Cricket 1913

Jun e 14, 1913. CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. 305 THE HAUNTED BATSMAN Cricket Chirps. (By E. H. D. S ew ell.) The model batsman was in great fettle at the O val; but Warwickshire struck me as short of bowling. Foster is bowling in rather a different style now from that which secured so many wicket 9 for him on the leg side, and seems to have shed for the time being some of that nip from the pitch that was his chief asset against batsmen who can bat. The model referred to is of course Quaife, and he was at his best— every stroke as it ought to be played. For long years now this “ youngster ” has been the pattern for all other youngsters. He used to be called slow. I have seen him play a few times and have never seen him slow yet. A slow player is the unattractive chap who makes no stroke at the ball that offers runs or, if he makes the stroke, makes no runs off it. Surely nobody ever had the temerity to accuse “ little W. G .” of not offering at the offered-four? I have seen him get well over a hundred of the best in well under a hundred minutes’ batting in a first-class match, and nobody but an inmate of Bedlam can grumble at that, j Kinneir is a bird of another plumage. He does often fail I to annex the offered-four, and there is a lack of flash and sparkle about his play that gives room for the sensation- | mongers to grouse. But he is a mighty useful man to have on your side, and 1 never see him calmly sedate on a plumb ’un without thanking my stars I am not a first-class bowler. Jeeves will get a sheaf of wickets by his quickness off the pitch ; but he is not built for the Tom Richardson job. And Parsons will have to hit the half-volley a jolly sight harder if he warns to go to Australia at the expense of M.C.C. ! What a well-built young chap means by dealing with it in any other way I never could make out. Young Mead had rather a thin time at Lord’s against Middlesex. Four overs when Warner and J. W. Hearne were well set is not calculated to make a kid burn with enthusiasm for the gam e! The value of slow stuff on hard stuff is altogether lost sight of in some cases. There would be far fewer drawn games on plumb pitches if the slow stuff was judiciously utilised. Of course young Mead may not be the real thing; but it would take a Trumble or a Hirst all he knew to prove himself in four overs. The youngster wants three or four spells of fifteen overs at a time, and he might not, after all, do worse than some who have been on far longer than that. How cricketers all over the place have been amused over the Mail’s claim to the idea of starting games on Saturdays, as also to its condescending recognition of the tendency of the cricket authorities to listen to its friendly criticism, of which the starting of games on Saturdays is an instance! This is highly diverting, considering the Saturday start was suggested years ago, and first taken up officially by Warwickshire and “ sat upon ” (for consideration understood) by the Advisory Board many months before the Mail was ill-advised enough to start its wild crusade against the imaginary evils of first-class cricket. I wonder, too, whether Messrs. Findlay and Borradaile fixed Saturday, I May 24, for Surrey v. Essex at the Oval after being advised j by the Mail that a Saturday start was likely to be a good j thing? The “ next, please! ’’ in this case may be that the Mail invented the game of cricket or “ discovered” W. G. j Grace and recommended him to the notice of the Gloucester­ shire authorities. That he scored hundreds for Gloucestershire years before the Mail arrived to amuse us matters nothing in such matters. “ Some very candid talk about Hitch’s bowling in this match has come to my ears. One man who watched it says point-blank that Hitch bowled short and at top speed with obvious design to intimidate the batsmen, and that in his desire for extra pace he was several times guilty of flagrant throwing, for which he was no-balled.” Thus “ Pavilion Gossip ” last week. I should like to be given the chapter and verse of the no-balling of Hitch for throwing. For neither he nor the Surrey team know much about it. Knowing Hitch pretty well, I can guarantee he has never bowled “ at his man ” in his life. And if he did, he would not be chosen to play for Surrey. It is, moreover, a certainty that he has never “ thrown ” a ball when bowling. It is the greatest moonshine to make such accusations against one of the best triers now playing. “ I am not judging Hitch,” says the Editor, “ I am only commenting on what some people say he did. If they are right, I hope it will never happen again.” And so say all of us. But “ they ” are absolutely wrong, the victims of hallucination. I do not agree with the Editor that short- pitched balls that get up from a fiery or crumbling pitch and look you in the face are “ not ordinary risks.” I hold that they are among the “ ordinary ” risks of cricket. Because a pitch is fiery or crumbling is one very sound cricket reason why a captain should put on the fastest bowler he has. Every bowler pitches short sometimes, and when, under such conditions, he does so the resultant “ rib- roaster,” “ percher,” “ flier,” “ bouncer,” call it what you will, is no moie than an ordinary risk. Few, indeed, have been the cases of “ bowling at the man.” There was a foolish outcry a few years ago about Neville Knox doing something of the kind at the Oval for the intimidation of Yorkshire. The man was utterly in­ capable of trying for wickets in that way. But in more recent times a very well-known bowler has got numbers of wickets with what is known as the “ body-ball,” and with that alone. Yet he is likely to be handed down to posterity as a “ great ” bowler ! ! Wickets were plumber in the days of Lockwood and Richardson and Kortright and Mold and