Cricket 1912

496 CEICKBT: A WEEKLY EECOED OF THE GAME. S e p t . 14, 1912. Cricket: A W E E K LY RECORD OF THE GAME. 33 and 35. MOOR LANE, LONDON, E.C. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1912. C omm unications to the E ditor should be addressed to him at 33 & 35 Moor Lane, E .C . Advertisements, Subscriptions, & c., should be sent to the Manager, at the same address. T he follow ing are the rates of subscription to C e ic k e t :— Great Britain. Abroad. One Year ................................ 6s. 3d. ... 7s. 6d. T he 24 Summer Numbers ... 5s. Od. ... 6s. Od. T he 6 W inter Numbers ... Is. 3d. ... Is. 6d. N O T I C E . Messrs. WRIGHT & CO., of 7, Temple Lane, Tudor Street, E.C.. areAdvertisementContractorsfor CRICKET, and will be glad to give their best attention to any Firms desiring to advertise in the paper. Scale of Charges will be sent on application. pavilion (Sosstp. Tbe abstract and brief chronicle of tbe tim e. — Hamlet . F rom an Australian exchange I snip this interesting item :— THE BOARD AND TIIE PLAYERS. Q u e st io n o p C o n tr o l . Sydney, July 28. During the past few days there have been persistent rumours in Sydney of a move originating in Melbourne against the Board of Cricket Control. It has been said that the intention is to secure clubs to send to the Cricket Association delegates in favour of the players, as against the Board. These rumours are probably based on the fact that Warwick Armstrong, J. W. Trumble, and Vernon Bansford, of Melbourno, are now in Sydney. Clem. Hill will bo here in a few days, and Frank Laver was here a couple of days ago. It is said that Armstrong has spent a considerable time in conference with M. A. Noble and Albert Cotter. Carter is also here, so within about a week there have been or will bo in Sydney five of the famous six players. Mr. McElhone, chairman of the Board of Control, when seen regarding the matter, said ho had heard various rumours, but knew of nothing definite, but ho would not be surprised at anything, so far as the Melbourne Cricket Club was concerned. That club would never be satisfied until it got control of cricket again. Warwick Armstrong, when seen late to-night, said lie knew absolutely nothing •about such a move. Cotter and Carter profess like ignorance, so the presence of these cricketers is evidently nothing more than a curious coinci­ dence and tho rumours are mere rumours only. D r e a d f u l ! What is going to happen next ? Thero is one com fort; whatever it is Mr. McElhone will not be surprised. “ T h e C r i c k e t C o n s p ir a t o r s ; o r t h e S e c r e t S e v e n ” —good title for a shocker, eh ? Seriously, I don’t think the Australian Bress need worry itself. One inclines to think that Mr.McElhone, having taken hold firmly, is not the man to let go easily. T h e following reaches me from a Staffordshire reader. I am afraid it is “ writ sarka.st.ik.” “ ‘ Good Work by Falcon,’ read a daily paper’s headline. And I thought that the Norfolk secretary was right., after all. He said that all the county players were helping in relief work in consequence of the floods. But it turned out that the Norfolk captain was playing in some cricket match at Old Buckenham Hall ! So they can’t, all be doing relief work. I feel a bit disappointed.” The Norfolk-Staffordshire dispute is rather a delicate matter for an outsider—if I, who am a member of one club and a friend of both, must consider myself an outsider—to touch upon. Staffordshire has definitely declined to play at Norwich on September 19, 20 and 21, the dates suggested by the Norfolk club; and I take it that in doing so the west midland county waives its claim to the Championship. The position is un. satisfactory in every way. Staffordshire might press a claim for the premiership, on the ground that Norfolk at first declined flatly to play, and, on amending this decision, endeavoured to fix dates inconveniently late. Norfolk can reply that their cir­ cumstances were exceptional, and some sympathy would be felt with them in such a contention. Out of evil may come good. Is it too much to suggest that Norfolk and Staffordshire, both undefeated, should be con. sidered joint holders of the title for 1912, and that in 1913 they should meet ? It is natural enough that Norfolk, with small gates at the best of times and less support than the club ought to have, Bhould fix up matches with its neighbours on the score of economy. But so good a team ought to play the strongest sides in the competition, and of the really strong sides it played in 1912 only one—Herts. I b e l i e v e it would be for the good of the Minor County Competition if all secretaries concerned saw to it that their county’s scores were sent to the Bress immediately after a match. Two of the scores belatedly included this week were only secured for publication in C r i c k e t by special efforts ; they have not seen the light in the daily papers. This sort, of thing is apt to choke off the few enthusiasts. In some cases, too, no bowling analyses are forwarded. I heard the other day that the Hon. Sec. of the M.C.C.A., Dr. J. Earl Norman, himself found it impossible to get the analysis in one match—a Carmarthenshire game, I believe —a year or two ago. Wisden for 1912 stated that the Carmarthenshire averages for 1911 were unobtainable. But they wore, as a matter of fact, published with the rest in C r ic k e t , having been supplied to me by Mr. G. P. Lewis, the county’s Hon. Sec. P e o p l e there are who affect to despise such records as the round four-figure total in runs or the three-figure total in wickets. But I fancy that very few players are numbered among these lofty-minded ones. Bersonally I feel a good deal of sympathy with William Huddleston, who has never yet taken a hundred wickets in a season, and who missed that distinction this year through rain-spoiled matches and unavoidable absence from one game. I AM sure that John Newman must have felt some chagrin that in Hampshire’s .last match ha could only get six wickets, when seven would have made him 100 for the season. I guess James Iremonger would welcome the chance to incroase his quota of 95 to 100, and Tom Bushby that of taking his 97 into three figures ; and if H. L. Simms and Gervys Hazlitt are not working hard to reach 100 in the wickets column appearances are deceptive. T h r e e colonial players—Syd Gregory, Louis Tancred, and Claude Jennings—have boon a very long time in moving from 900 to 1000. The Australian captain had reached 900 by the end of July, and has only just lately got his thousandth run, having played a dozen innings meantime. The Aus­ tralian vice-captain reached 900 during the second week in August; at tho time of writing he also has just passed 1000. Tancred had made 815 (including his 62 for M.C.C. v. Notts) as long ago as the last week in July. His next three innings added 16. Then ho made a jump with 30 v. Australia at Trent Bridge. After that came 0, 9, 0, 0, and 0 in five successive innings. Total thus far, 870. Consecutive scores of 28, 51, and 13 took him to 962. Six in two innings at Leyton moved him on to 968. A score of 27* at Bristol made him 995. He went for a duck in the second innings ; then he made another blob, then 3. At last another innings of 3 at Attleborough lifted him into four figures. It is scarcely likely that, a batsman of his experience was obsessed by anxiety for the thousand total ; probably he himself might put down some of his failure to that vile fellow, August.