Cricket 1910

2g6 CRICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. J u l y 2 8 , 1 9 1 0 . H . GRADIDGE And SONS, Manufacturers of >11 Requisites for Cricket, Lawn Tennis, Racquets, Hockey, Football, and all British Sports. PATEN TEE S AND SOLE M AKERS & OF THE % % \ Used by all tho Leading Players. Made la Men's, ■mall U n i, *r 0*ll«f«, «, 5, 4, 4 I sixes. P r i c e L i§ t« JFrcc o n A p p lic a t io n . Of all First-Class Outfitters ^ and Dealers. v • R ebl& d ln g a S p e cia lity . Factory; A r t il le r y Place, WOOLWICH. “ U R I N E ” For cleaning and whitening Buckskin and Canvas Boots and Shoes, Cricket Pads, &c. Packed in spun zinc container,with sponge. Of all dealers, or post free 6 d . WILL NOT RUB OFF OR CAKE. STANLEYFEAST&CO, Biffii: Cricket: A WEEKL Y RECORD OF THE GAME. 168, UPPER THAMES STREET, LONDON, E.C. TH U R SD A Y , JULY 2 8 th , 1910. |. 1 abilintt ®ossip. The abstract and brief chronicle of the time. — Hamlet. A l t h o u g h not a ball could be bowled on the Monday, and bad weather marred the social side of the function, the Maidstone Week proved a success financially. The takings during the two matches—with Northants and Yorkshire — amounted to £'506 7s. 8d. On Friday the “ gate" realised just over £154. F o r the first time since 1889 Kent have won both their matches against Yorkshire, and on each occasion two left-handers bowled for them unchanged throughout in the Maidstone match, Wright and Martin being tho successful pair twenty-one years ago and Blythe and Woolley last week. Not one of the twenty-two who played last week took part in the corresponding match o f 1889. In the last-mentioned game the figures of the left-handers were Martin .................. 200 balls, 65 runs, 10 wickets. Wright ................. 208 balls, 51 runs, 9 wickets. Last week Blythe and Woolley performed thus:— Blythe ................... 228 balls, 95 runs, 11 wickcts. NVoolley.................. 217 balls, 91 runs, 8 wickets. Lord Hawke, for one, will readily recall the 18S9 match, seeing that, after winning the toss, he put Kent in and saw his side beaten by an innings and 10G runs. S e v e r a l correspondents have written to me asking on how many occasions two left-handers have bowled unchanged through both completed innings o f a first-class match in England. At the moment of writing I can recall only the following | Kent v. M.C C. & G., at Lord’s... 1850 *'■ j-L’tersliirc v. Sussex, at Leicester 1S80 | Kent v. Sussex, at Maidstone ... 18S1 | Lancs, v. Glos., at Liverpool ... 1888 **■ |Kent v. Yorks., at Maidstone ... 1889 |Kent v. Sussex, at Town Mailing 1890 " I Kent v. Middlesex, at Lord’s ... 1891 | Yorkshire v. Essex, at Leyton ... 1901 Hollands Willsher Parnham Hylott A. Penn Wootton Barlow Briggs Martin Wright Martin Wright Martin Wright Hirst ... Ilhodcs !.\eo ! R oberts f GIos' v' 8urrey> at Bris‘ ° ' ............1903 lihodes.........I Yor^s* v- Surrey, at the Oval ... 1903 Rhodes" |Yorks, v. Derbyshire, at Glossop 1007 Woolley Kent v. Yorks., at Maidstone ...1910 Perhaps some reader of Gossip may be able to add to the list. I n last week’s match Kent undoubtedly had rather the better of the conditions, but on the form shown they would pro­ bably have proved successful had they not won the toss. At the present time they are by far the most formidable side in the country, their defeat at Leyton notwith­ standing, and when Mr. Mason and Mr. Carr reappear they will be stronger than ever. The fact should be emphasised that wlien they overcame Yorkshire on Saturday by 178 runs they were without K. L. Hutchings and Fielder. M e . F. G. R o b in so n , of Ilkeston, writes as follows to the A thletic N ew s :— “ While playing in a recent Ilkeston and District Cricket League match for Ilkeston Church Institute v. Hallam Fields, Arthur W . Baker drove the ball out of the ground into a passing goods train on the Great Northern Railway. The engine-driver pulled up the train, and the ball was recovered. Appropriately enough, the stroke was the winning hit for Baker’s side.’' O n Friday and Saturday last the M.C.C. played Household Brigade, and Major Arthur Carew Richards, who assisted the former — he has been a member of the Club since 1884, almost succeeded in adding his name to the list of batsmen who have scored as many as two hundred runs in an innings at L ord’s. He went in first, and, when the closure was applied, with six wickets down for 422, carried out his bat for 195. In the circumstances it is only reasonable to suppose that, if the declaration had been postponed for a couple of overs, he would have completed his second hundred. He hit two C’s and twenty- two 4’s. For three seasons he was in the Eton Eleven, and nine years ago accomplished a feat in a small match in South Africa which may never be paralleled—ho made 101 not out and 185 without any other member of his side reaching double-figures in either innings. F rom Dr. Poidevin’s “ Current Cricket ” in the Pall Mall Gazette :— “ People are not apt to associate the idea of defence with Tyldesley’s batting. Ilis play is so aggressivo as a rule. If one wanted a splendid example of tho oft-repeated remark that offence is the best means of defence. Tyldesley would supply it. Whenever he finds himself in difficulties Tyldesley becomes hor­ ribly aggressive from the bowler’s point of view. I have seen him under the most adverse batting con­ ditions take hold of the bowling and hit it all over the place with a coolness and daring that are simply magnificent. Never will his batting in a Test match on an atrocious, sticky wicket in Melbourne be for­ gotten by those who saw it. A Melbourne sticky wicket offers the worst, batting conditions that can be imagined, and of the twenty-two players engaged in that match only two showed the least capacity for surmounting the difficulties; those two were Tyldes­ ley and Trumper, both masters in offensive tactics. It is not a policy, however, that can be universally followed; the defence of most players must inevitably follow the orthodox lines for obvious reasons. At the same time it must not be imagined that Tyldesley has no defence in the ordinary way; in point of fact it is excellent, but the natural genius of Tyldesley tends in another direction.” C o n c e r n in g the Sussex team, the same writer remarks:— “ They learnt a lot in the matter of back play from llanjitsinhji. He was a master in the art, and, though apparently on the defensive, he was always making scoring strokes with a facility that amounted to genius. His pupils, on the