Cricket 1913

354 CRICKET: A WEEKLY RECORD OF THE GAME. Jun e 28, 1913. Important. Will any subscriber who has recently sent along a renewal of his subscription and has not had a receipt, or any new subscriber who has not had his remittance acknowledged, be good enough to drop the Editor a line? See address above “ Pavilion Gossip.” Perhaps those who are overdue and have not forwarded will also accept a hint. Many notices sent have not yet been replied to. -------------------- Cricket Chirps. (B y E. H. D. S e w e ll.) 1 had a good look at the best all-round cricketer of the season to date at Lord’s last week, to wit Booth, and was a bit disappointed. O f course he is mightily effective, and that is the real test; and it is not his fault he hasn’t got wrists, but the lack of them will for ever and a day prevent him from filling the eye as many a good ’un before him has done. The secret of his comparative non-success with that action at that pace from that height as a bowler is probably to be found in his stiff wrist. One has only to see him make one stroke to see that his wrists are stiff. The whole stroke swings from the shoulder. But a glance at the season’s averages; as I write he is third with 56.00 for 15 innings, 6 not out, and has taken most wickets with 73 for 16.8 each. It is clear that he “ gets there,” and that his effectiveness is beyond question; but, without wishing to be captious, he ought to do better with his physical advantages. Still he will be asked to go to South Africa, just he as ought to have been to go to Australia last time, and just as A. H. Hornby will very likely be the next England captain. I don’t know what Warner’s scheme was, but “ from the pavilion ” he kept Tarrant and young Jack on too long when Booth and Stanley started the partnership that saved York­ shire from defeat. Both men batted badly for nearly half an hour, and both finished really as well (especially Stanley) as they had begun badly. The way they shaped at first shrieked for a fast bowler at one end and J. T. Hearne at the other, and long after Tarrant and young Jack were obviously not going to do the job they were kept on. Aye, Middlesex had the game in their pockets at 12.1s to 12.30 last Saturday. Just as Essex had against Kent at Tonbridge in their second innings with 220 on the board, only 3 wickets down, and Perrin and Fane just over the awkward new-ball period. Perrin missed a placing stroke to leg— and Kent won. But some of the Kent team had all but jjiven it up ! At the. hour of writing Essex look good enough to beat .Surrey; but, facing a 350 total and against better bowling than Essex has to offer, Surrey won by an innings against Hants at the Oval when the ball was turning, so ought to be able to win on one of Freeman’s pitches, which, I doubt not, are better than those at the Oval. Perhaps by the time these lines are published the rival captains wjll have made known their choices for the big affair at Lord’s on July 7, 8, 9. Perhaps not. Anyway, how is this for the two sides? O x f o r d : Campbell, Twining, Knott, Bardsley, White, Mell£, Davies, Colman, Wilkinson, Peat, Boswell. C am bridge : Mulholland, Kidd, Saville, Lagden, Cal­ thorpe, Davies, Lang, Woodroffe, Evans, Naumann, and Riley. _____ _ Cambridge are in sore straits for bowling, as they say Xaumann doesn’t spin it, and White doesn’t iast and is a very slack field. It looks as though Mulholland, Calthorpe, Kidd, and Evans will have to do the damage, ant! Naumann be left out for another bat. I shall not be surprised to find Cumberlege and Fairbairn playing vice Naumann and Riley. But as matters stand the favouritism of Cambridge is a long way from being justified. I daresay Oxford will prove themselves much the better team, though it ought to be a long drawn-out affair, unless Cambridge bat on a day of wind, and that wind blowing diagonally. I was an interested spectator of a good game on a plumb fast one at Slough last week, when one side got 303 for 9 and the other 278 for 8 between 11.50 and 6.30 with the usual intervals. It is a good sporting side that Dr. Weaver J Adams generally gets together for Slough, and when I j declared, leaving his team 2J hours in which to get 304 runs, ' f knew that there was not much margin left, as (and for this I had no remedy) there was a lot of slow stuff for them to go for. In the end honours were easy, though Slough think that if Lowndes hadn’t made a very fine catch at mid-off to send back Leat they would have won. O f course I differ from that view, as much of our bowling was pur­ posely sent down with a view to encourage hitting. It was quite easy to bowl to stop such exceptionally fast scoring as was necessary to win, but we refrained. Three days later Boston Park nearly caught a tartar with this same Slough go-for-the-runs brigade. They declared at 220 for 1, and Slough got 217 for 7 in 105 minutes— another close call. I quote Slough en passant, but they are not the only club side that goes for the gloves. The habit is growing apace and is quite general. ^Except at one place, where they say the umpire calls “ Time ” before the last over is completed, in case his side might lose if the rules of the game were adhered to. Clubs will know where not to arrange fixtures for 1914 et seq.! ■--------------------- The Fullness of the Game (From The Morning Post.) I don’t care,” said Reggie— short, as readers will remem­ ber, for Regius Professor of the Higher Athletics— " I don’t care what the wicket was like, no side can stay in all day for less than 300 against any other and claim to have really played cricket. You see, twenty real snorters will surely take ten wickets any time. It is bad luck if half the balls that deservedly beat the bat miss the wicket. You must put in 4deservedly * because so many of these bowler fellows throw up their hands when a fair to moderate thing gets within a foot of home. When you get a wicket on which the bowlers can’t offer the snorter often enough to get t ’other side out in less than six hours, then the batters ought by all the laws of cricket to score more than a run a minute. It always licks me how some of themmanage to stay there without scoring faster. They must be good enough to keep off the edge stroke, because if that doesn’t get you caught at slip- it counts four a time. If they are good enough for that they must be able to put the ball wide of the fielders now and then. It is really awfully clever the way they keep them busy for no result. But it’s the kind of cleverness which soon palls on intelligent specta­ tors like you and me. Mind you, I don't want to see nothing but fireworks. Slogging and goosing are both cricket on occa­ sions remember Henry Martyn's 96 in the ’Varsity match-—- 1902 was it ?— and Ernest Smith’s historic o (not out). Both proper bits of cricket. But I don’t know what game they think they are playing when they win toss on a plumb wicket and stay in all day for 298. What is the object of it ? When you play cricket you want to play every ball on its merits, which, of course, vary according to circumstances. For instance, one that drops just beyond a length on the off side is worth having a go at when the side wants runs quick, and there are others to get them if you get out. The same ball wants playing carefully when one of the top-notcliers has come down to you, and the side is beat unless some one can stay with him while he gets a hundred. These con­ ditions don't arise when one side stays in all day. In the time available they must get more than 300 if they play cricket. Don t tell me that any bowlers in the world can bowl well enough to keep the runs down to that total without getting the others out for less. No, I am not an Irishman ! The meaning of what I say is perfectly plain. I suppose Northampton were playing to get one point, possibly three, off Kent. They may have known that the thunderstorm was coming, and played for a sticky wicket on the second day. However, Kent got over 400 in less time, and at once made sure of their three points.”