Cricket 1911

A u g u s t 5, 1 9 1 1 . C R IC K E T : A W EEK LY RECORD OP THE GAME. 391 B U £ # E Y ’S WORLD - FAMED. t a . « a 27 /6 2 2 / 6 Q 0 ^ 18/6 9 o ^ 16/6 S ^ o . b 4 ^ 14/6 ^ u n T o ^ ' D E M O N •) 14/6 " ry?e Evolution of a Cricket Bat," O BTA IN A BLE F R EE UPON R EQ U EST FROM GEO. G. BUSSEY & CO., LTD ., 3 6 & 3 8 , QUEEN VICTORIA ST., LONDON. „ , . | Peckham, London. ac o n e s, | Suffolk. A g e n t s a ll o v e r t h e W o r ld . Cricket Notches. B y t h e R e v . K . S . H o lm e s . RESUMING that Fry can go to Australia there are still three men to be f chosen before the England team will be complete. Who shall they be ? In batting and bowling there is little room for criticism of the selected ten. What of their fielding ability ? A few weeks ago Tyldesley, who may be regarded as an author­ ity, spoke weighty words on thisJail-important depart­ ment of the game. Discussing this Australian tour, ho said : “ We want men who can field. Picking men J for batting and bowling is of little use if you have 110 places for them in the field. The team ought largely to be chosen 011 a fielding basis.” That pronouncement I heartily endorse. Perhaps it was natural for him to add— “ We badly require men in ihe long field,” seeing that that has been his place throughout his long and successful career. What about men in the slips—a position only just second in import­ ance tothewicket-keeper in these days of off bowling ? Safe slips are a sine qminoil.; more catches are made there than in all other positions. Have we the men wanted ? I think so. Young Hearne and George Gunn always field there. Now I don’t say that either of them is worth a place in a representative eleven for their slip-fielding alone; but fortunately they would alike strengthen our batting, whilst Hearne is something more than a useful change bowler. His age may be quoted against him, but he is Foster’s junior by only two years, and in addition he gives me the impression that few, if any, matches are too big for him. Did he not thoroughly justify his inclusion in the lu st Trial match at Sheffield ? Gunn’s remarkable suc­ cess in the last Australian tour needs only to be mentioned to emphasize his claims. We want one more ; why not choose Hitch, who, in addition to his marvellous fielding, is a fast and untiring bowler that at any time may change the complexion of a match ? I have little doubt that he would prove as handy in the long field as at short leg ; like the Notts Captain he may be able to field brilliantly in any position. I beg respectfully to remind the M.C.C. that fielding is as integral a portion of the game as batting or bowling ; perhaps more matches are lost by loose fielding than are won by skilful batting. In our day the best bowlers are at the mercy of “ the field.” A fortnight ago there was only one first-class match in town all the week and that at. Leyton ; last week simultaneous county matches were played at Lord’s, the Oval and at Leyton. Surely a happier arrangement was possible. Most of the scoring last week was kept within reasonable limits, although the weather and wickets were in batsmen’s favour. Consequently we had some very delightful, not to say exciting, matches. And it is curious that in several moderate innings one batsman stood out conspicuously. For example, Lancashire made 181 against Essex, Sharp’s contribution being 100 ; Bowley scored 104 not out in Worcestershire’s 287 against Middlesex ; Rhodes 125 out of Yorkshire’s 282 against Sussex ; Seymour nearly one- half of Kent’s total against Surrey— 118 out of 241 ; Chaplin H I out of 250 for Sussex v. Lancashire ; Foster 101 out of 225 in the Warwickshire match at Harrogate ; whilst Bird’s 90 was more than one-third of Surrey’s score at Blackheath. Against Lancashire, Essex totalled 315, of which Fane and Perrin accounted for 235. On the other hand there were three centuries in Surrey’s 576 against Derbyshire, but only one— Tarrant’s 168 — in the Middlesex (440) innings against Essex. So bowlers had little cause for complaint. Here are some of the week’s analyses :— Field, 7 for 20 against Yorkshire ; Hitch 7 for 72 against Derbyshire ; Haigh, 7 for 20 against Sussex ; Jupp (Sussex), 5 for 37 against Yorkshire ; Hirst, 6 for 34 against Sussex and 5 for 26 against Warwickshire ; Tremlin, 6 for 64 against Lancashire ; Rushby, 6 for 71 against K e n t; Iremonger, 6 for 65 against Leicestershire ; Vine, 6 for 59 against Lancashire; Quaife, 4 for 14 against Gloucestershire ; Humphreys, 3 for 4 against Surrey; and lastly, .T. W . Hearne, 6 for 17 against Essex, with the hat trick thrown in. Are batsmen tiring ? J‘er contra, Buckenham’s one wicket against Lanca­ shire cost 144 runs, but he quickly set this right against Middlesex— 6 for 109. Surrey’s 576 against Derbyshire may well be placed alongside of Essex’ 78 at Lord’s and Yorkshire’s 58 at Harrogate. Bowley is the first Worcester­ shire batsman to play through an innings. Foster had a memorable week with consecutive scores of 56, 87, 60 and 101. He is the outstanding cricketer of the present season, I am not for­ getting the all-round ability of Hirst and Tarrant, but the former is, as was only to be expected after more than twenty seasons of exceptionally hard work, a; trifle passe, whilst Tarrant is more a match-saver than a match- winner. Foster inspires ; he has lifted Warwickshire into tha front rank of the counties. Kinneir and Quaife have been fine batsmen for many a past season, and yet their county never took a commanding position. Foster comes along, and, like poor Lohmann, makes his county respected by all