Cricket 1909

O c t . 28, igog. CR ICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 437 and 428 runs, inflicted by Surrey on Hamp- shire at the Oval, and the next most pro­ nounced by an innings and 314, the margin by which Kent beat Gloucestershire at Catford. At Tonbridge, during the Week, Lancashire (after declaring with five wickets in hand) defeated Kent by 312 runs— an interesting fact as the latter succeeded in carrying off the Championship. II.— T he B atsmen . Of the one hundred and sixty-six partner­ ships of 100 or more runs during the season the following were the most remunerative :— 393 for 5th, Arnold (200*) and W. B. Burns (196): Worcestershire v. Warwickshire, at Edgbaston., 371 for 2nd, Hayes (276) and Hobbs (205): Surrey v. Hampshire, at the Oval. 355 for 3rd, W. Bardsley (219) and V. S. Ransford (174) : Australians v. Essex, at Leyton. 352 for 1st, Hayward (204*) and Hobbs (159): Surrey v. Warwickshire, at the Oval. 284 for 1st, Knight (163) and J. W. H. T. Douglas (102) : An England Eleven v. Australians, at Blackpool. 237 for 3rd, Sharp (183) and Tyldesley (J. T.) (121): Lancashire v. Worcestershire, at Stourbridge. 235 for 10th, Woolley (185) and Fielder (112*): Kent v. Worcestershire, at Stourbridge. 226 for 4th, Hirst (140) and Wilkinson (89): York­ shire v. Northants, at Hull. 224 for 2nd, Humphreys (208) and Seymour (86): Kent v Gloucestershire, at Catford. 217 for 2nd, Tyldesley (J. T.) (114) and R. H. Spooner (113): Lancashire v. Essex, at Leyton. 216 for 3rd, Kinneir (123) and Quaife (96): War­ wickshire v. Worcestershire, at Worcester. 208 for 1st, A. Hartley (111) and R. H. Spooner (105): Lancashire v. Sussex, at Eastbourne. * Signifies not out. Fresh records were established for the fifth and tenth wickets, whilst the partnership of 284 at Blackpool ranks as the largest ever made for the first wicket against Australian bowling in this country. Furthermore, the stand of 355 by Bardsley and Ransford against Essex is the longest credited to a couple of left-handers in the history of first-class cricket. Hayward and Hobbs have now made 100 or more runs for the first wicket of Surrey on 26 occasions— a remark­ able record for five seasons’ cricket— whilst A. O. Jones and Iremonger (J.) have per­ formed a sim ilar feat for Notts 24 times. (C. B. Fry and Vine indulged in a three- figure stand for Sussex on 33 occasions, and the late Brown (J. T.) and Tunnicliffe 19 times for Yorkshire.) There were twelve instances of a player carrying his bat through a completed in ­ nings during 1909, the particulars being as follows :— 143 W. Bardsley, Australians v. An England Eleven, at Bray (Ireland). 25 F. L. Fane, Essex v. Yorkshire, at Leeds. 91 Gunn (G.), Notts v. Yorkshire, at Nottingham. 96 Hayward, Surrey v. Australians, at the Oval. 00 Hayward, Surrey v. Somerset, at Taunton. 125 A. O. Jones, Notts v. Australians, at Notting­ ham. 137 Knight, Leicestershire v. Warwickshire, at Edgbaston. 88 Mead (C. P.), Hants v. Warwickshire, at Leamington. 272 Relf (R. R.), Sussex v. Worcestershire, at East­ bourne. 55 Tarrant, Middlesex v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol. 37 Vine, Sussex v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol. 102 P. F. Warner, Middlesex v. Surrey, at Lord’s. Of the 157 individual scores of 100 or more W . Bardsley, Hobbs, and V. S. Ransford claimed six each, Denton, Rhodes and Sharp five each and Llewellyn four. Nine of the innings mentioned reached the second hundred : — 276 Hayes, Surrey v. Hampshire, at the Oval. 272* Relf (R. R ), Sussex v. Worcestershire, at Eastbourne. 219 W. Bardsley, Australians v. Essex, at Leyton. 211 W. Bardsley, Australians v. Gloucestershire, at Bristol. 208 Humphreys, Kent v. Gloucestershire, at Catford. 205 Hobbs, Surrey v. Hampshire, at the Oval. 204* Hayward, Surrey v. Warwickshire, at the Oval. 201* Lewis, Somerset v. Kent, at Taunton. 200* Arnold, Worcestershire v. Warwickshire, at Edgbaston. Rhodes made 199 for Yorkshire v. Sussex, at Brighton. No player new to first-class cricket in England succeeded in playing a three-figure innings on the occasion of his first appearance, but W. Bardsley’s opening scores for the Aus­ tralians were 63 v. Notts at Trent Bridge, 76 and 63 not out v. Northants at North­ ampton, 219 v. Essex at Leyton, and 41 (the highest for the side during the innings) v. Surrey at the Oval. Four batsmen made two separate hundreds in a match:— W. Bardsley, Australia v. England, at the j 136 O v a l................................................................. 1 130 Hobbs, Surrey v. Warwickshire, at Edg- (160 baston ..........................................................I 100 G. L. Jessop, Gloucestershire v. Hampshire, I 161 at Bristol......................................................... f 129 Llewellyn, Hampshire v. Sussex, at Brighton | * Signifies not out. Two left-handers are included in the list, one of them an Australian and the other a South African. J. R. Mason was the only cricketer who made three hundreds in con­ secutive innings; his scores (all for Kent) were 179 not out v. Sussex at Brighton, 111 v. Somerset at Taunton, and 152 not out v. Surrey at the Oval: but Hobbs nrssed the distinction by one run only, his innings being— in each case for Surrey— 160 and 100 v. Warwickshire at Edgbaston and 99 v. Essex at the Oval. For Oxford University against Surrey at Reigate M. G. Salter scored 152, J. A. Seitz 120, and C. V. L. Hooman 117, and this was the only occasion during the season upon which three hundreds were made in the course of an innings. (To be continued.) CORRESPONDENCE. [The Editor does not hold himself responsible for the opinions ofhis correspondents. ] A SUGG ESTIO N F R O M U T A H . To the E d ito r o f C ricket . S ir , — On looking at the County Champion­ ship table in a newspaper of August 16th last I was surprised to see the very large number of drawn games, and I think some­ thing should be done to remedy this very unsatisfactory state of affairs. Therefore I beg to make a proposition which I think w’ould ensure a definite result being arrived at in almost every match and one, moreover, which would prove a benefit to the players themselves. In the first place I would suggest that a match, instead of consisting of two innings apiece of ten wickets for each side, should cons:st of Jou r innings apiece, each innings to be concluded on the fall of the fifth wicket. When each side had lost ten wickets, and one possessed a lead of 80 (or 100 ) runs, the team in arrears should be compelled to go in again next for their third innings. In the event of that team passing their opponents’ total the other side would play their third innings in their turn, and should time permit the fourth innings of each team should be played : but, if time did not allow four completed innings, the result would be decided by the total runs of three completed innings, that i 3 to say on the number made upon the fall of the fifteenth wicket of each side. My reason for believing that very many more games would be completed under the above method is that both bowlers and fieldsmen would not be so tired and worn- out in playirg only a five-wicket innings as they are now after perhaps a whole day in the field. The game would be much move “ snappy” and interesting to watch. Then, again, it would tend to cut out the large scores that are made on the almost perfect wickets of to-day : in short, I think on a dry, hard and true wicket it would biiDg the bowler more on a level with the batsman. From these remarks you w ill see that my object is to bring a match to a definite issue at the fall of the fifteenth wicket of each side, i f tw enty cannot be played . As you are very wrell aware, a great number of matches are drawn with only one or two wickets to fall and with one side hopelessly in arrears and literally robbing their opponents of a win. This is only a rough outline for an im ­ provement in the game, but from the above suggestions some of your readers may be able to discover a system which wou!d enable us to see very many more finish* d, and fewer drawn, matches. It appears strange to us over here that something should not be done to diminish the number of drawn matches p’ayed at the national game. Yours very truly, JO H N J. MORRIS. Salt Lake City, Utah, Oct. 4tb, 1909. K E N T AND T H E CH AM PIO N SH IP. To the E d ito r o f C ricket . S ir ,— May I be allowed the hospitality of your columns in orJer to ask whether it is too late for a dinner in Loudon to le arranged by the Kent authorities in celebra­ tion of the county carrying off the honours of the Championship? There must be living in London a large number of Men of Kent and Kentish Men wrho found it impossible to attend last week’s dinner at Canterbury and who would be only too pleased to have the opportunity of attending one in Town. Several persons must, like myself, have been prevented from being present by the knowledge that attendance would have involved spending a week-end away from home, or, at least, returning to London on the Sunday. When Kent won the Championship three seasons ago, the team were entertained at dinner at the Hotel Cecil as w7ell as at Maidstone, aud the success of the Loudon function was so pronounced that it is surprising that arrangements were not made for a similar one to take place this 3 ear. Again I ask, Is it too late for the matter to be remedied ? Yours faithfully, London, “ O XON IAN .” 25th October, 1909. BOOKS R E C E IV E D . One Dai / and Another.- -By E. V. Lucas. London : Methuen and Co., 36, Essex Street, W.C. Price 5s. GEORGE LEW IN & Co., (Established 1869.) Club Colour Specialists and Athletic Clothing Manufacturers. OUTFITTERS BY APPOINTMENT To the Australians, 1896,1899 and 1902 ; Mr. Stoddart’s XI., 1894- 1895, 1897- 1898; Mr. MacLaren’s XI., 1901-1902 ; West Indian XI., 1900 and 1906 ; South Africans XI., 1901 and 1907; and M C.C , Lancashire, Kent, Surrey and London Counties, Wanderers, Stoics. Bromley, Sutton, and all Public Schools’ Old Boys’ Clubs.—Write for E stimates F ree . Telegraphic Address: “ Leotdde, London.*’ Telephone: P.O. City 607. 8, Crooked Lane, Monument, London Bridge, E.Ci