Cricket 1912

F e b . 24 , 1912. CKICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 21 between New South Wales and Tasmania, in which Messrs. E oy Minnett and H. V. Hordern distinguished themselves so greatly. These are all given in C r ic k e t , however, so that our readers will not miss them. I t should be clearly understood that, in the present tour, the matches with Queensland and Tasmania rank as first-class, while that with Toowoomba does not so rank. In dealingwitli the averages while the tour is still incomplete, the better plan would seem to be to give those for first-class matches only, allowing the remaining games—which really are not taken seriously— to wait for inclusion in the “ all matches ” table at the end. L o n g -L e g ” in the Sporting Life had a gibe at the expense of Woolley’s 305 v. Tasmania and the statisticians who hasten to include it in their figures. But really, is there any very essential difference between tho Kent man’s achievement and Mr. Warwick Armstrong’s 303 not out v. Somerset in 1905 ? Tasmania is not specially strong in bowling ; but it is no further beneath the level of the stronger States than our weaker first-class counties are below tho standard of their stronger brethren. T h o s e of our readers who have missed the continuation of Mr. P. R. Le Couteur’s thoughtful articles have a right to an explanation as to their non-appearance. Early last month the old Oxonian, who had been at Bonn for some time, was called home to Australia by urgent family affairs. We hope to have more work from his pen in months to come, and think it is almost a pity he did not go back sooner. As it is, ho will be too late for a chance of selection for the English tour, though we believe that he would have been a great element of strength to the team. If anyone could fill Dr. Hordern’s place as a googly bowler, it is Mr. P. R. Le Couteur. A t the time of writing only Messrs. Hill and Carkeek appear to be certain starters. Of the ten selections made, Dr. Ilordern has refused ; Messrs. Armstrong, Bardsley, Carter, Cotter, Minnett, Ransford and Trumper are under­ stood to have asked more time for consideration. Probably these seven will all come ; Australia will not be at full strength without them. This will loave at least six, possibly seven, places to fill. But a definite decision cannot be postponed for long, especially as the Board of Control has sent an ultimatum to the players who have not yet answered its invitation, demanding an immediate reply. M e s s r s . Kelleway and Macartney should be practically certainties. Mr. Gervase Hazlit, who narrowly missed inclusion in the last team, has come well into the running by his fine bowling for New South Wales against the English team in the last match ; lie also did well against both South Australia and Victoria at Sydney (9 for 104 and 6 for 140), so that this cannot be discounted as a mere flash in the pan. The inclusion of these three would give another trio of bowlers, all good batsmen, moreover. Then there are Messrs. Matthews and McLaren, the latter of whom should surely have been played at Melbourne in the fourth Test. As batsmen there are Messrs. Mayne and Dolling (South Australia), Smith and Kortlang (Victoria), Barbour (New South Wales) and Jennings (Queensland), all posses­ sing at least an outside chance. Is the appointment of Mr. Mayne as a selector quite fair to him, by the way ? Remember the story of the man who did not like carving, because one must either be a pig and keep the best cuts for oneself, or an ass and let others have them ! Mr. Mayne, who really has strong claims to inclusion, will be placed in very much the same invidious position as Mr. Peter McAlister was three years ago. We shall not respect him a bit the less if he sticks up for his own rights, as that gentleman did. I f more bowlers are needed, there are Messrs. Whitty, who must not yet be counted out, and R. J. A. Massie, son of that dashing hitter, Mr. Hugh Hamon Massie— both left-handers. But possibly that wonderful little veteran, Mr. Gregory, who will be 42 in April, and who has already visited England with seven teams, has a better chance of selection than any of these younger men, for no one can deny “ Syd’s ” value in a crisis. He may seem to be careless when nothing is at stake, but give him something to play for—put him in a real fighting position-—and he will almost always bo found equal to the occasion. His great innings of 186 not out for New South Wales against the M.C.C. team is his twenty-second century in twenty-two years of first-class cricket, during which he has dropped out of tho N.S.W. team two or three times, only to be brought back again. It is, we believe, the first time he has evor carriod his bat right through an innings in a big match. H e r e is a list of his first-class centuries, in chrono­ logical order : 112 Eighth Australian Team v. Middlesex ............... 1893 201 Australia v. England 1894-5 101 N.S.W. v. Victoria ... ... ... ................ 1894-5 154 Ninth Australian Team v. XI. of England 1896 103 Australia v. England 1896 102 Ninth Australian Team v. Leicestershire............... 1896 171 N.S.W. v. English Team ... ... ............... 1897-8 124 Tenth Australian Team v. S o u th ............................ 1899 102 Tenth Australian Team v. Cambridge University 1899 117 Australia v. England 1899 176 N.S.W . v. South Australia........................................ 1899-1900 182 N.S.W . v. South Australia............... ............... 1901-2 147 N.S.W . v. English T e a m ........................................ 1901-2 152 N.S.W. v. South A ustralia......................................... 1903-4 112 Australia v. England ........................................ 1903-4 134 Twelfth Australian Team v. Hants. ............... 1905 201 N.S.W . v. Victoria ... ................ 1907-8 106 Australian Team v. Rest of Australia ............... 1907-8 179 N.S.W . v. Victoria ... ... ... ............... 1908-9 126* Thirteenth Australian Team v. Best of Australia 1908-9 169* N.S.W . v. V ic to r ia ..................................................... 1909-10 186* N.S.W . v. English Team ................ ............... 1911-12 • Signifies not out. W i l f r e d R h o d e s ’ s great feat in the match with New South Wales just finished is only the sixth instance of the double century in the course of many tours. The five preceding it were :— Mr. A. C. MacLaren’s 142 and 100, England v. N.S.W., Sydney, 1897-8 ; Mr. V. T. Trumper’s 109 and 119, Australia v. Essex, Leyton, 1902 ; Mr. W. Bardley’s 139 nnd 130, Australia v. England, Oval, 1909 ; David Denton’s 139 and 138, England v. Transvaal, Johannesburg, 1909-10; Mr. C. G. Macartney’s 119 and 120, N.S.W. v. South Africa, Sydney, 1910-1. Three of the six on the Sydney ground, it will be observed, and the “ Governor-General’s ” the only instance in which the centuries were made against the touring side. I t is a coincidence that Mr. Trumper’s scores in 1902 were, in reverse order, however, the same its Wilfred’s this week. Rhodes has now totalled over 1,000 runs in the first-class matches of the present tour, and has gone slightly ahead of Hobbs on average— 1,059 runs at 58-83 against 866 at 57'73. Gunn’s average is 50-18, Hearne’s 49'12, W oolley’s 49‘00, Mr. Douglas’s 39'00, and Mr. Foster’s 38-87. D if f ic u l t , if not absolutely impossible, is it for anyone so far away to make a plain and straight-forward story out of tho enravelments of the differences between the Austra­ lian Board of Control and the players. Various brief cablegrams from tim e 'to timejonly^ servedto complicate matters still further. Mr. F. R. S p o f f o r t ii , whose opinion one naturally values, does not agree with the Board. Messrs. Armstrong, Carter, Cotter, Ransford, and Trumper do not agree with the Board. The Australian public does not agree with the Board. One hears that already a sum well on towards four figures has been subscribed with a view to sending over here a team chosen quite independently of tho Board. Mr. Frank Laver is very hard up against the Board. E x p r e s s io n s of opinion in this country do not help one to come to a final judgment . “ Wanderer ” of the Sports­ man says that the scheme of an independent team would not