Cricket 1911

164 C R IC K E T : A W EEK LY RECORD OP THE GAME. M ay 20, 1911. The No=ball kavv. T h e fo llow in g officia l sta tem en t has b e e n issu ed b y th e M .C .C . w ith referen ce t o th e “ N o -B a l l ” c o n tro ­ v e rsy a n d th e p rop o se d a lteration in the law s w h ich at th e A n n u a l G eneral M eetin g o f th e M .C .C . th e w eek before last w as w ith d ra w n o n c o n d itio n th a t M r. A . P . L u ca s’s am en d ­ m e n t w as n o t m o v e d . I t is n o t perh ap s k n ow n t o the crick etin g w orld gener" a lly w h a t w ere th e circum stan ces th a t com p elled the C om m ittee o f th e M .C .C . to ta k e u p th e am en dm en t o f th e law s w h ich deal w ith “ ru n o u t ” o ff a n o -b a ll. T h e fo llow in g m em ora n d u m m a y , u n d er th e circum stan ces, b e usefu l. T h e c o n tra d ictio n w h ich som e p eop le h a v e discovered b etw een L aw s 16 a n d 23 o n th e on e h a n d , an d L aw 28 on th e oth e r, is n o t e x a ctly a n o v e l su b je ct ; qu estion s h a v e b een raised in p rev iou s years arising o u t o f im p o r­ ta n t in cid en ts, b u t w h en th e um p ires in first-class m atch es b e g a n to g iv e co n flictin g decision s, it w as n o t to b e w o n ­ d ered a t th a t th e M .C .C . c o n ce iv e d it to b e their d u ty to e n d e a v ou r to p rev en t a re p e titio n o f su ch decisions. L a w 10 p rov id es th a t a b a tsm a n m a y n o t be given o u t fo r th e in frin gem en t o f L a w 23 o ff a “ n o -b a !l,” an d L aw 23 defines w h a t stum p in g is— i.e., th e ba tsm an m ust h a v e le ft his g ro u n d to p la y at th e ball, an d the w ick et m u st b e p u t d ow n b y th e w ick et-k eep er w ith ball in h a n d : e.g., if th e ba ll w ere to break so fa r as to g o to sh ort slip, a n d h e p u t or th rew th e w ick e t d ow n , it w o u ld n o t b e a case o f “ stum p in g ,” b u t o f “ ru n n in g o u t ,” an d if the ball w ere a “ n o-b a ll ” the um p ire w o u ld be righ t to g iv e th e b a tsm a n “ ru n o u t ,” b u t if the w ick et-k eep er takes a n o-b a ll, an d p u ts th e w ick et d ow n , an d th e batsm an , in p la y in g at th e ba ll, has le ft his g rou n d , the th eo ry an d p ra c­ tice o f th e g am e fo r som e e ig h ty years has b een th a t it is a case o f “ stu m p in g ,” an d the um pires h a v e until last y ear h eld th at it w as g ov ern ed b y L aw 16, a n d h a ve g iv e n su ch cases n o t ou t. Last, year, h ow ever, th ere w as m ore th an on e case w h ere th e um p ire g a v e the b a tsm a n ‘ ‘ ru n o u t,” h old in g th a t L aw 28 ov errid es L aw s 16 an d 23. N ow , L aw 28 p rov id es th a t w h en a b a tsm a n is o u t o f his g rou n d w h eth er “ in ru n n in g o r a t a n y oth er tim e ,” w h en th e ba ll is “ in p la y ,” h e m a y b e “ ru n o u t.” T h e um pires in q u estion argu ed th a t th e w ords ‘ ‘ a t a n y oth er tim e ” ov e rrid e the law s w h ich deal w ith ‘ ‘ stum p ­ in g ” o ff a “ n o -b a ll,” and th a t if th e ba tsm an w as o ff his grou n d , an d th e ball ‘ 1 in p la y ” th e y fe lt con scien ­ tio u sly b o u n d to g iv e h im o u t. T h e M .C .C . C om m ittee w as th erefore in th is d ifficu lty— th a t the law s them selves are h eld b y certain um pires (and th ere w as a risk o f th a t o p in io n sp readin g) to be co n tra d icto ry ; a n d th e y d eem ed it to b e their d u ty eith er to fin d w ord s w h ich w o u ld clearly d efin e the d ifferen ce b etw een these tw o w ay s o f bein g o u t o ff a “ n o -b a ll,” or, rather, b e in g n o t o u t in on e case an d o u t in the oth er, o r else issuing an “ in s tr u c tio n ” to um p ires h ow th e y w ere to deal resp ectiv ely w ith the tw o cases. T h e y fe lt th a t an in stru ction w as n o t th e p rop er m e th o d o f dealing w ith a case o f co n flictin g law s, an d th e y th erefore d id their best to fram e a sa tisfa cto ry d efin ition . F ailin g, a fter p ro tra cte d discussions a n d fram in g o f m a n y sen ten ces, to fin d o n e th at, w h en p u lled to p ieces, displayed n o flaw , th e y fell b a ck on the p rop osa l to m ak e a ‘ ‘ n o -b a ll” a “ d e a d -b a ll.” T h e y con su lted the co u n tie s an d the C olonies, an d re ce iv e d overw h elm in g su p p o rt fo r their p ro p o sa l, an d, as p ro v id e d b y th e L aw s o f C ricket, a d v er­ tised th eir in ten tion o f p rop osin g th e n ecessa ry alteration s in th e law s a t th e an nu al general m eetin g o f th e M .C.C. A n a ltern ativ e w as p ro p o se d b y Mr. A . P . L u ca s, an d d u ly a d v ertised , w h ich u n d o u b te d ly w ou ld h ave, b y law , d irected th e um p ires w h a t th e y w ere to d o in each case ; bu t it w as th o u g h t th a t th e w o rd in g w as in v olv ed , a n d th a t m a n y um pires w o u ld fin d d ifficu lty in u n derstan din g it. A t th e last m om e n t a th ird m eth o d p resen ted itself, an d it w as th e m e n tio n o f this a t the m eetin g o n M ay 3, a t L o r d ’s, w h ich resu lted in b o th th e C om m ittee’s an d Mr. 1 iUcas’.s_p rop osals b e in g w ith d raw n . T h e p ro p o sa l is to : (1) A d d the fo llow in g w o rd s t o L aw 23, o r insert a n ew L a w 23a, as m a y b e th e b e tte r, ‘ 1 B u t th e striker shall n o t b e given o u t thus o ff a n o -b a ll.” (2) Am en d L a w 28 b y in sertin g w ords so th a t it w ill read , “ In ru n n in g, or a t a n y oth er tim e, e x cep t as p ro v id ed for in L aw 23 or 2 3 a ,” w h ich ever is fin ally ad op ted . These alteration s n o t h a v in g been d u ly ad vertised , it w as h eld c o u ld n o t be m o v e d a t th e m eetin g, a n d m ust w ait fo r the n e s t annual m eetin g, a n d this w as agreed to o n the u n derstan din g th a t th e Committee w ou ld , fo r the purposes o f this year, issue an in stru ctio n to um pires to the e ffe ct th a t the op in ion , n o t m erely o f the C om m ittee, b u t o f the M .C.C. in A n n u a l M eetin g assem bled— fo r it was form a lly m o v e d , secon d ed , a n d carried u n a n im ou sly— the th eory a n d p ra ctice o f th e g am e is th a t L a w 28 does n o t overrid e L aw s 16 an d 23 ; in o th er w ords, th a t w h en a batsm an leaves his g rou n d to p la y a t a “ n o-b a ll ” an d his w ick et is p u t d ow n b y th e w ick et-k eep er, th e ba ll n o t h a vin g to u ch e d the b a tsm a n ’s b a t or h an d , he sh ou ld n o t be given ru n -ou t. The kibran). (All Publications intended for review in “ Cricket" must be addresieC. to the Editor.) HANDBOOKS, ANNUALS, &c. The Derbyshire Cricket Guide, published at ‘2d. by Messrs. Bacon and Hudson, Printers, Derby, is now in its sixteenth year and in its 192 pages contains a vast amount of information concerning the county’s cricket. Local clubs are dealt with, but the publication is valuable for purposes of reference chiefly on account of the material contained in it relating to the matches played by Derbyshire since the formation of the County Club forty years ago. “ L.G. W .” con­ tributes a very interesting article on “ Cricket in 1910,” and there is an informative biography, with portrait, of Arthur Morton. The Hampshire County Cricket Guide is this year produced in a new guise and may therefore be taken as the first number of a new series. The size of the page has been doubled, whilst the price has been reduced from sixpence to half that sum. Full scores of all matches played by the county last season are given, though only the figures of the Hampshire players are given in the bowling analyses, and among the other contents may be mentioned the names and addresses of all members of the County Club, an excellent article, with portrait, of Dr. Russell Bencraft, and “ Facts in Hampshire Cricket History.” The eleventh issue of the Scottish Cricket Annual should prove an invaluable companion to all cricketers beyond the Tweed and of interest to the majority of players in other parts of the world. Considering the amount of valuable matter it contains, it must be regarded as the cheapest cricket publication in the world, for it is issued at a penny and contains almost 200 pages. Mr. Joe Anderson, of 15, St. John Street, Perth, is the publisher. H.A.C. v. MARLBOROUGH BLUES.—Played at Finsbury on May 13. Score:— H.A.C. R. A. Christopher, c Lewis, b Jenkins ............................ 7 P. L. Frith, b M. S. Rogers .. 8 W. O. Hubbard, b Jenkins .. 10 J. D. H. Watts, b Jenkins .. 14 D. Hill, lbw, b M. S. Rogers.. 1 R. C. Cole, b M. S. Rogers .. 14 R. Cartwright, not out . . .. 25 J. II. Pritchard, not out. .. 11 B 4, w 2 ................... (5 (Total Gwkts) .. 9G R. G. Gill, W. J. Lock and E. J. B. Hobrow did not bat. ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS. A. W . H. J. d’A.—Next week. M a r lb o r o u g h B l u e s . L. R. Lewis, b Christopher . . 0 K. Gatey, c Hubbard, b Frith 43 L. M. Rogers, c Watts, b Frith 5 M. O. Lewis, b H obrow .. . . 21 H. Church, b Hobrow .. . . 5 M. S. Rogers, b Christopher.. 4 O. S. Jenkins, c Christopher, b Watts ........................... 36 A. W. Dickinson, c Hobrow, b Gill .................................... 4 A. Hacking, b Cole................... 34 A. N. Rogers, not out .. . . 8 V. B. Rogers, not out . . . . 2 B 10, lb 1, w 1, nb 2 . . 14 Total (9 wkts)* .. 176 ♦Inniiurs declared closed.