Cricket 1910

CRICKET: a w e e k l y r e c o r d o f t h e g a m e . JUNE 23 , 1910 . “ T o g e t h e r j o i n e d in C r i c k e t ’s m a n l y t o i l .” — Byron. No. 8 4 3 . V O L . X X I X . THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 1910. o n e p e n n y . A CHAT ABOUT J. H. KING. The proceeds of the match between Leicestershire and Nottinghamshire which commences to-day at Leicester will be set aside as a benefit for King, by common consent one of the very best left-handed batsmen seen in English cricket during modern times. There is no little rivalry— friendly rivalry, be it added—• between the neighbouring counties, and it is hoped that this year the game will prove an even greater attraction than usual in order that the player named may receive adequate recognition of the excellent service he has ren­ dered the side during the last decade and a-half. If King had been unable to bowl a single ball, he would still have been worth a place in any county team, but, in addition to being a very skilful batsman, he has proved most useful over and over again as a medium-paced bowlerwho had a puzzling flight and could keep a good length. In seven of the last ten seasons he has taken over sixty wickets in first-class matches, and as in seven of the last nine he has also made well over a thousand runs, it will be un­ derstood that he is a most desirable cricketer to have on one’ s side. Seeing that he was born—at Lutterworth, in Leicestershire —on August 16th, 1873, and that it was not until May, 1895, that he took part in his first county match — against Essex on the Leyton ground— it may be taken for granted that as a young man he showedno exceptionalpromise, and this view is supported by the fact that his place was number ten in the order of going-in, Woodcock being the player to precede him and Whiteside the one to follow. Although he scored only 15 runs and failed to take a wicket, he has cause to remember the match, for in the first innings of Leicestershire Pickett took all the ten wickets for only 32 runs in a total of 103. It was not until 1899 that he played for the county at all regularly, and then the twenty- two wickets which he obtained in first-class matches during the season cost over forty runs each. Against Surrey at the Oval he took four wickets for a dozen runs, those whom he dismissed being V. P. S. Craw­ ford, K. J. Key, Hayes and Woo 1. With the bat he did nothing remarkable, his average being only 16 27 with a highest score of 65, but he had shown himself to be a player of great possibilities and during the year he became a member of the ground-staff at Lord’s—an engagement which he still holds. In 1900 he played his first three figure innings in an important match—121 against Derbyshire on the Derby ground—and four years later performed the feat with which his name will always be associated. Chosen on the first morning of the match to take part in Gentlemen v. Players at Lord’s, owing to the inability of Tyldesley to assist the latter on account of an injury, he made the most cf the opportunity to distinguish himself on his debut in a match of such im­ portance by scoring, without a mistake of any kind, 104 in his first innings and 109 not out in his second. The latter was certainly the finer dis­ play, for Hesketh Prichard bumped a gooi deal and the next highest Icore from the bat was only 31 by Rhodes. This was the match in which the Gentlemen, set 412 t> win, made the number with a couple of wickets to spare. But perhaps the most remark­ able thing in connection with the game was that King was asked to play only because he chanced to be on the ground. Two years later, in the match between the same sides at the Oval, he scored 89 not out and 88, “ W.G.” getting him caught in his second innings when apparently well set for his hundreJ. Last season, as all readers of (Jricltet will remember, he was chosen to play for England against Australia at Lord’s^ and he thoroughly justified his selection by scoring 60 in his first innings. With the ball he was not successful, his one wicket costing 99 run-, but it is only right to s ate that he received very poor support from the field and that both Ransford and Trum­ per were missed off him in the course of an over. Probably the best thingKing ever did as a bowler was when he took thirteen Nottinghamshire wickets for 73 runs at Leicester in 1901: bis analysis in the first innings was six for 22, and among the players he dismissed were Iremonger, J. A. Dixon, W. B. Gooclacre and Anthony. Two years later he took five Sussex wickets for 6 runs for M.C.C. at Lord’s, andagainst the same county later in the season performed the hat-trick for Photo by] [Hawkins & Co., Brighton. J. H. KING.