Cricket 1911

346 CEICKET : A WEEKLY RECOKD OF THE GAME. Jm/sr 15, 1911. who took charge of the bowling. That should suffice for readers of Cricket , all of whom know their Fry. Quicker and truer judg­ ment of length and more prompt suiting of the action to the ball, no one could desire. We saw real driving. Fry alone seemed to realise that Barnes’ best ball in posse is, if over-pitched, made to be on- driven. How Fry got out is a puzzle. He was thinking cricket- wise so clearly and suiting his action to his thought with such accuracy of execution that I regret having seen only the last act of the tragedy. The ball, that bowled Fry, having been invested with a weird and vindictive blend of all the fatal qualities, it swung ; it broke back yards ; it came off the pitch as no ball ever came before ; all I know is that it finished its vindictive career with a splendid smash­ ing of the middle stump. That at least is the one item in its varied programme that is true. But a very mild-mannered ball might smash a stump, so I suppose the ball really carried some subtle change of pace and that “ two minds ” did the rest. In any case it ended the innings that had the promise of history and yet was an historic innings for all its too brief duration. The rest of the batting was tame. Douglas showed patient defence aud a remarkable ability to stop balls which would have bowled him, while Warner was Warner—under the yoke of Barnes. Foster and Fry alone escape the same subjugatiou. Foster played Barnes on his merits, as witness that on-drive which recalled Fry. We have not yet seen the best of Foster. He has still the propensity to hit wildly, as we saw when he was bowled in the second innings. Barnes quite, confirmed the view that he is our best bowler of his type. With reasonable luck he would have accomplished an even finer perform­ ance than five wickets for 67 runs in 34 overs. Barnes has all the qualities— length, command of pace and pitch, ability to break both ways and to bowl the rising ball that is really dangerous, the ball that seeks glove or bat to come off the same with fatal effect, the ball that cannot be avoided. Barnes in this respect is Lockwood’s successor, but he is not Lockwood. Tuesday was another red-letter day, because we saw a very strong batting side of Players reduced to comparative impotence by good bowling on a good but lively wicket. Yet somehow the triumph of Foster and Douglas—particularly after lunch—was not convincing. There was a suggestion of false cricket, or at least that the eccentricity of the game had asserted itself. It was not the same sort of failure as when the Players were fired out by Knox and were tied up by Jephson’s lobs. Hayward alone looked like staying. He conveyed the sole sense of coming mastery over the bowling. Maybe that blow on the body from a ball by the erratic Burns helped to his downfall. None of the others impressed one. All struggled for runs, while Tarrant, though making 43, ought to have been caught in the long-field by Fry when 24. The “ carry” of the wind deceived Fry, for the ball was taken further than he expected. Six wickets fell for 51 after lunch and Foster’s “ swingers ” were the direct cause. He began the demoralisation which Douglas completed. The batting was not good, but the mistakes made in playing at the fatal balls were—cricket. The writer believes in holding and in consolidating an advantage. Hence, though there is much to be said in favour of taking the “ sporting chance” of making a side follow-on, Fry acted rightly in going in again. It was the safer course. We again saw Fry at his best and had the additional satisfaction of seeing Spooner like­ wise in happy vein. Their partnership of 122 for the first wicket was worth much travel to see. That Fry should have been bowled in attempting an on-drive of a drivable ball only shows that Fry is as human cricketwise as all the greatest batsmen .Fry may look at his broken wicket and wonder how he missed i t ; but he has done it before and will do it again. Foster played another good innings and at the end of the day the amateurs were 359 runs on with 5 wickets in hand, so that Fry’s decision to bat again had ensured an interest­ ing third day’s play. The promise of an interesting day which the position held was in every way realised. Fry did not declare until his side had a lead of 422. To make these runs on a somewhat worn and lively pitch was a big task, and the Players had to move at the rate of 85 an hour to get them. Up to a point they did so well that their success appeared not unlikely. With 200 up and three men out there were three hours left for play. Then the batting broke down before Le Couteur, and tbe only interest left in the match was in the superb batting of Hobbs who carried his bat right through for 154—a feat only previously accomplished in the Lord’s match by Hayward in 1907. Hayward made 146 not out out of 278 ; Hobbs made 154 out of 292, so that the performances were parallel in more ways than one. Both were made on much tbe same sort of pitch, but Hayward’s feat was performed in the first innings of the match. Hobbs’ innings was a really great effort. He gave, it is true, a very difficult chance to Campbell, running from fine to square leg when 94, yet I venture to think that the chance would never have been given if Hobbs had made a century in the match before or a century this season. He has got out so often in the eighties and nineties that over-anxiety led to this bad stroke. Up to the nineties and after he had reached one hundred his play was perfect, and he could have hit the ball which he miss-timed for four. He hit 24 fours and his innings can rank with the very greatest innings played in the long history of the match. Apart from Hobbs, Hayward and Tyldesley, the batting of the Players was again disappointing and the Gentlemen deserved their win. Looking back over the two matches, the conclusion is warranted that English cricket is as good as ever. We lack perhaps a great fast bowler, and as I have already said more slips of the highest class would be very welcome. SUSSEX M ARTLETS v. GENTLEM EN OF Ground, H ove, on July 10 and 11. Score S ussex M a r ti . First innings. Hon. Brian Butler, c Harding, b K ortright R. G. Tudor, st M clver, b M cGahey ............ G. C. Dow ling, st M clver, b M cGahey............ A. L. Corbett, b K ortright ............................. Capt. Alexander, b M cG ahey............................. A. H. Lang, b K o rtrig h t...................................... W. G. Heasman, not o u t ...................................... R. K. Simms, lbw , b McGahey .................... H. L. Havens, lbw , b McGahey .................... H. G. P. W yatt, b Kortright ............................. J. S. Welsh, b K o rtrig h t...................................... B 5, lb 1 ... ............................................... T otal............................. E SSE X .—Played at the County ................. 238 G entlem en of First innings. C. J. K ortright, lbw , b W e lc h ................... C. D. M clver, b Butler ............................. K. Harding, st Lang, b D ow ling ............ C. P. M cGahey, c Tudor, b Corbett J. H . Pattisson, b Corbett .................... P. P. Lincoln, lbw , b C orbett.................... C. K. R idgw ay, c Corbett, b Dowling ... B. H ope, b Corbett ...................................... D. D. Stiven, b D ow ling ............................ O. P. C. Collis, b W yatt ............................. H. D. Swan, n ot o u t ...................................... B 15, lb 7, w 1, nb 2 .................... Second innings. 29 c M clver, b K ortright 68 c Lincoln, b K ortright 12 c and b K ortright 77 b K ortrigh t.......................... 0 c K ortright, b M cGahey 1 b K ortrig h t..................... 26 c Stiven, b K ortright 7 c Collis, b Pattisson ... 5 c and b K ortright 1 n ot o u t .............................. 6 b Pattisson ..................... 6 B 22, lb 4, w 1... Total .................. 0 31 3 6 9 8 10 96 25 20 0 27 E ssex . Second innings. ... 4 ... 43 st Tudor, b B utler ... . 71 ... 23 st Lang, b Corbett .......... 0 ... 193 c W yatt, b D ow ling ... . 17 ... 0 not o u t ................................... 29 ... 0 not o u t ................................... 8 ... 32 ... 12 ... 4 ... 8 ... 3 ... 25 L b 1, w 1 .................... 2 Total 347 Total (3 w kts) .. 127 KENT 2 nd X I. v. SUSSEX and 4 and w on by the visitors by First innings. Munds, c Roberts, b Fender ... H. W. French, b R o b e rts............ Collins, b Roberts ..................... H ubble, c Roberts, b Jupp Jennings, b J u pp............................. F. H. Reynolds, lbw , b Jupp ... M orfee, b R oberts ..................... H ickm ott, b Jupp .................... Capt. McCanlis, not out ............ R. S. Le May, b J u p p ..................... Sm ith, b W addington.................... B 23, lb 1, nb 1 ... Total ............ First innings. Chariw ood, b Sm ith ............ R. G. Tudor, b M orfee P. G. H. Fender, b Morfee Jupp, not ou t............................. Street, c Jennings, b French G. Selmes, b French ............ Bow ley, b French ............ C. R. Brow ne, b Collins ... Capt. M. B. Baily, b French F. K. W addington, run out Roberts, c Sm ith, b French B 27, lb 5, w 1, 2 nd X I.— Played at Sittingbourne on July 3 eight wickets. Score and analysis:— K ent 2 nd X I. Second innings. .................... 23 b J u p p ................................... 31 .................... 21 c Street, b Roberts ......... 5 .................... 0 b W addington .................. 2 .................... 15 b Roberts ........................... 8 ..................... 14 b W addington .................. 37 .................... 0 c Roberts, b W addington... 45 .................... 27 c Bow ley, b W addington .. 21 .................... 0 b J u p p .................................... 4 .................... 0 not o u t .................................... 0 .................... 11 o W addington, b Jupp ... 0 .................... 12 run o u t .................................... 7 .................... 25 B 14, lb 5 .................... 19 Total .................... 179 Second innings. Total... First innings. ......................148 S ussex 2 nd X I. ...................... 14 ...................... 24 ...................... 35 ...................... 70 ...................... 67 .................... 0 ...................... 9 ...................... 3 .................... 1 .................... 1 .................... 1 5 ............. 38 ......................263 K ent 2 nd X I. not o u t ..................... c H ubble, b M unds c H ubble, b Sm ith not o u t .................... B ye.. 23 1 28 12 Total (2 w k ts )... Second innings. O. M. R. W. O. M. R. W. W addington ... .. 6-2 0 19 1 ..................... ... 15-2 1 55 4 R o b e rts ............ .. 15 5 62 3 ...................... ... 13 2 41 2 Jupp..................... .. 15 6 37 5 ...................... ... 13 4 36 3 Fender ............ .. 5 0 25 1 ..................... ... 3 0 28 0 Jupp bow led one no-ball. First innings. S qssex 2 nd X I. Second innings. O. M. R. W. 0 . M. R. W. Collins ............ .. 19 1 38 1 ..................... Sm ith ............ .. 11 1 87 1 ..................... 2*3 0 15 1 Morfee ............ .. 9 0 49 2 ....................... H ickm ott .. 7 0 30 0 ..................... Jennings............ .. 5 1 29 0 ..................... French ............ .. 7 4 41 5 ....................... 8 0 27 0 Munds ..................... ... 5 0 22 1 Collins bowled one wide and Morfee five no-balls.