Cricket 1911

J une 10, 1911. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 231 to make up for the absence of his famous namesake. In five matches, ten innings, up to the 3rd inst., he had totalled 473 runs, and had never been out under double figures. Last season W. T. did great things for Lancashire Second—628 runs in 8 completed innings—and may be said to have compelled the Committee to give him a good trial in the first team. It will be difficult to leave him out now, many as are the good batsmen available. His 108 v. Somerset is his initial century in first-class cricket. Other new ‘ ‘ centurions ” —some people don’t like that word, we know—this year we have Mr. Ian P. F. Campbell, Arthur Morton, Edward Alletson, R. A. Hay­ wood, Major Booth, and Alonzo Drake. There were ten players in the list last year who had never been there before : Messrs. H. P. Chaplin Leonard Oliver, E. S. Litteljohn, C. L. St. J. Tudor, N. C. Tufnell. P. R. Le Couteur, and F. H. Knott, Arnold Warren, J. W. Hearne and George Brown. In 1909 there was thirteen : Messrs. R. B. Ilevgate, P. Cartwright, M. C. Bird, John Chapman, C. Y. L. Hooman, M. G. Salter, J. A. Seitz, G. A. T. Vials, and W. T. Greswell, Captain W. N. White, Ducat, Fielder and Wilkinson. The professional element shows up much more prominently so far this year than in either 1909 or 1910, it will be noticed. T h e finish at Southampton on Saturday must have been a rare fine one, and if only Mr. Forester had been able to bat earlier the Peak County might well have pulled off the match. Forester, in his 38th year, is a better all-round player than ever before, beyond doubt. He played fine cricket v. Yorkshire at Chesterfield for 58 ; he had more than anyone else to do with the victory over Lancashire, scoring 35 and 43, and taking 5 wickets for 36 in the critical last innings ; and he took 10 wickets for 158 (6 for 30, and 4 for 128) v. Hants. M o r t o n ’s first century may almost be said to be over­ due. For some years past one has been expecting it. As far back as 1904 this player three times topped 50. In 1905 he played successive innings of 73 v. Surrey and 69 v. Lancashire. The last match of the following season saw him make 77 and 54—highest score in each innings—v. Surrey at the Oval ; in 1907 he made 72 v. the South Africans, and another good double, 67 and 37, at the Oval ; in 1908 he ran up 87 v. Leicestershire at Leicester ; in 1909 he was responsible for such scores as 76, 74, 56, 55, 52 and 50 ; and last year he made 89 v. Northants and 60 v. Essex. Never a particularly rapid run-getter, Morton scores chiefly in front of the wicket, playing with a very straight bat. His first century for Derbyshire should not be his last. So far success has not attended the efforts of the Indian team over here, but many weeks will elapse before their tour closes and when the end comes it will be surprising indeed if they have not some wins to set against their reverses. It would not be fair to judge them by what they have done in their first two matches, for it is practically certain they will do much better when they have acquired a larger acquaintance with English grounds. At Oxford both Mistri and Jayaram. probably their two finest batsmen, lost their wickets through faulty judgment in running, and at times the fielding left something to be desired. But, as we have said, it would be premature to pass a verdict on their merits yet, though it may be stated that they have shown themselves possessed of some bowlers who are decidedly useful and of three attractive and capable batsmen in the Maharaja, Meherhomji and Mulla. S o m e reference was made last week to the list of centuries scored by leading batsmen which ‘ 1 Wisden ” gives in its last issue. Denton is not the only batsman credited with too many therein. Tom Hayward is set down 93 ; this should have been 91. C. B. Fry is given 81, instead of 80—Tyldesley 68 instead of 70 (probably the •South African scores in 1*898-9 were omitted)—Hirst 48 instead of 47—G. L. Jessop 45 instead of 42. Most of the other figures were wrong, if the intention was to limit the table to strictly first-class cricket. But one observes that no such limitation is made clear. The correct figures of the leading players still on the active list, to date June 3rd, 1911, and including centuries made in first-class matches in Australia, South Africa, America, New Zealand and the West Indies, as well as at home, we give in the next paragraph. Hayward, (T. W.) .. 93 Hobbs, (J. B.) .. 30 C. B. Fry . . 81 29 Tyldesley (J. T.) .. 71 C. P. McGahey .. 29 P. F. Warner .. 49 II. K. Foster . . 27 Denton (D.) . . 48 C. J. B. Wood .. . . 27 Hirst (G. H.) . . 48 Bowley (F. L .) 20 A. C. MacLaren . . 46 Carpenter (H.) .. . . 24 Quaife (W. G.) 46 Sharp (J.) .. .. . . 23 P. A. Perrin .. 45 Arnold (E. G.) 22 G. L. Jessop .. 43 Braund (L. C.) .. 22 J. R. Mason .. 34 R. E. Foster 22 Iiayes (E. G.) .. 33 K. L. Hutchings. . !; 2 i A. O. Jones .. 33 Killick (E. H.) 21 Knight (A. E.) .. . . 31 Rhodes (W.) . . 21 Among the others may be noted F. L. Fane (19), A. .T. L. Hill, Kinneir, Llewellyn, R. H. Spooner and Tarrant (18 each), King and Vine (17 each), and John Gunn (16). No century made in England is included here unless it went to swell the maker’s first-class aggregate. Some of those included in the Wisden list cannot have fulfilled this condition. J a m e s I r e m o n g e r is a man of cool resolution. At Trent Bridge on the 31st ult. he ran Alletson out—to say that it was by the purest accident is surely unnecessary. A display of temper, taking the unpleasant form of booing, was made in one corner of the ground. When Iremonger himself got out, he went straight from the pavilion, after taking off his pads and putting on his coat, to that corner, seized the man whom he considered the principal offender, and marched him off to the police-station. Bravo, James ! It was well done. I n the brief biography of Mr. R. V. Ryder on another page no mention is made of what is probably the most vivid cricket recollection the Warwickshire secretary has. Fielding in the country as a substitute against Surrey at Edgbaston in July, 1901, he dropped a very hard catch offered him by Lees, at a moment when practically Lees formed the only barrier between Warwickshire and victory. But the home team won, after all, though by 16 runs only, and the contemplated wear of sackcloth and ashes was foregone. T h e manner of George Gunn’s dismissal in the second innings of Mr. Jessop’s XI. at Sheffield last week was marked by a curious incident. He was the striker, and his vis-a-vis, James Seymour, thinking there was a chance of a run, raced down the wicket and reached the other end, going a few feet past Gunn, who had gone a short distance out of his ground. The wicket at the non-striker’s end was put down, and Seymour, feeling that the fault of the disaster was entirely his, retired. After a consultation between Mr. Warner, the captain of the fielding side, and the umpires, Seymour was recalled from the pavilion and Gann went out. S. F. B a r n e s , in last Saturday’s North Staffordshire League match between Oldfields and Porthill, took nine wickets for 35 runs. The Oldfields total was 69, and Porthill won by 118 runs. On the same day, in a North Yorkshire and South Durham League match, Mr. C. L. Townsend made 155 and took four wickets for 23. T h e r e was some heavy run-getting in the match played on Friday and Saturday last between Malvern College and a strong batting side got together by Mr. H. K. Foster. The former, going in first, ran up 548, to which total D. J. Knight, the young Surrey amateur, contributed