Cricket 1910

i8 o CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME J u n e g. i g i o . undertaking a great deal of research, which I am far too busy to do, I could not attempt to say. But there are several octogenarian survivors, Surrey claiming three in Caflfyn and Sherman, who are 82, and Lawrence, who has been settled many years in Aus­ tralia, 81. If Heartfield, of the same county, is alive, he will be 87. Joseph Wells, of Kent, the father of Mr. H. G. Wells, the novelist, will be 82 next month; he it was who took four wickets with consecutive balls against Sussex at Brighton in 1862. Another Kent player, W. H. Fryer, was 81 last March. ‘VETERANS” AND THE GAME. Mr. Pe’ham Warner was rather right when he laid down the dictum that well-preserved physique meant a much longer career in big cricket than was commonly undersfanded of the theorists. No soonerhad Rugby and Oxford spoken than instances of rejuvenescence re­ curred at every turn. This was the retort in substance for those who would be rating “ mid-thirty or forty men ” as veterans. The Triangular Tests of 1912 were in the minds of the “ shelving ” fraternity. Tom Hay­ ward came out with a great innings at once; then followed demonstrations of the retention of bowling skill by George Hirst and sundry other bowlers of his years or thereabouts. The fallacy of the critics was universally exposed. Mr. Archie MacLaren has wrought another bolt for their discomfiture. He dis­ covered again the glorious power of his game, the lightning sympathy between an unerring eye and a tremendous wrist that no other Harrovian of our time possessed to such a classical degree—we are forgetting neither Mr. W. H. Patterson nor Mr. F. S. Jackson. It is nice to see the early triumphs of youth ; it is well to see the old guard go on to the end of its normal tether, getting heap3 of runs or many wickets, and maintaining activity in the field and holding the catches. — The Observer. AUTHORS v. PUBLISHERS, on May 31 and won by the innings by 7 runs. Score:— A u t h o r s . First innings. J. C. Snaith, run out.......21 A. Henderson, c Pawling, b Farquharson...............11 H. Carrick, lbw, b Farqu­ harson ........................ 2 H. Hesketh Prichard, c Truslove, b Latimer ... 16 Sir A. Conan Doyle, st Truslove, b Latimer ... 10 W . J. Galloway, run o u t.. 0 J. F. Macpherson, e Paw­ ling, b Longman ...........15 A. Kinross, not out ........ 8 R. B. J. Scott, b Longman 1 H. de Selincourt, b Long­ man ...............................11 W. L. Irwin, st Truslove, b Longman ................ 0 Byes, &c.................... 6 .—Played at Lord’s Authors on the first Second innings. Ibw, b Pawling... 24 c Farquharson, b P a w lin g........... 7 c Spicer, b Paw­ ling ...................20 c Truslove, b Far­ quharson...........24 lbw, b Pawling... 0 not out....................101 c and b Pawling... 2 not o u t .................. 0 Byes, &c. ... 20 T o ta l...................101 Total (G wkts)*198 •Innings declared closed. P u b l is h e r s . R. B. Latimer, b Pri­ chard ......................... 0 W . Farquharson, b P richard................. . 0 A, Dene, b Irwin ... 28 W. Longman, b Pri­ chard.......................... 18 R. Truslove, c Ander­ son, b Irwin ......... 13 W. S. Murrell, b Snaith 0 J. H. Miles, c Ander­ son, b Irwin ........... 9 Second innings: Latimer, b Doyle, 1; Farquharson, not out, 31; Dene, not out, 33 ; byes, &c., 4.—Total (1 wkt) 69. R. Spicer, st Ander­ son, b I r w in ........... F. J. H. Darton, c Car­ rick, b Irw in ........... B. W. Matz, b Pri­ chard.......................... S. S. Pawling, not out Byes, &c.............. : Total ...........! ESSEX v. SURREY. Played at Leyton on June 2, 3 and 4. Surrey won by three wickets. Two hours’ heavy rain in the morning had affected the pitch, and Essex certainly gained 110 advantage by winning the toss. They might have done better had they put Surrey in, but certain it is that not one captain in a hundred would have done so. Weak batting had a good deal to do with the poor total by Essex, only Gillingham and the cousins Gibson playing with much resolution. Smith’s bowling was very true, and the Surrey fielding was very good indeed, the catches which dismissed Perrin and Gillingham being brilliant. After Harrison had been dismissed without a run, Hobbs and Bird put on 87 together in 57 minutes. Hobbs drove splendidly and hit seven 4’s. Spring and Davis con­ tinued the good work by adding 69 in 40 minutes, but both players were missed. The last five wickets fell for 48, but Surrey led by 126 on the innings. At the end of the day Mead and Tremlin made 2 runs without loss. On Friday Mead was caught at mid-on with only 5 added, and then the bowlers met with such success that the total was only 86 when the sixth wicket fell. An innings defeat for Essex seemed in store, but at this point McGahey joined Douglas, who had gone in upon the fall of the first wicket and settled down to a strong defen­ sive game. During the first hour he was in he made only 11, but when McGahey joined him the Surrey bowling was mastered. Douglas reached 50 out of 155 in two hours and a-half, and McGahey made the same number in 80 minutes. That the Surrey attack was thoroughly mastered is evident from the fact that Hitch went on with leg-breaks. The stand for the seventh wicket lasted 95 minutes and yielded 125 runs. Douglas took three hours and a-quarter to make 70 ; he played a slow game and was not seen at his best, but as to the value of his cricket there cannot be two opinions. McGahey made his runs in two hours and hit ten 4’s, and after his dismissal Kenneth Gibson and Buckenham put on 51 for the last partnership. Surrey wanted 153 to win, and in the last 105 minutes of the day lost six wickets for 131. Hobbs and Harrison made 76 for the first wicket, and Abel and Smith put on 34 without being separated after six men had been dismissed for 97. On Saturday the pair took the score to 142, when Smith was bowled. With Strudwick in, Abel quickly made the remaining eleven runs, and Surrey won by three wickets. The last-named played a fine game at a critical time, and had a very great deal to do with his county’s success. Score and analysis :— First innings. E ss e x . F. L. Fane, b Smith J. W. H. T. Douglas, c Platt, b Hitch .......................... 0 P. A. Perrin, c Hobbs, b Smith.................................... 8 Rev. F. H. Gillingham, c Hitch, b Smith .......... 25 Freeman (J.), c Hobbs, b Lees ..................................19 C. P. McGahey, c Hitch, b Smith ... .......................... 10 A. L. Gibson, c Spring, b Hitch ..........................11 Second innings, c Strudwick, b Hitch ...........li lbw, b Lees ... 7' c Strudwick, b Hobbs ........... run out ...........1! Kenneth Gibson, wick, b Hitch Strud- ... 19 Buckenham, lbw, b Smith 0 Mead (W.), c Platt, b Smith 0 Tremlin, not out... ......... 2 No-ball ................... 1 Total ...................99 S u r r e y . Hobbs,c Douglas, b Tremlin 52 Harrison, c and b Bucken­ ham .................................. 0 M. C. Bird, c and b Tremlin 41 Spring, st K. Gibson, b McGahey .......................... 34 Davis, lbw, b Tremlin ... 39 Abel (W. J.), c Mead, b McGahey .......................... 15 Platt, c Freeman, bTremlin 1 Smith (W. C.), c K. Gibson, b McGahey..........................12 Hitch,c Freeman,b Tremlin 4 Strudwick, not out ........... 5 Lees, b T rem lin .................. 4 B 13, lb 5 .................. 18 c Bird, b Lees ... 80 c Strudwick, b Hitch .......... 3 lbw, b Smith ... 28 not out .......... 24 c Harrison, b Smith ........... 1 cHarrison.b Lees 20 B 11, lb 6..........17 Total........278 c Fane, b Mead... 42 b Douglas .........33 run out ........... 9 c Buckenham, b Mead ........... 3 b D ouglas........... 1 not out.......... b Douglas ... b Douglas ... not out B 7, nb 1 Total ... ...........225 Total:'7 wkts)153 First innings. E ss e x . Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Hitch ......... 13-5 3 33 3 ... ... 26 4 85 2 Smith ...........19 5 34 6 ... ... 22-4 5 62 3 Lees .........12 4 24 1 .. . ... 25 6 75 3 Platt ........... 6 2 7 0 .. . .. 3 0 11 0 Hobbs .. . ... 4 1 17 1 Bird . ... 1 0 4 0 Abel .. . ... 1 0 7 0 Hitch bowled one no-ball. S u r r e y . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Buckenham ... 10 1 53 1 ... ... 10-5 3 34 0 Tremlin... ... 19-1 2 62 6 ... ... 4 1 29 0 Mead ... 13 0 46 0 ... ... 12 4 34 2 Douglas ... ... 2 0 16 0 ... ... 10 1 37 4 McGahey ... 10 2 30 3 ... ... 4 2 11 0 Douglas bowled one no-ball. NOTTS 2nd XI. v. LINCOLNSHIRE. Played at Nottingham on May 31 and June 1 and left drawn. Rain prevented a ball being bowled on the first day. Score and analysis :— N o tts 2nd XI. First innings. Second inninga. R. E. Hemingway, c Day, b R ile y .................................. 53 c Allen, b Cook... 0 J. Armstrong, c and b Riley 25 b Broughton ... 14 G. Lee, c Riley, b Day ... 1 b Broughton ... 4 Stapleton, b Cook ...........46 cand bBroughton 11 W. Whysail, c Allen, b Day 9 not out................... 6 Rev. H. Staunton, st Allen, Brooke C. Turner, c Cook, b Day.. G. C. Wood, b Cook ......... C. Clifton, not out ......... J. Barnes, c Day, b Cook.. Wass (G.), c and b Day .. Byes, &c................. Total ...........150 * Innings declared closed. L in c o l n sh ir e . Byes, &c. ... Total (4 wkts)*42 First innings. Rev. C. G. Ward, c Staple­ ton, b Clifton .................. 12 E. Riley, c Stapleton, b Clifton .......................... J. Broughton, b Barnes ... Dajr, b Clifton ................... Second innings. : Stapleton, b Clifton ........... 0 0 7 c Wass, b Clifton 12 0 c S ta p le to n , b Clifton ... ... 4 notou t.................. 14 E. T. Cook, b Barnes........... 9 L. S. Harrison, b Barnes .. 0. W. E. Thompson, lbw, b Clifton .......................... 11 b Barnes ... Geeson, not o u t ...................15 not out J. A. Brooke, c Barnes, b Clifton ...........................13 b Clifton ... J. Allen, c Hemingway, b Clifton ........................... 4 A. E. Gibson, b L e e ........... 6 Byes, &c....................... 4 Byes, &c. Total ................. 81 Total (5 wkts) 36 N o tts 2nd XI. Cook Gibson D ay... Riley Brooke Clifton Barnes Wass L ee... First innings. O. M. R. W. ............ 8 1 35 3 ... ........... 4 0 12 0 ... .......... 21-4 5 46 4 . .......... 10 3 31 2 ... ............ 8 1 20 1 ... Broughton ... L in c o l n sh ir e . First innings. O. M. R. W. 24 9 35 6 ... 15 4 33 3 ... 6 4 9 0 ... 02 0 0 1 ... Second innings. O. M. R. W. ... 7 11 27 1 Second innings. O. 10 7 M. R. W. 3 19 4 3 10 1 1 7 0 SOUTHGATE v. ST. THOMAS Played at Southgate on June 4. S o u t h g a t e . L. Neiderheitmann, c Morcom, b Parkin­ son .......................... J. D. Davies, b Morcom R. E. Cranfield,cJohn­ son, b M eakin......... E. J. Mann, b Morcom R. Peterson,c Morcom, b Parkinson ........... C.A.Saville, c Morcom, b Parkinson ........... HOSPITAL.— G. W. Cranfield, lbw, b M eakin.................20 A. J. Carter, b Meakin 21 J.H. Hargroves,b Mor­ com ...........................16 E. T.Vint,b Parkinson 4 H. D. Kennington, not out ........................... 0 B 18, lb 8, w l,n b l 28 Total ...179 St. T h o m a s ’ A. F. Morcom,c Peter- t son, b G. W. Cran- .. field .......................... 2 L. Meakin, c Har­ groves, b Carter ... 13 W. L. Johnson, c and b Neiderheitmann ... 26 D. M. Gibson, c Davies, b G. W. Cranfield ... 37 H. L. Mann, c Mann, b G. W. Cranfield ... 50 W. B. Laird, lbw, b G. W. Cranfield ,,.23 H o sp it a l . E. H. Walker, b G. W. Cranfield................... 3 W. R. Parkinson, c Kennington, b G. W. Cranfield................... 0 W. B. Foley, b G. W. Cranfield.................. 2 C. W. Sparks, not out 19 H. A. Rowell, not out 7 B 15, w 2 ...........17 Total (9 wkts) 199