Cricket 1914

A u g u s t 8, 1914. THE WORLD OF CRICKET. 407 From 1904 onwards he was a failing force, as his figures show. There was a batting renascence in 1906, when he made scores of 84 v. Notts at Lord’s, 83 v. Yorkshire at Leeds, 75 v. Surrey at the Oval, 73 v. Kent at Tonbridge, 55 v. Notts at Trent Bridge, and 53 v. Lancashire at Old Trafford, aggregated 952, and averaged 25 ; and there was in some degree a bowling renascence in 1907, when he took 7 for 20 v. Somerset at Lord’s, including 4 with 4 balls and the hat trick in one innings, and had 96 in all. But in 1908 his days of success with either bat or ball were rare ; and in 1909 one can pick out only a few items in the old vein— 93 v. Surrey at the Oval, 77 not out v. Hants at Portsmouth, 50 v. Lancashire at Old Trafford, 10 for 123 v. Essex at Lord’s. That was practically his last season, his remaining appearances being confined to three games for the county and two for the M.C.C. in 1910, and a couple for the M.C.C. (in one of which he took 9 for 89 v. Leicestershire) in 1911. Apart from cricket in England he accompanied Lord Hawke’s Team to South Africa in 1898-9, and took in all matches 168 wickets at under 10 each. Few of the matches were on even terms, and of course in many cases the men met were far below the first-class standard ; but such per­ formances as 12 for 105 ». XV of Western Province (not a weak side), 20 for 66 v. X X II of Graaff-Reinet, 15 for 121 v. XV of Eastern Province, at Port Elizabeth, 13 for 76 v. XV of Eastern Province at Grahamstown, 14 for 79 v. XV of the Border, 13 for 77 v. XV of Pretoria and n for 116 v. XV of Griqualand West, are worth noting. In the more important games he took 7 for 99 v. Cape Colony at Port Elizabeth, 11 for 140 v. Transvaal at Johannesburg (where he hit up a century), 9 for 110 v. South Africa a,t Johannesburg, 6 for 73 in the second innings of Cape Colony at Cape Town, and 8 for 88 v. South Africa at Cape Town. He spent two or three seasons as coach at Napier, New Zealand. He was there when the English Team under Warner came along in 1902-3, and on the small ground they pasted his bowling for 225, but he got half-a-dozen of their wickets. In this match Hawke’s Bay played fifteen men, and it cannot therefore be included as first-class. The English team took Trott with them when they left to play three matches in Australia on the homeward way. He had 4 for 88 in the first innings of Victoria, and 6 for 88 in the first of New South Wales ; but his other analyses were o for 51,0 for 76, o for 78, and 2 for 101, and his dozen wickets cost over 40 each. In the previous season he had accompanied the Hawke’s Bay team on tour. They played three matches with Wellington, Otago, and Canterbury—losing the first two, but bringing off a capital win at Christchurch. Trott scored 1 and 43 (top score) at Wellington, 39 and 30 not out (top score each innings) at Dunedin, and 68 and 80 not out (top score each innings) at Christchurch. His analyses were 5 for 17, o for 46, 7 for 136, 7 for 58, and 4 for 93. Of 39 wickets which fell to the Hawke’s Bay bowlers he thus took 23 - A great player at his best—a very great player indeed. His batting was first-class of its kind, the big hitting kind, force without restraint at times, though not invariably. As a bowler he was always trying experiments. He did not in the least mind being h it ; perhaps he scarcely minded enough, though this indifference was a fault on the right side. He sandwiched fast with slow, good with bad ; often an over would contain six balls each quite different from any of the others. He had considerable command over pitch, though one might have thought otherwise on his bad days ; but his variations of pace were not as subtle or as well con­ cealed as those of some bowlers. As a fieldsman he was at his best really great. Those big hands of his could hold almost anything that came into them. But now and then he fell below his best. His heart was always in the game ; but want of physical fitness affected him as it is bound to affect anyone. He played in 343 first-class matches in England, 23 in Australia, 5 in South Africa, and 3 in New Zealand—374 in all. What he did in them will be found in the table of averages given hereunder. This does not show his fielding work. According to my reckoning (but I lay no claim to infallibility) he made 446 catches in the 343 matches—- 408 in England, 30 in Australia, 6 in South Africa, and 2 in New Zealand. On eight occasions (for Middlesex v. Somer­ set at Taunton, 1898 ; for M.C.C. v. Oxford University at Lord’s, 1899 ; for M.C.C. v. Yorkshire at Lord’s, 1901 , for Players v. Gentlemen at Lord’s, 1901 ; for Middlesex v. Yorkshire at Lord’s, 1903 ; for Players v. Gentlemen at the Oval, 1903 ; for M.C.C. v. Oxford University at Lord’s, 1907 ; and for Middlesex v. Notts at Lord’s, 1907) he took 5 catches in a match. Forty-one in 1907 and 40 in 1909 were his best totals. In Gentlemen v. Players’ matches Trott never achieved any signal success. He appeared thirteen times for the Players, scoring 281 runs in 21 innings (3 not out), and taking 43 wickets at a total cost of 1376 runs, or just 32 each. His big hitting feats were many. That which comes most readily to mind is the famous slog over the pavilion at Lord’s off M. A. Noble in 1899. The ball struck a chimneypot on its way, but cleared the pavilion and fell behind. Trott was one of three men—Murdoch and Ferris the others—who have represented Australia v. England and also England v. South Africa. The late William Midwinter was the only man who played both for England v. Australia and for Australia v. England. A L B E R T T R O T T IN F IR S T -C L A S S C R IC K E T . SEASON. INNS. N.O. R. A. H.S. B. R. w . A. 1892-3 (A .)------ 1 O 4 4'00 4 54 35 2 17*50 1893-4 (A .)------ 4 I 12 4-00 7 542 194 12 16-16 1894-5 (A .)------ 16 4 472 3933 85 * 1943 773 35 22 'OS 1895-6 (A .)----- 10 0 134 13-40 24 1098 44 i 17 25-94 . 18 1 345 20*29 67 * 2072 1x71 43 27-23 18 9 7..................... • 13 1 276 23*00 62 1369 692 50 I 3-84 • 25 1 482 20-08 77 5071 23 33 130 17-94 1898-9 (S.A.) . 8 1 153 2 18 5 101* 1271 546 42 1300 1899..................... • 53 2 1175 23*03 164 8849 4086 239 170 9 . 62 6 1337 23*87 112 9204 4923 211 2333 . 46 3 880 20-46 112 7735 3835 176 21-78 1901-2 (N .Z.) . 6 2 261 65-25 80* 795 350 23 15-21 • 50 2 941 19-60 103 5735 2883 133 21-67 1902-3 ( A .) ... 5 O 34 6-80 17 689 483 12 40-25 1903..................... • 38 4 604 17-76 103 4039 2029 105 19-32 *904..................... • 47 3 747 16-97 67 5175 2573 108 2382 1905..................... • 35 4 428 13*80 45 3124 1724 62 27-80 . 46 8 952 25-05 84 3015 1592 62 2 5 6 7 1907..................... • 42 4 549 14*44 49 * 3739 1601 96 16-67 • 34 2 295 9*21 49 3415 1609 54 29-79 1909..................... • 34 3 573 18 4 8 93 1998 11 ro 42 26-42 19 10 ..................... 6 1 23 4-60 8* 228 159 8 I 9‘87 3 0 19 6*33 19 310 175 12 14-58 T otals . . 602 53 10,696 0 00 164 • • 71,470 35,317 1674 21*09 Trott’s centuries have already been mentioned ; but a list of them may as well be given here for reference. He made many more in minor matches, of course. 101*, England v. Transvaal, Johannesburg, 1898-9. 164, Middlesex v. Yorkshire, Lord’s, 1899. 123, Middlesex v. Sussex, Lord’s, 1899. 112, Middlesex v. Gloucestershire, Lord’s, 1900. 112, Middlesex, v. Essex, Lord’s, 1901. 103, Middlesex v. Somerset, Lord’s, 1902. 103, Middlesex v. Gloucestershire, Lord’s, 1903. But, all said, Trott was more bowler than batsman, and' the figures which follow aim at giving as complete a record of his work as a bowler as may well be given. Every instance in which he took 9 or more wickets in a match (which means that he must have had at least 5 in one innings or the other) and every instance in which he took 5 or more in an innings when not securing 9 or more in a match is in­ cluded. Nothing is set down twice. The left-hand table contains, of course, many cases of 5 or more wickets—in fact, each entry means that—but these are not repeated in the right-hand one. Playing for M.C.C. in so many matches, Trott put in more than half his cricket at Lord’s ; but even so the pro­ portion of his successes gained at headquarters is remarkable. He grew to know the ground so well that he could take every