of the Borth crisis was trans­ ferred to Repton, and subseqnently played against his old school: F. D. Gaddum left at the same time and afterwards did well at Rugby. Mr. Patterson mentions the very interesting rumour that A. G. Steel was intended for Uppingham, but that some trifling matter like a delayed letter caused a change to be made. “ It may be allowable to speculate, and ask------If he was so great at Marlborough, what would he have been under Stephenson?” A. P. Lucas, like one or two others who made a name for them­ selves, was in residence at Uppingham before “ H. H.” arrived. Butin the case of most of them, and especially in that of Lucas, Stephenson improved their play to a very great extent. But for his coaching, it is probable that Lucas would have been only a back player. J. G. Beevor and C. E. Green had, of course, left Uppingham some years before “ H. H.” entered upon his duties. The latter, who was played origin­ ally for his bowling, was in the Eleven for six seasons, being only twelve years of age when he first obtained a place in the side. In the pre-Stephensonian days various professionals had been engaged for a short period at the beginning of the season, but their influence left no permanent mark on the School’s cricket. Among them were Roger Iddison—“ a genial, thick-set man, an 1 a slow bowler”—Edgar Willsher, and Galpin. The Rev. Edward Thring, who was head­ master from 1853 until his death in 1887, although only a poor performer himself, played an important part in the development of the School’s cricket. He took part in House games until he was nearly fifty years of age, and near the close of his life he wrote to another great educationalist: “ Mark me, cricket is the greatest bond of the English- speaking race, and is no mere game.” During his last appearances in the field he “ bowled a fast underhand ball with some spin, and sometimes more than one bounce before reaching the wicket. Sometimes also, with a burst of almost superhuman energy, the ball would rer-ch the wicket-keeper’s hands without touching the ground at all. Nay, it was known occasionally to be a “ wide” over the batsman’s head, and more than once to become a full pitch into the hands of the long-stop. Such was the variety of the head-master. While the over was at the other end, he stood at short-slip with his hands in an old pair of washleather gloves, which he removed each time before handiog them, together with an old, black wide-awake hat, to the umpire. His trousers would always be the same absolutely black habiliments to which we were accustomed every day, suspended by the braces which we find in all old ciicket prints prior to 1850. His shirt was of dark grey flannel. In fact, in appearance and his style of bowling he recalled the cricket of very early Victorian days.” His heart was always in its right place if his deliveries were not. The first entry in his diary reads : “ On the 10th Sep­ tember, 1853, I entered on my head-master- ship with the very appropriate initiation of a whole holiday and a cricket match, in which, I recollect, I got 15 by some good swinging hits, to the great delight of my few pupils.” Mr. Patterson says of him : “ Hospitable, genial, and strenuous by nature, his heart warmed towards the boy who was enthusi- a-tic and keen about the cricket of the school.” The book is excellently illustrated aud will probably interest very many besides those for whom it was primarily intended. YORKSHIRE v. LEICESTERSHIRE. Played at Dewsbury on June 17, 18 and 19. Yorkshire won by an innings and 21 runs. The home side, who were captained by Hunter in the absence of Radcliffe, batted all Thursday for 390 for seven wickets. After Rhodes had been caught- and-bowled at 24, Denton and Wilson added 170 for the second wicket in 115 minutes. Denton was missed when 24 by Astill off King, but Wilson made no mistake. The latter made 109 out of 194 in 160 minutes and hit fourteen 4’s, the majority of them powerful drives. Wilkinson remained in an hour whilst 80 were put on for the third wicket, and very soon after I)is departure Denton was sent back for 129 made out of 258 in 190 minutes : he hit twenty- two 4’s and made only the one mistake mentioned. Hirst and Bates made very useful scores, but their cricket was overshadowed by that of Wilson and Denton. The three outstanding wickets put on only 20 runs, and the innings, after lasting 350 minutes, closed for 410 Leicestershire gave promise of making a good score, for Knight and Whitehead made 49 for the first wicket and King and Coe 82 for the fourth. The sixth wicket, however, fell at 167, and it was due very largely to a partnership of 43 by Crawford and Astill that the total reached 235. Rhodes took six wickets for 68 runs. In the follow- on Leicestershire made 32 for the loss of Knight by the end of the day, and on the next morning quickly lost three wickets for 12 runs on a pitch affected by rain. Although Coe and Astill afterwards remained together for 90 minutes and put on 72, the innings closed for 154. In the whole match Rhodes took twelve wickets for 115 runs. Score and analysis :— Y o r k s h ir e . Rhodes, c and b Jayes 11 Wilson, c Hazlerigg, b Astill............................109 Denton, c Wood, b Jayes............................129 Wilkinson, c King, b Wood..............................24 Hirst, c Coe, b Astill... 52 Rothery, hit wkt, b King ............................13 Bates, b W o o d ....... 32 Myers, b Jayes........15 Newstead, c Shields, b Jayes ................... 2 Haigh, c Shipman, b K in g........................... 6 Hunter, not out ... 4 B 4, lb 7, w 1, nb 1 13 Total . 410 L e ic e s t e r s h ir e . First innings. Knight, c Hirst, b Rhodes 27 Whitehead, c and b Haigh 24 C. J. B. Wood, c Newstead, b Rhodes Second innings, c Wilson, b Myers 10 c Hunter, b Myers 22 c Hunter, bMyers King, c Rothery, b Rhodes 40 c and b Rhodes... Coe, c Haigh, b Rhodes ... 48 V. F. S. Crawford, c Bates, b Myers .......................... 47 Jayes, b R hodes................... 0 Astill, c and b H irst........... 5 Shipman, b Myers ........... 0 Sir A. Hazlerigg, not ou t... 11 J. Shields, Ibw, b Rhodes... B 8, lb 11 ................... Rothery, Rhodes ........... c Newstead, b Rhodes ........... c Hunter, b Rhodes ........... c Haigh, b New­ stead .......... c and b Rhodes... c Wilkinson, b Rhodes ........... not out ........... Lb 3, nb 1 ... Total ...235 Total.......... 154 Y o r k s h ir e . O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Jayes ... 33 7105 4 1Astill ... 32 6 92 2 King ... 35-1 9 97 2 Wood ... 12 1 42 2 Shipman... 17 3 53 0 |C oe........... 3 1 8 0 Jayes bowled one no-ball and Shipman one wide. L e ic e s t e r s h ir e . Hirst Newstead Haigh ... Rhodes ... Myers First innings. O. M. R. W . Second innings. , 24 , 22 . 19 22-5 4 42 1 . 56 0 39 1 , 68 6 . 11 2 . O. . 10 . 11 , 7 191 11 M R. W. 0 33 0 3 27 1 2 17 0 4 47 6 2 26 3 Myers delivered one no-ball. ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS. L. C. H. (Dartmouth.)—Many thanks for mentioning the matter, which has been seen to. MIDDLESEX v. ESSEX. Played at Lord’s on June 17, 18 and 19. Middlesex won by an innings and 84 runs. Winning the toss, Middlesex batted the whole of the first day, scoring during that time 349 for seven wickets. They lost Warner to the first ball sent down, but Tarrant and Hendren remained together 130 minutes, during which tim e 145 runs were put on for the second wicket. Hendren when 42 was missed at square-leg off Mead, and 15 later was let off in the same place again off Reeves : he reached 50 in 75 minutes, and hit well all round the wicket, although only four 4’s were included in his innings. Litteljohn made only a single, but Murrell hit well and of the 75 added in an hour for the fourth wicket claimed 40: he hit six 4’s. Tarrant, who had made 50 in 80 minutes, reached 100 out of 225 in 205 m inutes: altogether, he made 129 in 230 minutes before being caught at mid-off for a faultless innings which contained eleven 4’s. The sixth wicket fell at 277, but in the last 45 minutes of the day Hebden and Trott added 72 without being parted. In all, the eighth wicket put on 97 in 85 minutes and the total reached 396, in which Mead did well to take five wickets for 84. Hebden batted two hours for his 62, and hit four 4’s in his sound innings. When Essex went in Mignon quickly brought about a series of disasters. After Fane had made a 4, Douglas was caught at slip and Perrin bowled with consecutive balls, and with the total unchanged Fane played-on to Tarrant. Gillingham tried to knock Mignon off, but, after losing Freeman at 28, was himself bowled at 60, when half the side were out. Reeves then joined McGahey, and the pair effected such an improvement that the 100 went up without further loss as the result of 90 minutes’ play. Eleven runs later, howTever, Reeves was bowled by Hearne (J. W ), the wicket having put on 51 in 40 minutes. McGahey made his 38 in 70 minutes and was seventh out, at 127. After the eighth wicket had fallen at 142, Buckenham and Benham indulged in the most remunerative stand of the innings, the pair adding 53 during the 50 minutes they were together. With 25 extras, the total reached 200 and the side followed-on 196 in arrears. Whatever hope they had of saving the game soon disappeared, for Fane and Perrin were out for 19—the later obtained “ spectacles ’’—and by the end of the day six wickets were down for 40. On Saturday the last four wickets added 66, leaving Middlesex with the easiest of victories. Benham made some capital off-drives and carried out his bat for 37. One of the most pleasing features of the match was the success of Trott as a bowler. Score and analysis:— M id d l e s e x . P. F. Warner, c Ben­ ham, b Buckenham 0 Tarrant, c McGahey, b Mead .................. 129 Hendren (E ),c Douglas, b Buckenham...........70 E. S. Litteljohn, b Douglas ................... 1 Murrell, b Douglas ... 40 Hearne (J. W.), lbw, b Mead .................. 9 E ss e x . First innings. F. L. Fane, b Tarrant ... 4 J. W. II. T. Douglas, cTrott, b M ig n on .......................... 0 P. A. Perrin, b Mignon ... 0 Freeman (J.), c Murrell, b Mignon ........................... 5 Rev. F. H. Gillingham, b T r o tt..................................25 C. P. McGahey, st Murrell, b Trott .......................... 3S Reeves, b J. W. Hearne ... 28 Russell (E.), b T rott.......... 12 Buckenham, st Murrell, b T r o t t ..................................35 Benham, c Murrell, b Trott 26 Mead (W.), not out .......... 2 B 19, lb 6 ...................25 C. V. Baker, c Fane, b Douglas ...........10 G. L. Hebden, not out 62 Trott (A. E.), b Mead 42 Bearne (J. T.), c Russell, b Mead... 0 Mignon, b Mead ... 11 B 13, lb 7, nb 2 ... 22 Total ...396 Second innings, b Trott.................. 5 lbw, b Mignon ... 29 c M u r r e ll, b M ig n on .......... 0 b Trott........... c and b Trott lbw, b Trott st Murrell,b Trott 11 not out..................37 b Mignon ... 0 B 4 lb 4 ... 8 Total ...200 T otal.........112 M id d l e s e x . O. M. R. W. Buckenham 31 8 88 2 I McGahey Douglas ... 37 13 89 3 Benham.. Mead.......... 29 5 84 5 Reeves O. M. R. W. 1 33 0 1 24 0 1 56 0 Douglas delivered two no-balls. E ss e x . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Tarrant............. 8 0 24 1 ............. Mitrnon..............20 3 59 3 ............. 21 4 42 3 Trott .......... 21*4 5 63 5 ........... 22'2 5 60 5 Hearne (J. W.) 5 2 12 1 ............ Hearne (J. T.) 5 1 160 ............ 2 0 2 0 Hendren ... 1 01 0 ..............