Cricket 1911

130 CRICKET : A W EEK LY EECOED OF THE GAME. M a y 6 ,1911. Corr<?spond?nc^. [The Editor dots not hold himself responsible for the opinions of his correspondents. ] Colombo, Ceylon, March, 1911. THE INDIAN TEAM OF 1911. To the Editor of C r ic k e t . S ir,— The Selection Committee of the Indian Cricket Team for England met on the 1st of March at Bombay and selected the following to form the team which will leave Bombay on the 6 th of M ay:—H .H . the Maharajah of Patiala, Mr. K. M. Mistri, Dr. H. D. Kanga, Mr. P. Balu, Mr. B . P. Meherhomji, Mr. J. S. Warden, Mr. B. Jayaram, Mr. K. Sesachari, Mr. H. F. Mulla, Mr. Bulsara, Mr. M. Pai, Mr. Salam-ud-din, Mr. Manikchand, Mr. Noor Elahi, Mr. Shafkat Hussein and Mr. S. Hussein. On the 14th of April, 1910, I wrote in the “ Ceylon Amicus ” that the Maharajah of Patiala, Dr. Kanga, K. Mistri, Balu, Warden, Sesachari, B. Jayaram, Mulla, Meherhomji, Shivram, Mehta, Telang, and K. B. Mistri form the nucleus of a strong side, and if chosen should render a good account of themselves. A glance at the team chosen will show that the first nine whom I included in my list have been selected to visit England. On the 21st of April, 1910, a letter written by “ One Interested’ ’ appeared in your columns. The writer of that took me to task for my presumption in dare men­ tioning the names of Jayaram, Mistri, Sesachari, Balu . . . . who could not stand the strain of a tour in a strange climate. He further stated “ K. M. Mistri, Jayaram, Sesachari, Balu . . . . are past their prime.” “ ‘ Am icus’ stumbles in fact over the old block Past v. Present.” “ Their team is one of past celebrities who have now no chance of success in England. Had the names come over eight or ten years ago it would have been a different thing.” However, the Selection Committee presided over by Capt. Greig, the famous Hampshire cricketer, and composed of “ men on the spot ” who ought to know better than “ experts ” in London, have actually chosen nine of the “ names ” that 1 mentioned as forming the nucleus of a fine team. “ Interested’s ” note of warning to the Selection Committee perhaps did not reach those responsible for the selection of the team else the nine I named as being fully worthy of inclusion in the team would have been dropped out. However despite the fact that nine “ veterans ” and “ men who cannot stand the strain ” have been chosen to join the team I am confident that the tour will not be a failure. Hoping this will catch the eye of “ Interested,” I remain, Yours &c., “ U B IQUE " of “ Ceylon Amicus.” To the Editor of C r ic k e t . Sir,—The Indian tour was, it was said, to last to the first week in September. Is there a likelihood of additional fixtures being added hereafter ? Should the team be fortunate enough to meet a real summer, and prove to contain, as Mr. Jackson feared, “ eleven B anjis” there could be no more popular wind-up for the Scarborough Festival than a match between them and a combined team from the Gentlemen and Players, whose game could be advanced from tbe 7th to the 4th of September. Should the season, however, be of the kind that usually greets a pioneer team in England,—well, never mind. The shorter the programme then, the better. But a return match with the M.C.C. would hardly be out of place under any circumstances. I am, &o., “ ZcM M ERZET.” Ceylon, March, 1911. To the Editor of C r ic k e t . Sir,— In reply to “ Ubique ” of Ceylon Amicus, I have to say that the Selection Committee in Bombay have chosen “ Ubique’s ” nine “ names ” because they had, practically, nobody else to choose. I hope as much as “ Ubique” evidently does that the tour will not be a failure, but I will say now before the season begins that if the first-class counties put their first elevens in the field the Indian team will not win a match. Its bowling, its fielding and its catching will be admired by cricketers over here, even by those who are not “ experts in London,” but its batting has small chance. The Indian team is unquestionably a fine team in its own class, which is about equal to a Minor County team, but beyond that nobody who knows much about both sides of the question would care to commit himself. Yours, “ I n t e r e st e d . ” TWO-DAY CRICKET AND POINT-COUNTING. S ir , —The lucid writer of “ Cricket Notches ” (whose restoration to C r ic k e t is a matter for unfeigned congratu­ lation) hopes that his opinions will “ provoke searching criticism.” I feel sure, then, he will not resent a presenta­ tion of the case for the other side on some points about which universal agreement with him can hardly be expected. To wit, the limitation of matches to two days and one innings a side or, alternatively, scoring points for the first innings. Virtually many (nearly half I believe) of the county matches are already two-day matches, but with a three-day allowance of time to play them in. Two days of actual play, that is, frequently suffice to finish a game ; but if for any purpose, as the decision of a Championship, a definite result is desirable, it is advisable to reserve a third day against misadventure. If the weather prevents play on one day two others remain—enough to ensure the likelihood of a finish. Under the two-day allowance often only one would admit of play and a huge increase of unfinished games would naturally result. As an illustration I have tested one series of matches only—the county games played on the Oval in 1910. These numbered fifteen. In three of them no start at all was possible on the first day, and in several others late com­ mencements were made and play was considerably inter­ fered with. It is obvious then, that if an allowance of two days only for each match had been fixed, very little progress could have been made in many of the games. As it was, the reservation of a third day enabled most of them to be played out. To carry the analysis a bit further : two of the games were left unfinished owing to national mourning—a third day would undoubtedly have settled both of these. Of the remaining 13 games, the weather prevented a finish in two cases, four more were finished on the second day, and seven were won and lost on the third day. If two-day allowances had ruled, therefore, only four instead of eleven of the matches would have been carried to completion. Decide them, then, on the first innings, we are advised. Truly enough, by this method, every one of the 13 games might have been adjudicated ; one on the first day, ten on the second and two on the third day. If, therefore, all the games had been two-day fixtures, terminable after the first innings, eleven of them would have been finished and two drawn. This seems a lot, as proportions go, but of the eleven definite results so obtained ten of the matches were actually completed on a two-innings basis—much more satisfactorily—within three days, and in the other case rain prevented any play on the third day. And notice that in three cases out of these ten the continuance of the match beyond the first innings resulted in the side behind at that stage coming out top at the finish. Now nobody can con­ tend that a lead on one innings is a more reliable test of merit than a lead on two ; and by the experience of Surrey last year 30 per cent, of matches decided on the first innings would appear to give positively misleading results. Two-day allowances and first innings decisions are well enough for games played purely and simply for amusement, but not for matches intended to determine the better of two first-class sides. For the County Championship, to be taken seriously, its matches must be arranged with that purpose. The establishment of the Divisional system of conducting this competition would not diminish the number of county matches at a ll; it would simply reduce the “ strenuous ” importance of some of them. In that event the three-day allowance might be retained for games in the contest, and two-day allowances, and even first innings awards, be given a trial in games outside the competition. But the position of the game after one innings apiece has been played is not really a reliable test. It is frequently a lottery decided by the choice of innings. The same may, of course, be said of the position after two innings have been played, but in that case the chance business has been reduced—I believe I am correct in saying—by something like the square of the number of innings played ; or as four to one. For this reason chiefly, though for many others besides, I would oppose the awarding of points for first innings positions in any competition. [And, by the way, if the loser 4