Cricket 1910

268 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. J uly 14, 1910. G E N T L EM E N v . P L A Y E R S . Played at Lord’s on July 11 and 12. The Players won by ten wickets. Two excellent teams had been got together for this match, though neither was quite representative. At the last moment Blythe dropped out and Thomp­ son took his place. With two left-handed bowlers in Rhodes and Tarrant in the side, the absence of the Kent player mattered little, and the presence of Thompson certainly strengthened the batting. Although there had been no rain for some days, the ball came along at various paces and run-getting was no easy matter on the first day, during which nineteen wickets went down for 310 runs. The Gentlemen, going in first after winning the toss, were dismissed in a couple of hours for 114. Six of the side failed to make a run between them, and there were 16 extras. The first ball sent down—by Fielder—bowled Warner, whose success against Kent bowlers at Lord’s this year has not been very pro­ nounced. Spooner and H. K. Foster added 30 together and the latter and Hartley 34. Foster batted admirably for an hour and a-quarter, but Hartley was somewhat laborious, taking over 90 minutes to score 24. The only other batsman seen to any advantage was Le Couteur, who could get no one to stay with him and carried out his bat for 22 when the innings closed. For their small total Smith was chiefly responsible, though it must be admitted that the batting was, on the whole, very poor. Smith bowled excellently on his first appear­ ance in a representative match, and had practically all the side in trouble. Having got rid of their opponents for a smaller score than they could have hoped, the Players made a capital start in their own innings, Hobbs and Rhodes scoring 69 together for the opening partnership in an hour. The good start was not maintained, however, and when the total was 94 the sixth wicket fell. Thompson at that point joined Tarrant, and in 40 minutes the pair pulled the game round by adding 09 for the seventh wicket. Tarrant batted 80 minutes for 32, and after his dismissal Thompson and Hirst added 43 by attractive cricket. Thompson played the best cricket of the day and was in for just over an hour for 46. At the end of the day the Players were 82 runs ahead with a wicket in hand. Tuesday’s cricket was most tame and disappointing, the Gentlemen batting in a manner quite unworthy of the side and the occasion. After the Players’ last wicket had added 13, they were faced with a deficit of 95, and, as the result of two hours and a-half’s laborious cricket, just managed to escape the innings defeat. The state of the ground was certainly against run- getting, and the bowling was full of life, but, even so, it was inglorious for the side to be got rid of for such a small total. Their first four wickets fell for 25, and the only stand of the innings was by Hart­ ley and Heygate, who put on 38 for the fifth partner­ ship. Hartley batted nearly two hours for his runs, showing strong defence but not displaying much ability to score. Score and analysis :— G e n t l e m e n . First innings. P. F. Warner, b Fielder ... 0 R. H. Spooner, lbw, b Hirst 11 H. K. Foster, c Rhodes, b Sm ith.................................. 37 C. V. L. Hooman, b Hirst... 0 A. Hartley, c Tarrant, b H ir s t ...................................24 R. B. Heygate, b Smith ... 0 S. G. Smith, c and b Smith 4 P. R. Le Couteur, not out... 22 N. C. Tufnell, lbw, b Smith 0 F. R. Foster, b H irst.......... 0 N. A. Knox, lbw, b Smith 0 B 13, lb 2, nb 1...........16 Second innings, st Board, b Hirst 3 b Hirst...................16 b Fielder b Fielder b Thompson ... 35 b Fielder .......19 b Hirst................. 0 b Hirst................. 0 c Hobbs,b Tarrant 10 b Thompson ... 5 not out................... 1 B l, lb 2, nb 3 6 Total Total... 95 ...........114 P l a y e r s . Hobbs, c Hooman, b K nox...........................35 Rhodes, b F. R. Foster 30 Tyldesley (J.T.),bF. R. Foster ................... 1 Hardstaff,bF.R. Foster 0 Tarrant, st Tufnell, b Smith ................... Sharp, b Le Couteur 9 Board, b Le Couteur... 0 Second innings: Hirst, not out. 0 ; Smith, not out, 4 ; byes, &c\, 0.—Total (no wkt) 4. 32 Thompson, c and b Le Couteur ...................46 Hirst, not out ...........28 Smith (W. C.), lbw, b Le Couteur ........... 0 Fielder, b F. R. Foster 3 B 15, lb 10...........25 Total ...209 G e n t l e m e n . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. 11. W. F ie ld e r......... . 10 1 23 1 ... ... 15 5 32 3 Hirst ......... .. 15 6 33 4 ... ... 15 5 18 4 Smith ......... ,. 15-2 7 18 5 ... ... 4 0 1 1 0 Thompson .. . 6 3 11 0 ... ... 8 2 18 2 Tarrant......... , . 4 2 13 0 ... ... 5‘5 1 10 1 Rhodes ... ... 1 1 0 0 P l a y e r s . First innings. O. M. R. W. Knox ........... 15 2 61 1 .. F. R. Foster... 21*2 7 34 4 .. Le Couteur ... 19 1 56 4 .. Smith ........... 13 5 33 1 .. Second innings. O. M. R. W. !!.’ 0-4 0 4 0 KENT V. SOMERSET. Played at Tunbridge Wells on July 11 and 12. THE TUNBRIDGE WELLS WEEK. Kent won by 306 runs. Pleasant weather was experienced for this match though the effect of the sun on a wicket affected by rain placed batsmen at a marked disadvantage on the first afternoon. Before lunch on Thursday 132 runs were made for only three wickcts, but during the next three hours seventeen wickets went down for an aggregate of 112. From this it will be gathered that Rent gained an advantage in winning the toss. Humphreys played admirably, and made his 69 out of 152 in two hours : he was ninth out, at 152, and hit seven 4’s. Somerset succeeded in saving the follow-on, but were all out for 50 in 80 minutes. Preston dismissed Narayan, Poyntz and Ingram in four balls. At the end of the day Kent, with seven wickets in hand, were 195 runs ahead. On the second morning Humphreys was bowled with only 5 added, but Woolley played well and scored a faultless 99 out of 148 in an hour and a-half; he hit a 6 and eleven 4’s and with Hardinge put on 94 for the seventh wicket in an hour. The last-named batted soundly for 100 minutes for 41, and when the innings closed for 260 carried out his bat. Lewis took seven wickets for 81 runs in the innings—an excellent performance. Somerset were set 405 to win, and the only question was by how many runs they would be beaten. The only stand of the innings was by Hardy and Her­ bert, who put on 34 for the second wicket. Woolley supplemented his fine innings with some effective bowling, and Preston made his record for the match eight wickets for 35. Score and analysis:— K e n t . First innings. E. W. Dillon, b Lewis Fielder bowled three no-balls. Humphreys, c Chidgey, b L ew is................................. 69 Seymour,c Herbert,b Lewis 19 Woolley, lbw, b Taylor ... IS Hubble, b Robson ...........20 Hardinge, c Poyntz,b Lewis 31 Huish, b Robson........... ... 2 L. H. W.Troughton, b Lewis 2 Fairservice, b L ew is........... 4 Morfee, not o u t ................... 9 Preston, b Lewis................... 0 B 9, w 1, nb 5 ...........15 Total ...................194 S omerset . First innings. Braund, b Morfee ........... Hardy, lbw, b Woolley ... Hon. M. Herbert, b Morfee E. A. Greswell, c and b Woolley .................. ... Lewis, b Woolley................... Robson, b Preston ........... Prince H. Narayan,c Dillon, b P reston .......................... E. S. M. Poyntz, c Fair­ service, b P reston ........... Dr. R. Ingram, b Preston... Taylor, c Hardinge, b Woolley .......................... Chidgey, not out................... Lb 2, nb 3 ................... Total ........... First innings. Second innings, c N a ra y a n , b Taylor ...........18 b Lewis ...........29 c and b Lewis ... 1 c Ingram,bHardy 99 c H e r b e r t, b Braund ......... not out................... c Cbidgey,bLewis b Lewis ........... b Lewis ........... b Lewis ........... b Lewis ........... B 2,lb4,w l,nb2 Total ...........260 Second innings. 0 b Morfee ... ... 4 2 b Woolley ........... 12 5 b Preston ........... 29 c Hardinge, b 8 W oolley........... 6 10 b Preston ........... 15 17 b Preston ........... 4 c Dillon, b Wol- 2 ley ................... 3 0 b Woolley ........... 13 0 b Woolley .......... 2 1 b Preston ........... 9 0 not out ........... 0 5 Bye ........... 1 50 Total ... 98 Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. Lewis ... 28 10 60 7 ... ... 30 7 81 7 Robson ... ... 22 6 66 2 ... ... 13 4 49 0 Ingram ... Taylor ... ... 10 1 20 0 ... ... 7 1 37 0 ... 7 0 33 1 ... ... 7 1 2S 1 Braund ... ... 9 1 35 1 Hardy ... ... 5 0 21 1 Lewis bowled seven no-balls and two wides. S o m e r se t . First innings. Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. It. W. Morfee ... ... 8 3 12 2 ... ... 10 2 31 1 Woolley... ... 12-2 5 25 4 ... ... 16-3 5 37 5 Preston ... ... 5 1 8 4 ... ... 8 2 27 4 Fairservice ... 1 0 2 0 Morfee bowled two no-balls and Woolley one. WARWICKSHIRE v. HAMPSHIRE. Played at Edgbaston on July 11 and 12. Hampshire won by an innings and 119 runs. Everything was in Hampshire’s favour when the first day’s play concluded. Warwickshire, after being dismissed for 157, having 217 made against them for the loss of only one wicket. F. R. Foster was assisting the Gentlemen at Lord’s, but that does not explain the poor form shown by the home side on an easy-paced wicket. Their last five wickets fell for 36 runs in 45 minutes against Llewellyn and Kennedy. Hampshire established a strong lead before stumps were drawn. In two hours and a-quarter Stone and Mead made 193 for the first wicket, and after the former had been caught, Mead and Johnston added 24 without further loss. At the end of the day Mead carried out his bat for 110. On Tuesday Mead was caught at slip with only a sifigle added. He made his 111 in just under three hours, made fifteen 4’s and offered only one chance—when 101. Sprot failed, but Llewellyn and Johnston put on runs quickly, and added 74 ere the latter was bowled. Apart from Llewellyn’s batting the rest of the innings calls for no remark. He batted two hours and a quarter for his 92, and during that time hit a 6 and seven 4’s. Going in again with arrears amounting to 224, War­ wickshire gave a very weak batting display and were got rid of on a good wicket for 105. Newman bowled very well indeed, but the poor resistance offered to him flattered him somewhat. Score and analysis:— W a r w ic k s h ir e . First innings. Lilley, c Newman, b Luckin 24 Kinneir, lbw, b Llewellyn 8 Charlesworth, b Llewellyn 31 Quaife, b Kennedy ...........31 Baker, lbw, b Llewellyn ... 23 W. H. Holbeche, b Kennedy 0 Santall, not o u t ................... 7 H. J. Goodwin, c Mead, b Kennedy ......................... C C. K. Langley, c and b Ken­ nedy ................................. 1 Field, c Johnston, b Llew­ ellyn .................................. 8 Smith(E. J.),bLlewellyn... B 10, lb 7 ...................17 Second innings, c Stone, b Luckin 13 b N ewm an.........46 b Kennedy ... 1 lbw, b Luckin ... 0 c Bowell, b Llew­ ellyn...................16 b Newman.......... 0 c Stone, b New­ man ........... 6 b Newman... b Newman .. not o u t.......... b Newman... B 6, nb 1 Total Total ...105 H a m p s h ir e . Mead(C. P.), c Lilley, b Charlesworth...........Ill Stone, c Baker, b San­ tall .......................... A. C. Johnston, b Langley .................. E. M. Sprot, b Field... Llewellyn, c Baker, b F ie ld .......................... Brown, st Smith, b Quaife ................... 79 Bowell, c Baker, b Santall ................... 4 H. G. M. Barton, st Smith, b Quaife ... 19 Newman, c Lilley, b Quaife ................... 0 Kennedy, c Baker, b Quaife ................... 3 Luckin, not out ... 1 B 18, lb 6, w l, nb 1 26 Total ...381 W a r w ic k s h ir e . Second Innings. Newman Llewellyn Luckin ... Kennedy O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. 19 3 48 0 ... ... 13 3 32 6 23*2 5 55 5 ... ... 15 2 43 1 10 1 27 1 ... ... 7 2 10 2 7 2 10 4 ... ... 4 1 13 1 O. Santall ... 29 Charleswrth 16 F ie ld ...........29 Kinneir ... 2 Langley ... 9 Newman bowled one no-ball. H a m p s h ir e . M. R. W. Quaife ... Lilley ... Baker ... Goodwin O. M. R. W. 16 5 1 51 4 7 2 2 0 7 1 16 0 15 0 36 0 Langley bowled one wide and Field one no-ball. ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS. W. S co tt . —Price Od. E. L. T h o r o l d .— A. Hartley, Vine, Humphreys, J. W.H.T. Douglas, V. F. S. Crawford, R. B. Heygate, Coe, Smith (W.C.), Huish, F. R. Foster, and Dean. Probably no two lists would agree. A D M V T C I J T C ____ Suitable for gardens, H n lY l l I L l l I U i cricket, or camping out, 40ft. round, pegs, poles, lines, complete (with tent bag included) for 35s. each ; cheaper kinds from 15s. each. Write for list of fancy garden tents.— H, J. GASSON, Government Contractor, Rye.