Cricket 1912

Nov. 16, 1912. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 579 Also batted: —Barham, C. H., 1 innings-0 not out-1 run; Goldup, S. T., 1-0-0 ; Harris, H. V., 1-0-0 ; Holt, W. S., 1-0-5 ; Hunter, P.J.f 1-0-23 ;Lanham, H., 2-0-30 ; Lee, C. E. E., 2-1-38 ; Neall, K. P., 1-0-4 ; Silverthorne,S., 1-0-2 ; Skipper, F., 2-1-73 ; Williams, C. ()., 3-0-2. Also bowled: — Barhaui, C. H., 33 runs-6 wickets; Goldup, S. T., 38-5; Harris, H. V., 54-2 ; Hunter, P. J., 31-1; Lanham, H., 91-12 ; Neall, K. P., 46-4. Centuries were scored for the second X I. by : J. Crafter, 106*, v. London, Liverpool and Globe Insurance Co. A . S. Sellar, 104*, v. L. and W . Bank II. W . S. H olt, 104, v. W hite H ouse II. W . II. W illiam s, 103*, v. Sutton II. A nd for the third X I. by : J. P. W hite, 101 v. South American Banks. A . J. WThyte seven times topped 50 for the first and once (the only tim e he played) for the second X I. J. Crafter and A. S. Sellar each three times topped 50 for the second X L , and A. B. Nichols did so three times for the third X I. G. C. Hast six times took 5 or m ore wickets in an innings for the first X I., taking 5 for 12 v. Private Banks. N. W . Matthews took 5 or more wickets three times for the first, twice for the second XT., A. B. Nichols once for the second, five times for the third. T he W est Kent Wanderers scarcely came up to their usual standard of success in 1912, a fact largely due to the inability of some of their best men to turn out at all regularly. As m any as 27 players appeared in the first X I. during the season— too m any in view of the fact that the club has a strong and keen A team. Possibly a re­ sorting would be advisable. But the clu b ’s prospects for the future are bright— as bright as at any tim e during its existence, says its secretary, and that is saying much, for it dates back to 1856. Looking over the figures of the first X I., one picks upon A. E. Lugg as its shining light. He actually took more than half the wickets, and 95 at 11 each surely represents splendid work, especially for a veteran. Am ong the batsmen who played at all frequently, G. F. Howell is easily first, and W . D. Myers, H. W aller, and G. Darrell also made over 200 runs. But the team undoubtedly suffered from too many chops and changes. A feature of the season was a very enjoyable visit to Belgium. The club recently held its first social of the winter, with progressive whist, singing, and dancing ; and the evening was so great a success that it will be repeated on the 28th inst. W :E£T K E N T W A N D E R E R S : 1912. Matches played, 23 ; won, 7 ; lost, 12 ; drew, 3 ; tied, 1. Buns for : 2,849 for 200 wickets— average 14-2. Buns against: 3,367 for 202 wickets—average 16.6. Cleaver, A. J. Crouch, S. J. A. Darvell, G. Greathurst, A. T. Gurnsey, H. E. Howell, G. F. Lawrence, W. H. Longman, J. Lugg, A. E. ... Myers, W. D. Silk, F. Tickell, B. S. Waller, H. ... Ward, J. G. Willis, A. G. F. Wise, S. Also batted: —-Crump, W. G., 4 innings-0 not out-4 runs; 3-0-20 ; Kaye, R., 2-0-6 ; Lawrence, C., 1-0-1 ; Maggs, W. H., 3-0-24 ; Marriott, D. J., 4-0-48 ; Ridout, F. M., 2-1-15 ; Tovey, C., 1-0-7 ; Truelove, A., 2-1-16 ; Youngs, W., 3-0-27. Also bowled :— Lawrence, C., 16*3 overs-70 runs-6 wickets; Maggs, \\. ft., 13*3-49-4 ; Tovey, C., 6-30-2 ; Youngs, W., 7-4-28-4. The A team’s figures appeared in an earlier issue. Inns. B atting . N.O. R. A. H.S. B owling . O. R. W. A. ... 14 3 66 6-00 29 92-4 378 16 23*62 ... 11 0 184 16-72 61 91 47 4 11*75 ... 18 0 215 11-94 49 ... 125*5 564 20 28*20 5 1 49 9-80 24 — — — — 6 1 76 15-20 32* ... — — — — ... 11 3 211 •26-37 66* ... 50 190 12 15*83 ... 13 1 178 14*83 46 — — — — ... 16 3 65 5*00 23 — — — — ... 19 4 165 11-00 71* ... 319-1 1067 95 11*23 .. 20 0 323 16-15 62 ... — — — — 7 0 107 15-28 36 — — — — 7 1 23 3-28 12 ... — — — — ... 20 0 293 14-65 69 — — —■ — 5 2 147 49-00 79* ... 17-1 87 7 12*42 ... 10 1 5 8 6-44 20 8 42 1 42*00 .. 7 0 40 5-71 20 ... 33*1 134 10 13-40 ! ; Hollands, A. W., TW ICK EN H AM C.C. : 1912. Matches phiyed, 22 ; won, 10 ; lost, 9 ; drew, 3. Runs for : 2,821 for 194 wickets—average 14-5. Runs against: 2,726 for 233 wickets—average, 11-2. B atting . Inns. N.O . R. A. H.S. O. R. W. A. Barbour, T. J. 8 3 51 10-20 28 2 15 0 — Battle, B................... 3 0 31 10-33 15 7 22 I 22*00 Bourne, W. ... 9 1 7 0-87 4 6-51 221 9 24*55 Brown, B. W. .. 17 1 276 17*25 59 30 199 11 18-09 Chads, H. T. 3 0 26 8-66 23 29 144 11 13-09 Cozens, A. B. .. 19 0 280 14-73 38 43*5 140 16 8*75 Docker, L. ... .. 16 0 138 8-62 47 . 232*5 667 79 8*44 Fox, F........................ .. 15 1 131 9-35 35* .. . 115*3 364 38 9*57 Goatly, S. 4 0 86 21-50 38 — — — — Hurditch, C. P. .. 17 1 571 35-68 178* .. 2 19 0 —■ Looker, F.................. .. 10 2 105 13*12 25* 2 9 0 — Montgomerie, G. R. 4 1 43 14*33 17 5*1 18 2 9-00 Nobes, P. E. .. 12 1 100 9-09 19 — — — — Saunders, W. 8 1 58 8-28 22 — — — — Walbanck, S. .. 14 4 78 7-80 36 !!! 117*1 508 48 10-41 Walbanck, V. J. .. 18 149 9-93 33* .. 12*3 49 3 16*33 Walbanck, W. S. ... 19 2 505 29-70 118 51*3 181 12 15*03 Also batted: —Arthur, C., 10 ; Arthur, E H., 2 and 0 ; Banks, C., 2 and 0* ; Barrott, S. J. R., 1 ; Bayles, E., 8 and 5 ; Boden, C. A., 28; Cooper, W. J., 2 and 0 ; Fox, E. A., 13 ; Goatly, A., 0 ; Goode, E. St. J., 12 ; Gosling, A., 1 ; Griffen, G., 10; Hurditch, 1\ It. R., 1 and 1 : Marks, M .,0; Morris, M., 17 and 6 ; Rhodes, R., 4 ; Severn, M., 0 ; Staples, R ev.— , 23 and 2 ; Tucker, H. ()., 4 and (); Vaughan, L., 9 and 0 ; Whiffen, E., 7 ; Wilkins, F., 0 ; Williams, W., 8 ; W.lson. A., 0 ; Wood, P. C., 5 and 1. Also bow ed :— Griffen, G.,8 overs-23 runs 5-wickets ; Rhodes, W. J., 3-27 0 ; Vaughan, L., 5-74-5. Parson’s Green had a great season. Of 27 matches played only one was lost, which is good enough for anything. The side can scarcely be said to have had a tail at all, for right down to the last man there was batting ability, and the figures of the leading bats­ men in so wet a season as 1912 are really remarkable. .1. Higgs was one of the few club batsmen of the season who totalled four figures ; but F. D. Heath and F. W . England— it is to be hoped that the latter does not really mean to give up cricket for golf ; surely cricket is England’s national and natural game ?— head him in the averages. In A. C. Higgs, C. E. Harrod, and the worthy secretary, H. R . Ellis, Parson’s Green had a rare trio of bowlers. It is a fact worth noting that H arrod took his 100 wickets at under 10 runs each, and that on an average he had a wicket for each nineteen balls bowled, while Higgs actually had a wicket for every 14 balls ! This means the quick dismissal of opposing sides, and the quick dismissal of opposing sides means more matches won, if only your own men can score heavily enough— which the Parson’s Green men can. P A R SON ’S G R E EN C.C. : 1912. Matches played, 27 ; won, 19 ; lost, 1 ; drew, 7. Runs for : 5,142 for 213 wickets—average, 24-1. Runs against: 3,569 for 294 wickets—average, 12-1. B atting . B owling . Inns. N.iO.R. A. H.S. O. R. W. A. Bool, C. J. ... ... 20 0 481 24-05 134 46*5 173 8 21-62 Driver, F. G. ... 18 0 299 16-61 71 — — —• — Ellis, H. R. ... ... 16 4 93 7*75 31 190 873 51 17-11 England, F. W. ... 16 8 359 44-87 82 25*3 127 7 18-14 Harrod, C. E. ... 25 7 412 22-88 56 308*4 946 100 9-46 Hayes, H. ... 12 1 66 6-00 *20 — — — — Heath, F. D. ... 19 3 738 46-12 155 — — — — Higgs, A. C. ... 16 0 484 30-25 89 149 509 65 7-83 Higgs, J. S. ... Thompson, C. W Thompson, J. S. ... 26 1 1016 40-64 152* ... — — — — . ... 21 5 304 19-00 57 — — — — ... 19 1 195 10-83 39* ... — — — — Also bowled: 87*1-282-21. — Kingham, H. C., 39*2overs-110 runs-8 wickets; P<:ttitt, T. M., Twickenham won one more game than they lost, and on figures should have had a bigger m ajority, as they were over 3 runs per wicket, or say 33 per innings, better than their opponents. But cricket has not yet been reduced to a question of mathematics, which is one reason why even m atch results cannot be held to tell the whole story. That much-travelled cricketer, C. P. Hurditch (who scored two centuries) and W . E. W albanck, in very different styles, were the side’s chief batsmen, and L. Docker, S. W albanck, and F. Fox did excellent work in the attack. D ocker and F ox each achieved the hat trick once. Most of the bowlers have far better averages than last year ; the batsmen, on the contrary, show a natural decrease, this being especially marked in the cases of F ox, V. J. Walbanck, P. E. Nobes, and F. Looker. Another real cricket season will prob­ ably find them to the fore again. In 1912 the “ flannelled fools ” and the “ muddied oafs ” got a bit m ixed up. Old Charlton had a good record on the whole, their first, second, and m id-week teams winning 25 matches and losing 17, which gives a substantial m ajority, and averaging 20*5 per wicket, while their opponents averaged 15*2. A. A. Martin, who in all matches for the club fell only seven short of four figures, with an average o f 41, scored three centuries, and took 69 wickets at 10*45 each, and A. H. Manning, the left-hander, who had in all 155 wickets at 10.65 each, did great things, and W . J. Gill, W . C. S. W eller, S. D. Fresco (these three all scoring centuries), F. J. Tyler, A . J. Pitt, J. F. Lambert, E. Punch, H. J. Gradidge, and H. H. Martin were all valuable members of the teams. The second X I. had quite a useful lot of batsmen, and did not lack for bowlers either. In the cases of the mid-week and second teams only the best of the batting and bowling figures are given ; and in the first team averages no batsmen is included unless he played 8 innings, no bowler unless he took 10 wickets.