Cricket 1912

594 CRICKET : A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. D ec . 14, 1912. batting assets, though as yet his bow ling had been disappointing. Against Lincolnshire at Sleaford he scored 61 ; against N orthum ber­ land he made the first century of his life, his 116 including seventeen 4’s, and no m istake bar a chance at 80. In the second innings of the cou nty he took 8 of the 9 wickets that fell at a cost of only 88. Against the N orth of Scotland at Inverness he had 6 for 31 in the first innings, against Scotland at Galashiels, 7 for 94, and against the Scottish Counties at Perth he aggregated 91, and took in the match 8 for 165. A t W oodbrook he was top scorer of the match, with 53 and 89, the bowlers against him including G. A . Faulkner, R . H. Lambert, and Peter Clarke. In the second innings of Sussex at H ove he had 5 for 71 ; and in the last m atch of the tour he took 8 of the 9 Glouces­ tershire wickets that fell in the first innings for 91. In all matches of the tour his figures were 928 runs in 43 innings (one not out), average 22 09, and 94 wickets at 20-42 each. H e stood sixth in batting, and second in bowling, and had the distinction of a larger proportion of double figure scores that any other batsman on the side. T o no other of all the fifteen had the tour meant so much in the matter of developm ent, I fancy. Perhaps W arden was quicker to learn ; perhaps the tour had com e at just the right stage of his career, before his m ethods were stereotyped. A nyw ay, he went back to India an incom parably better batsman than, and at least as good a bowler as, he had been a few months earlier. J. S . WARDEN (All India Team). That he had not lost his bowling he showed m ost plainly in the Triangular Tournam ent of 1911 at B om bay. Seven for 40 and 2 for 42 v. the Hindus, 6 for 51 and 6 for 45 v. the Presidency, were his analyses— 21 for 178 in all. B ut proof of the strides he had made in batting were deferred until this year when three matches of importance were played by the Parsi team, v. the Presidency at 1\ ona, and v. the H indus and Mahom- medans at B om bay. His forcing batting went a long way towards his side’s victory in the gam e with the European side. Against the Hindus he made 115 n ot out, when practically every one else failed ; and against the Mahommedans he ran up 85, he and Dr. H. D. Kanga (150) making a great stand. His total was 308 for three com pleted innings, and such form as this puts him on a par with the Parsi best, K . M. Mistri, R . P. M eherhom ji, and H. D. Kanga. Others have been good, notably D. D. Kanga, B. 1). Gagrat (in days when scores ruled smaller), B. C. Machliwalla, N. C. Bapasola, M. E. Pavri (a better bowler than batsman, though, perhaps), B. M. Billi- moria, and D. M. R aja, but I think the four selected must have been the best. W arden only bowled a score or so overs in the recent matches, Parekh and Elavia, with some aid from Dr. Kanga, doing most of the work ; but he will get plenty more chances of showing his ability as a trundler, and it is to be hoped he will not go the w ay of some others, and let his batting kill his bowling. Australian Cricket Chronology and Memorabilia. (Continued from 'page 272.) 1868-9. Victoria v. Tasmania, at M elbourne.— In their first innings Tasmania were dismissed for 18, S. Cosstick bowling 85 balls for 1 run and 6 wickets and T. W . W ills 88 balls for 16 runs and 3 wickets. Victoria, who totalled 409 (21 wides), won by an innings and 265 runs. Joseph Phillips scored 115 for them. New South W ales v. Victoria, at Sydney.— In the first innings of N .S.W . (37) F. E. Allan took 8 wickets for 20. 1869-70. Victoria v. New South Wales, at Melbourne.— Lieut. Gordon, making his first and only appearance for Victoria, scored 22 and 121. X V I. of Tasmania v. Victoria, at Launceston.— T. W . W ills took 13 Tasmanian wickets for 92 runs (7-48 and 6-44). 1870-71. Victoria v. Tasmania, at Melbourne.— In the first innings of the form er H. Barrett bowled 60 balls for 8 runs and 5 wickets, and in the second of the latter (36) C. R eid sent down 38 balls for 5 runs and 6 wickets. New South Wales v. Victoria, at Sydney.— S. Cosstick bowled throughout the form er's second innings (84), sending dow n 120 balls for 21 runs and 8 wickets. Three of New South Wales v. Three of V ictoria, at Sydney. (Single wicket).— “ The decision of one of the umpires (D. Thom pson) in n o­ balling D. Gregory caused considerable discussion. H aving called ‘ no-ball ’ before the ball had left the hand, the fifth was not reckoned. The umpire retired and Caffyn took his place.” — Scores and Biographies. Form ation of the South Australian Cricket Association. 1871-2. Victoria v. New South Wales, at Melbourne.— For scoring 41 for the form er G. Gibson was presented with a bat made from a willow-tree grown in his own garden. F. E. Allan took 13 N.S.W . wickets for 60 runs— 8 for 35 and 5 for 25. C. Gregory had to bat one-handed for N .S.W ., having fractured one of the small bones of his hand against the pavilion fence whilst fielding a ball. It m ay here be m entioned that in a previous match between the two States, the m iddle stump of one of the wickets was bow led out of the ground. The sun, however, having heated the varnish, the bails were stuck together, and so they did not fall. 1872-3. New South Wales v. Victoria, at Sydney.— In the first innings of the form er S. Cosstick took 6 wickets for 15, and in the second of Victoria J. Coates, bowling 161 balls, obtained 6 for 19. A n arrange­ ment was made for this match that a fresh wicket should be used for each innings. The game comm enced on February 28, and, owing to rain, was not finished until March 8. 1873-4. A n English team, under the captaincy of W . G. Grace, visited Australia, playing 15 matches, of which they won 10, lost 3 and drew 2. Form al opening of the Adelaide Oval. X V III. o f Victoria v. England, at M elbourne.— In the form er’s innings of 266 “ W . G .” took 10 wickets for 58. In the second innings of England W . Oscroft was bowled by the fifth ball of an over from J. Conway, the umpire (F. H. Boult) b y mistake allowing one ball too many. A t the end of each day a report of the play was cabled to London— an innovation. X X I I . o f Stawell v. England, at Stawell.— S. Cosstick (6 for 18 and 4 for 36) and J. Conway (3 for 25 and 6 for 47), bowling unchanged, dismissed England for 43 and 91, but Scores and Biographies records that, “ The wickets were ‘ sim ply disgusting,’ newly made and little or no grass on .” In the first innings of Stawell, who won by 10 wickets, J. Southerton took 9 wickets for 52, and Martin M cIntyre 9 for 10. X X I I . o f W arrnam bool v. England, at W arm am bool.— The form er were dismissed for 68 and 51, J. Southerton (14 for 35 and 10 for 23) and J. Lillywhite (6 for 28 and 10 for 19) bowling unchanged. Jupp carried his bat through England’s innings o f 104 for 58. (To be continued.)