Cricket 1914

No. 18. V o l . 1. SATURDAY, AUGUST i. 1914. P r ic e 3 d . The Surrey Super-batsman. Photo by] [Af«srs. E. Hawkins & Co., Brighton. J . B . H o b b s . G r eat is John Hobbs ! If a poll could be taken at the present time among all who follow cricket the wide world over, as to who is first among the batsmen of the day, it is probable th a t 90 per cent, of the vote would be given to John Berry Hobbs. Macartney would get most of the remaining 10 per cent., and the votes for him would be cast b y Australians. South Africans would plump for Hobbs, unless, perhaps, a few might set down Herbert Taylor’s name, led thereto rather by sentiment than b y judgment. O f our own players who are sharing the honours of the year w ith him, none can be ranked as quite his equal. Philip Mead has neither the versatility nor the verve of the man who came to the Oval from Cambridge at Tom Hayward’s suggestion. Tarrant is great, and so is th at wonderful level-headed youngster, John William Hearne ; but they are less great than Hobbs. They do not dominate the situation as he does. While he often makes quite good bowling look easy, they occasionally make quite moderate bowling look more difficult than it is. B atting is spoken of as defence, bowling as attack. But when John Hobbs fairly gets going, he is apt to seem the attacker. There are times, of course, when even this super­ batsman must put defence before agression. Jaques has- kept him quiet on more than one occasion. So have others. But not for very long. One certain thing can be predicated of Hobbs— if he stays more than half-an-hour or so he wilL be found scoring fast. No bowler can tie him up for very long. He will either get runs or get out. In books of instruction one may find the various strokes which make up the armoury of a batsman neatly and nicely listed, reduced to formulae, explained in every least detail. They come near to being numbered and classified and sub­ classified, as the animal world is b y a competent zoologist. But when all this ig done, the fact remains that a really great batsman has in his repertoire strokes that are outsida the ken of the merely good batsman. Or, to put it in another way, he brings to the orthodox strokes qualities that differentiate them from those same strokes as made b y other men. It is not only th at he can make those strokes off balls that anyone but a genius would be content merely to play, though there is that in it. It is not only that he makes them better, though there is also that in it. It is a something incapable of pen-and-ink analysis. Let it go at t h a t !