Cricket 1911

180 CRICKET : A WEEKLY KECOED OF THE GAME. M ay 27, 1911. there is certainly room for one or other in every county eleven. W hat if he should never reproduce that Brightou innings and should go down to posterity on the strength of a solitary performance, like a certain political orator and his single speech ? L e t’s hope that he w ill not lose his head and fail, in consequence, to do him self justice. We shall want him in the representative matches of the present season, and perhaps he will have to get his cap for the Test matches of 19 12 . At the same time some of us are not going to abandon our old love for scientific batting, and clamour for slogging. An occasional hurricane is welcome, but on the whole a summer breeze is preferable. Alletson can hit hard ; nature intended him to do so. Let him hit then as hard as he can. Don’t bother him with cautions. At the sam e time remember that there is another order of batsman ; I don’t rank him higher or low er; every batsman in his own order. Shrewsbury could never have become an Alletson. There is room for them both ; neither should be held up as a model for the other. Let every man play his own natural gam e; if he is successful, encourage him with ap p lau se; if unsuccessful, then perhaps we m ay recommend other methods to him. George Gunn is batting so well—witness his three innings of 97,90 and 66 last week— that he bids fair to confirm the reputation he won in A ustialia in 1907-8. Another bowler or two would make Notts the Champion County again. Once they had a plethora of great bowlers—too many, indeed, to be played at the same time. And they came from the villages, not from the county town. In those days the weavers worked at home and so could choose their hours for work and for p la y ; they could cricket in the m iddle of the day and work on well into the night. Now-a-days the factory has absorbed all skilled labour, and so the supply of bowlers has been arrested. The very sam e thing has happened in the once-famous Yorkshire cricketing village, Lascelles H all. Whilst Notts have furnished most of the counties with class bowlers, they have never in their last years gone outside their borders to supply their own lack. Those of us who can recall Jim m y Shaw and Fred Morley, who were the finest left-handed bowlers of their day, will not need to be informed that at that time a great bowler was not expected to be a good batsman, nor was safe fielding a sine qua non. When Shaw had bowled a ball he had nothing more to do with it. He did once score an innings of fifteen; 1 am not sure that Morely ever rivalled that. And yet both of them were certain choices in representative matches, and they would be to-day. It was decidedly rough for Notts that Alletson's mammoth innings should not have carried them to victory. At the close Sussex were 23 runs in arrear with eight wickets down. It was anybody's m atch. Honours were easy. Y et by virture of a first innings lead Sussex will count three points, Notts one. Leicestershire missed the chance of a lifetime on Saturday. It was all over but shouting at one stage when 270 \vas on the board and less than 50 was wanted with 7 wickets upstanding. But it was not to be their match after all, for Dean and Cook, who had no terrors for Wood and Lord, began to sweep the board, and Leicester­ shire lost by 13 runs. I sometimes speculate as to whether a bowler improves, or batsmen deteriorate, when wickets fall rapidly after a good score has been run up. In the old days W. G. used to make all bowling look easy ; but the moment he was dismissed it very often looked difficult. I remember speaking to a couple of famous bowlers about it, and they both admitted that they could not bowl their best against W . G. after he had been at the wicket for a few overs ; convinced that they couldn’t get him out they didn’t try their hardest. As one of them said, it was like bowling at stumps placed behind a brick wall. When I reminded him that stumps so placed would be invisible to the bowler he sim ply said— “ You know well enough what I m ean.” Many bowlers can only bowl their best when they are getting batsmen o u t: owing to their temperament, nothing succeeds with them like su ccess; they are bad losers but good winners. It's the same in all sports : for every one m an who can play an up-hill game there are nine at least who cannot. And then such persons whine not seldom ; “ ju st m y lu ck ” is their favorite excuse. “ Ju st my chicken-heartedness” would be much nearer the mark. In this Leicestershire m atch Wood could con­ gratulate him self on being the only batsman to notch a second century in the present season. And for the fifth time in his short career Dean of Lancashire took 9 wickets in one in n in gs; his first county match was as recent as 1906. Tarrant and Blythe have accomplished this feat four times. Of course, Dean would not have been so successful had not Lancashire been short of really able bowlers of late years. There is an element of luck in bowling as in battin g; else how happens it that Hayward has twice done the hat- trick in a championship m atch, whilst Lohm ann never did it once? It has begun to rain centuries, as I feared it would. Bowlers are having an unenviable experience, especially in the grey east wind at the back-end of last week, when cold fingers could scarcely grip the ball, and fielders found it difficult to hold catches. I attribute Surrey’s defeat at Bournville to the inclement weather that prevailed all over the country. If H ayward had not m issed Burns and Simpson-Hayward on Saturday Surrey would not have tasted defeat. Still Worcestershire, in the absence of the Fosters, fully deserved victory, Burns’ 63 and 70 and Pearson’s century proving invaluable contributions. Hobbs is in great form ju st now and is rapidly taking H ayward’s place. Surrey w ill certainly find room for Campbell when the long vacation releases him . Seldom has a fresh­ man obtained his blue so readily and when facing such bowlers as Blythe and F ield er; but his double success—106 and 57—scarcely came as a surprise to those who saw his innings against Middlesex last year : he was safe for his colours at Oxford, and I hope that he will be able to take part in first-class cricket when his Oxford days are over. 'What’s the matter with Knott ? Somebody told me that he had completely lost his form. I don’t believe it. It is impossible, provided that his health and sight are sound. A series of batting failures mean little or nothing. Form such as he show’ed for Kent last year is innate, part and parcel of his very existence. It is inseparable from him . So I fully expect to see him reeling off big scores the season through, and I shall not be surprised if both he and Campbell get a place in the England Eleven when next a Test match is played. I must indulge a good-tempered growl at the authorities. Last week there was no county match in tow n: this week, E ssex were at the Oval, Ken ta t Lord’s. And I wanted to see both m atches, but had to content m yself with a few hours at each ground. Surely such fixtures should not clash. M.C.C. AND GROUND y . M IDDLESEX . Played at Lord’s on May 18 and 19. M iddlesex won by eight wickets. T his m atch, revived after an interval of 38 years, was completed on the second afternoon, the M .C.C., who were not strong in batting, being beaten by eight wickets. Capt. Luther played pluckily in each innings, but of the others only Brown reached double-figures twice. A. It. Litteljohn contributed much to his side’s success, scoring 82 without being dismissed and taking nine wickets with his leg-breaks for 66 runs. He made his 7 1 out of 144 in 110 m inutes without a chance, and hit eight 4’s. During the luncheon interval on the first day the flags on the ground were lowered to half-m ast as a m ark of respect to the memory of W. L . Murdoch, whose funeral took place that afternoon. Score and analysis :— M.C.C. a n d G r o u n d . First innings. J.W. H. T. Douglas, lbw, b A. R. Litteljohn 22 Mead (C. P.), b Tarrant ................................ 20 B. S. Foster, c Warner, b Tarrant................. 9 Brown (G.), lbw, b A. R. Litteljohn .......... 15 G. J. V. Weigall, b A. R. Litteljohn .......... 0 Capt. A. C. G. Luther, not out ................. 35 Capt. G. A. M. Docker, b Hearne.............. . 4 Buckenham, b A. R. Litteljohn ................. 2 N. C. Tufnell, b Hearne ................................ 1 Tremlin, c Mignon, b Hearne........................ 3 Mead (W .), b Hearne....................................... 4 B 11, lb 2 ................................ 13 Total .......................128 M id d l e s e x . First innings. P. F. Warner, b Trem lin................................ 10 Tarrant, c Brown, b Buckenham................. 28 Hendren (E.), b Tre m lin................................ 5 Hearne (J. W.), c Foster, b Buckcnham ... 2 E. S. Litteljohn, c Tufnell, b Douglas.......... 18 O. V. Baker, b W. Mead ................................ 24 A. R. Litteljohn, not out................................ 71 J. Wormald, c and b Trem lin........................ 23 C. B. W. Magnay, c Tufnell, b Brown.......... 9 Murrell, b Buckenham ................................ 19 Mignon, c Docker, b Buckenham................. 0 Second innings, lbw, b A. R. Litteljohn ... c Murrell, b Mignon.......... b A. R. Litteljohn .......... st Murrell, b A. R. Littel­ john ................................ c Murrell, b Mignon.......... c Murrell, b Mignon.......... c Murrell, b Mignon.......... b Mignon ......................... b A. R. Litteljohn .......... not o u t................................ c Wormold, b A. R. Littel­ john ................................ B 1,lb 1 ................. Total ......................... Second innings. b Tremlin ....................... c Tremlin, b Buckenham . not o u t............................... not ou t............................... 5 11 Mignon Tarrant Buckenham Tremlin ... Mead (W.) Douglas ... Mead (C. P/ Brown ... B 19, lb 3 ... ............. 22 B 5, lb 1 ................. 6 Tot;il... .............231 Total (2 wkts) ... 32 First innings. O. M.C.C. M. R. and G kound . W. Second innings. O. M. r . w. ............. 14 3 43 0 ................. ... 13 1 41 5 ...... 1 (5 26 2 ...................... ... 5 2 12 0 V.) ... 11*5 2 23 4 ...................... ... 7 1 35 0 olm ... 17 0 23 4 ...................... ... 18-5 6 43 5 First innings. O. M. M id d le s e x . R. W . Second innings. O. M. R. W. ... 21*5 4 70 4 ...................... 9 2 6 9 1 ............. 17 4 61 3 ...................... 9 4 17 1 ............. 8 2 29 1 ................. ............. 7 2 13 1 ................. i ............ 4 0 25 0 ................. '............. 5 3 1 1 .................