Cricket 1910

A p r il 2 8 , 1910. CRICKET A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. GOLDFIELDS v. VICTORIA. Played at Kalgoorlie on March 22 aud 23. Drawn. Smith and John Moore gave the Goldficlds a good start by making 101 for the first wicket, but although Judd Moore and Bean scored well the innings closed for 237. At one period McKenzie took three wickets for four runs. Tn reply, Victoria lost five wickets for 72, but Kortlang and McKenzie pre­ vented a collapse, and added 253 together without being parted in 125 minutes. Of that number the latter, who was missed when 2(5and hit three 6’s and fourteen 4’s, made 131. Kortlang scored 114 in two hours and a-quartcr by faultess cricket; lie hit a 6 and eight 4’s. Score and analysis:— G oldfiells . W. Smith, c John­ stone, b Saimders... 6S John Moore, c Lam­ pard, b K y le .......... 32 Judd Moore, b Mc­ Kenzie ................. 34 G. Bean, not out ... 47 C. Wellington,b Kenny 5 1). [Ieindricks, st Lam­ pard, b M cKenzie... 1 W.Lindsay,bMcKenzie 5 W.Callison, c Stuckey, b Hart ................... 8 T. Brett, b dart ... 5 M. Nickless, c John­ stone, b Saunders... 13 R. Hall, c Kyle, b Kenny ................... 5 Byes, &c..............14 Total ...237 V ictoria . R. G. Johnstone, c J. II. Stuckey, Judd John Moore, b Nick- Moore, b Nick less.. 7 less ........... ........... 1 B. Kortlang, notout 114 F. Scannell, b Nick- C. McKenzie, notout 131 less ........... .........10 Byes, &c. 18 H. Hart, c John Moore, — b Nickless .........41 Total (5 wkts) 325 T. Kyle, b Ball ........... 3 A. Kenny, A. Lampard, W. Carkeck and J. V. Saunders did not bat. G oldfields . R. W. R. w. Kenny ........... ... 53 2 Johnstone ... .. 83 0 Hart ........... ... 30 2 Kyle ........... .. 10 1 Saunders ... 65 2 McKenzie .. .. 23 3 V ictoria . R. W. R. W. Nickless .. 67 4 John Moore .. 10 0 Hall ........... .. 91 1 Wellington... 27 0 Lindsay .. 37 0 Bean ........... 36 0 Judd Moore... .. 30 0 XVIII. OF ALBANY v. VICTORIA. Commenced at Albany on March 25. At the end of the first day the game sto o d V icto ria , 22S; XVIII. of Albany, 97 for 15 wickets. Saunders took six wickets for 4 runs, including the hat-trick, and was then taken off. C orrection .— The third match between Western Australia and Victoria was played at Perth, not Fremantle, as stated i n paye 77, col. 1. The game was won by Victoria by two wickets. THE PH ILADELPH IAN TEAM IN BERMUDA . (Continuedfrom page 78.) Matches played, 3 : Won 2, lost 1. BATTING AVERAGES. Times Most not in an Total Inns, out inns. Runs. Aver. II. V. Hordern ........... 6 2 61* 123 30-75 P. H. Clark................... 6 1 56 118 23 60 P. N. Le Roy ........... 6 " 43 130 21-66 Capt. J. J. MacDonogh 6 0 40 105 17-50 A. S. Valentine........... 6 1 39 58 11-60 R. Patton ................... 6 0 20 57 9-50 A. J. Henry................... 5 1 19* 27 6*75 W. P. O'Neill ........... 6 0 11 13 2 16 J. R. Williams ........... 5 1 5 8 200 M. H arriss................... 5 0 5 8 1-60 J. L. Montgomery ... 5 1 1 1 •25 ♦Signifies not out. BOWLING AVERAGES. Overs. Mdns. Runs. Wkts. Aver. Cpt.J.J. MacDonogh 4 W. P. O’N eill...........17 1 0 2 4-50 3 42 6 7-00 P. H. Clark ...........68*4 11 176 19 9-26 P. N. Le R o y ...........28 8 62 6 10-33 H. V. Hordern ... 80’4 13 199 14 14-21 R. Patton ...........14 2 54 3 18-00 COKRESPONDENCE. [The Editor does not hold himself responsible for the opinions of his correspondents.] DRAWN GAMES. To the Editor of C ricket . D far S ir , —I am worrying jon with an explanation of the passage to which your esteemed correspondent takes exception. The argument I was illustrating b a l nothing to do with drawn eames, but was directed against the unequal lists of fixtures that the present “ all-in ” Championship system entails. As, at present, that system takes only finished games into account, I point'd out that one county (Sunvy) had a better record when it had finished as many games as another county (Sussex totalled, but that it marred its record simply by finishing more matches, although still very successfully, after that |oint had been reached. If, as lately projected, the rule had been to c<unt by g imes started, I should have selected an in-tance where one county le 1 when it had “ p'a' ed ” as many games as another’ s total, but similarly fell behind through “ playing” more. If Surrey and Sussex had answered the;e requirements I should still have quo'ed them, with the expressed intention of illustrating how absurdly the counting of different numbers of matches operates by that very fact. But in neither case would I have meant to imply that one club was necessarily better than the other or to reflect on either club for the proportion of games it drew. By the time this appears Mr. Pentelow will probably have an opportunity of examin'ng my sentiments wiih regard to drawn games, and I think they are coincident with his own. At any rate I favour a means of counting that ranks Sussex (in 1909) al.ove Surrey. This, simply because it seems the most rational method while the irrational allow­ ance of unequal fixture-lists continues. At the same time, does not your corres­ pondent’s analysis of the varieties of draws that Sussex experienced rather support the contention of those who would place Surrey in advance of her ? Most of those matchfs, he says, were not completed on account of the weather. Does not that make out Sussex to be weaker than clubs who mana; ed to win more matches in spite of tbe weather? Then he is probably right in claiming tbat there are worse offenders than Sussex in intention­ ally playing for draws, but is not the fact that Sussex effects more of them a confession of greater weakness in inability to prevent others doing the same thing? In effect, Mr. Pentelow concedes that a majority of unfinished, but finishable, matches were not draws of their own seeking, but because they were not stroDg enough to frustrate the natural efforts of their opponents to avoid a beating. Such endeavours 1 he strorg county proves its capability by overcoming. When it fails one has some excuse for regarding the draw as a drawback, for it seems more a proof of skill to be able to avert disaster than to be unable to press home an advantage. • With apologies, Yours, ifec., H P 2!i April 1910. cashire’s scheme woul 1 have affected the position of the Champion County since 1895. The percentages are by Lancashire’s system. 1895. Per­ P. W. L. D. centage. 1. Lancashire ... 21 ... 14 .. 4 ... 3 ... ... 66-66 2. Surrey ... ... 26 ... 17 .. 4 ... 5 ... ... 65 38 By M.C.C. 1, Surrey ; 2, Lancashire. 1S96. Per­ P. W. L. D. centage. 1. Surrey ... 26 ... 17 .. 7 2 ... 65-3S 2. Yorkshire ... 26 ... 16 .. 3 ... 7 ... ... 61-53 3 1 Lancashire ... 22 ... 11 .. 4 ... 7 ... ... 50-00 ' Middlesex ... 16 ... 8 .. 3 ... 5 ... ... 50 00 By M.C.C.:—1, Yorkshire ; 2 Lancashire ; 3, Middlesex; 4, Surrey. 1897. Per­ P. W. L. D. centage. 1. Surrey ... 26 ... 17 .. 4 ... 5 ... ... 65‘38 2. Lancashire ... 26 ... 16 .. 3 7 ... ... 61-53 By M.C.C 1, Lancashire 2, Surrey. 1899. Per­ P. W. L. D. centage. 1. Middlesex ... 18 ... 11 .. 3 ... 4 ... ... 6111 2. Yorkshire ... 28 ... 14 .. 4 ...10 ... ... 50*00 3. Lancashire ... 25 ... 12 .. 6 ... 7 ...• ... 48-00 4. Surrey ... ... 26 ... 10 .. . 2 ...14 ... ... 38-46 By M .C.C.:—1, Surrey 2, M iddlesex; 3, Yorkshire ; 4, Lancashire. 1903. Per­ P. W. L. D. centage. ( Middlesex ... 16 ... 8 . . 1 ... 7 ... .. 50 00 1Yorkshire ... 26 ... 13 . . 5 ... 8 ... ... 50-00 -T. LANCASHIRE’S SCHEME. To the Editor of Cricket. D ear S ir .— The following details may perhaps be of interest as showing how Lan- By M.C.C. : —1, Middlesex ; 2, Sussex ; 3, Yorksliiie* By Lancashire’s scheme Sussex fall from 2to 8 !! 1908. Per- P. W. L. D. eentage. 1. K e n t................... 25 ... 17 ... 3 ... 5 ............. 68-00 2. Yorkshire...........28 ... 10 ... 0 ...1 2 ............. 57*14 By M.C.C. :—1, Yorkshire ; 2, Kent. Surrey would have been deposed twice and have become Champion twice. Lancashiie would have been deposed once and become Champion once. Middlesex wou'd have been bracketed for first place in 1903 instead of being Champion, but would have become Champion iu 1899. Yorkshire would have been depcsed twice, but would have been bracketed first in 1903 instead of standing third. Kent would have become Champion once, viz. in 1908. Broadly speaking, Lancashire’s scheme seems likely to effect the following change. A greater effort to win will be made by both sides at the outset of a match, but eo soon as a side finds victory quite impossible it will try for a draw iu the hope of reducing the percentage of its opponent. At the same time, if there is the slightest chance of making the runs in a fourth innings we ought to see more sporting finishes. Yours Ac., J. B. PAYNE. T he M oont S chool , H arrogate , April 23rd. BOOKS BECEIVED. Thf Norfolk Crickct Annual , Season 11)09-10. Edited by C. B. L. Prior. Price, 2d. ; post free, 3d. ADMV TCMTC Suitable for gardens, H n m i i c n i o . cricket, 01 - 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.