Cricket 1914

N o v e m b e r , 1914. THE WORLD OF CRICKET. 479 Street .. .. Sx. v. Glos., Hastings, c. 3, st. 2. Street .. .. Sx. v. Hants. Southampton, c. 5. Street .. .. Sx. v. Kt., Canterbury, c. 3, st. 2. Street .. .. Sx. v. Kt., Hove, c. 4, st. 1. Street .. .. Sx. v. Lancs.,’ Manchester, c. 3, st. 2. Street .. .. Sx. v. Suit., Hove, c. 3, st. 2. Street .. .. Sx. v. Sy., Oval, c. 5. Strudwick .. .. Sy. v. Northants, Northampton, c. 5. Whitehead (H.) .. Leic. v. Sx., Leicester, c. 5. Whysall .. .. Notts v. Lancs., Manchester, c. 3, st. 2. G. E. C. Wood .. Camb. U. v. Oxford U., Lord’s, c. 3, st. 2 Four dismissals in a match were effected by Huish (7 times), Strud­ wick (5 times), Street (4 times), Buswell (3 times), Murrell (3 times); twice each by H. G. Garnett, Livsey, Russell, Seymour, Tarrant, H ; G. Vincent, and G. E. C. Wood : and once each by Abel, Bale, Midshipman E. L. D. Bartley, Dolphin, Gunn (G.), Hardinge, Hendren, Hubble, Humphries, Jeeves, G. L. Jessop, E. L. Kidd, Kinneir, Lord, Mead (C. P.), B. G. von B. Melle, A. E. Newton, E. S. M. Poyntz, Reeves, Relf (A. E.), A. D. E. Rippon, S. G. Smith, Smith (T. J.), Thompson, L. H. W. Troughton. Whysall, W’ild, Woolley (C. N.), and H. Wright. HOW THE WICKETS WERE TAKEN. BV. MATCHES. WKTS. TAKEN. B. L.B.W. C. ST. H.VV.. R.O Cambridge Univ. II 183 48 21 101 9 I 3 Derbyshire 20 317 130 34 136 7 O 10 Essex .. 24 373 133 43 187 4 I 5 Gloucestershire 22 293 82 24 158 23 O 6 Hampshire •• 30 5 *1 170 37 262 23 4 15 Kent . . 30 522 . x54 57 261 34 1 15 Lancashire . . 27 383 136 38 192 7 0 10 Leicestershire .. . . 23 396 136 36 207 6 0 11 M.C.C. 8 123 62 14 37 9 1 0 Middlesex 22 393 125 37 194 24 1 12 Northamptonshire 21 348 107 20 200 15 0 6 Nottinghamhsire 21 347 134 33 163 8 2 7 Oxford Univ. .. 9 159 59 14 78 5 0 3 Somerset .. 19 273 79 37 143 10 0 4 Surrey 26 453 171 47 211 11 1 12 Sussex .. 29 458 196 37 202 1.5 0 8 Warwickshire .. .. 24 393 192 26 167 3 0 5 Worcestershire.. 22 256 n o 15 IIO 10 0 11 Yorkshire •• 3 i 521 192 43 260 17 0 9 Other Sides 252 104 17 119 4 3 5 Totals 6954 4 - 2520 630 3388 244 15 157 T he Second-C lass Season of 1914. The War hit the second-class counties far harder than it did their more powerful brethren of the upper circle. Several sides had to cancel all matches after an early date in August. Buck­ inghamshire, for one, had scarcely a man left. The Bucks Yeomanry, to which many of the players belong, volunteered in a body for the front. Berkshire, Dorset, and Devon were very heavily drawn upon. Of the 92 matches arranged in the Second-Class County Championship as many as 25 were cancelled. Only Hertford­ shire and Kent II. as a matter of fact, fulfilled their programmes, though of course in some other cases all matches would have been played had opponents come up to the mark. Cambridge­ shire, Cheshire, Cornwall, Durham. Essex II, Monmouthshire, and Norfolk each had one match declared off ; Glamorgan, Northumberland, Staffordshire, Suffolk, and Surrey II each two matches ; Bedfordshire three ; Berkshire, Devon, and Lincolnshire each four ; Buckinghamshire, Dorset, and Wiltshire each six. In addition the matches between M.C.C. and Bucks. M.C.C. and Devon (C. & G.), M.C.C. and Durham, and M.C.C. and Glamorgan were all scratched. The averages which follow are made up from the 67 matches played in the championship ; the M.C.C. matches with the Minor Counties' X I, Cambs, Herts (2). and Norfolk ; Cheshire v. Lancashire II (2) ; Glamorgan v. Northants ; Surrey 11 v. Yorkshire I I (2) ; and Lancashire II v. Mr. H. Rhodes’s X I— 82 in all. Last season 102 matches came into the purview. It is a matter for regret that the bowling averages cannot be given at present. Analyses were often wanting, and the figures of several counties have not been published. An attempt witl be made to obtain them, and if all cannot be had the figures available will be presented next month. Staffordshire won the championship, and Hertfordshire, runners-up, waived the right of challenge. The many cancelled matches give the table a somewhat ill-balanced appearance ; but (except that Devon were going strongly) the counties chiefly MINOR COUNTIES’ CHAMPIONSHIP : PLACE IN ON IST INNS. NO I9 I3 . M. W . W. L. L. r ’ s ’T. 1914. I'TS. OBT. POSS. PERC. 4 10 8 1 0 1 0 43 50 86-00 3 8 4 2 1 0 1 27 35 77-14 •• 13 4 3 0 0 1 0 15 20 75-00 l8 4 2 1 0 1 0 13 20 65-00 . . 19 10 4 2 1 2 I 27 45 6o-oio I 8 2 2 2 1 1 18 35 51-42 I l6 7 2 2 2 1 0 18 35 51-42 2 1 0 0 1 0 5 10 50-00 7 6 3 0 0 3 0 15 30 5 00 0 9 8 3 1 2 2 0 20 40 5 00 0 .. 14 7 2 2 0 3 0 16 35 45-71 • • 15 7 3 0 0 4 0 15 35 4 2 8 5 •• 5 9 3 1 1 4 0 19 45 42-22 12 7 1 1 1 2 2 9 25 36*00 6 6 2 0 0 4 0 10 30 33 33 . . 17 7 2 0 1 4 0 I I 35 31-42 10 4 1 0 1 2 0 6 20 30-00 8 5 1 0 1 2 1 6 20 30-00 .. — 7 1 0 2 4 0 7 35 20-00 .. 20 6 1 0 0 5 0 5 30 16-66 11 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 10 — affected could scarcely be held as likely candidates for places in the first flight. COUNTY. Staffordshire .. Hertfordshire.. Devon Wiltshire Kent II Glamorgan Norfolk Buckinghamshire Lincolnshire . . Surrey II Cornwall Cheshire Durham Monmouthshire Northumberland Cambridgeshire Berkshire Bedfordshire .. Essex II Suffolk Dorset Last season Norfolk and Glamorgan tied for first place. In the deciding match Norfolk led on the first innings of a drawn game, and were awarded the champions! ip. The “ no result ” matches were : Herts v. Beds at St. Albans ; Kent II v. Mon­ mouth at Folkestone; and Monmouth v. Glamorgan, at Newport. There has been a general post, no county occupying the same place as last year, though Herts, Lincolnshire, Surrey* II, and Cambs have moved little. Suffolk was twentieth in each season ; but twentieth meant last in 1913, and does not in 1914, owing to the addition of Essex II to the circle. It is a circumstance worth noting that Glamorgan and Norfolk tie on points for the second year in succession. Staffordshire had a really remarkable season. Their batting, though quite strong enough, was nothing great ; but their bowling was so strong that no side seemed able to make headway against it. The Cheshire totals v. Staffordshire were 80. 107, 38, and 100, or 325 for 40 wickets ; those of Durham 51, 70, 69, and 55, or 245 for 40 wickets ; those of Kent II (the one side to beat the champions) 113, 237, 26 (one man absent), and 39, or 415 for 39 wickets ; those of Norfolk (one match cancelled) 84 and 80 for 7— 164 for 17 ; those of Northumberland 82, 121, 69, and 91—363 for 40 ; those of Surrey II (one match cancelled) 88 and 224— 312 for 20. Nor was this solely due to the destruction worked by Barnes. He took 48 wickets at a trifle over 6 each, truly ; but Wilson (the old Worcestershire pro.) had 43 at a smaller cost, Sedgw'ick 32 at under 10, Morgan 20 at just over 8, and J. S. Heath 20 at 12-75. Hertfordshire, by no means lacking in bowling, were chiefly remarkable for batting strength. In the tables which follow it may be noted that three Herts players figure in the first five in Table I. The side was only once dismissed in county games under 200. They made 473 (for 9) v. Beds, 395 v. Cambs, 368 and 274 v. Norfolk, and 261 v. Suffolk, thus registering at least one total of over 250 against each of their four opponents. Kent II did really well, with a very young side. There was some hesitation about entering, one understands, but the men justified Mr. Weigall's belief in them. When one considers that such promising players as Morfee, Preston, Collins, and Jennings had either gone altogether or were only once or twice available, one is inclined to regard the outlook for the Kentish reserve forces as very hopeful on the strength of what they did in 1914. Hickmott and Dutnall both came on, and Povey seems a more than useful wicket-keeper. Durham fell away sadly, but this was due in great part to inability to put representative teams in the field. Northumber­ land also fared ill ; but Northumberland is better used than its neighbour to a lowly place in the table. Cheshire did dis­ tinctly better than for years past. Wiltshire showed up in more like old-time form. Cornwall maintained the improve­ ment shown during the last year or two, and Devon showed itself a powerful batting side. There were the following : T o t a l s o f 40 0 a n d o v e r . 487 (for 5 wkts., dec.), Devon v. Monmouth, Sidmouth. 487 (for 8 wkts., dec.), Durham v. Northumberland, New­ castle. 473 (for 9 wkts., dec.), Herts, v. Beds, Luton. 453 (f°r 9 wkts., dec.), Devon v. Berks, Exteer. 417 (for 8 wkts.. dec.), Durham v. Glamorgan, Sunderland. The only instances of sides being dismissed for under 50 were those already mentioned v. Staffordshire— Kent I I ’s 26 and 39 and Cheshire’s 38—and the 46 of Berks v. Cormvall at Penzance. Only one match produced iooo or more runs—Cambs. v .