Cricket 1914

6 6 THE WORLD OF CRICKET. A p r il , 19 14 . any spin you can put on. B ut you have to keep a length to be any good. The chief scoring strokes on these wickets are the pull and the square cut. You very seldom see a full-blooded drive. The batsmen w ait for the short- pitched ball. Umpiring was not too good, on the whole. But there were exceptions. A few umpires we came across were, in m y opinion, better than any we have at home. As a general rule, grounds are rough. Cape Town, Johannesburg, and Durban are the best. Johannesburg is one of the finest fielding grounds in the world. The light is: beautiful, and there are fine screens. The crowds there are most impartial, though, I am afraid, the attention th ey give is not all it might be. Durban is another very good ground. They have a capital groundsman there. Up-country, almost always, fielding grounds were very bad indeed. Y ou can readily imagine how bad when I tell you that quite frequently a man would get his hand down for the ball only to find it rear up and go over his shoulder ! • B ut the wickets were very good, all of them. I wonder we don’t use m atting wickets here. T hey would be safer to p lay on, and younger cricketers would learn a lot. South Africa had a youngish side, lacking in experience. T aylor stood out quite above the rest. Like Hobbs, though, he had lots of luck. Bu t he deserved all the luck he got, for he was always going for the ball. In two or three years this South African side should be quite a good One. The bowling is a little weak, perhaps. Quite the best bowler we met was Blanckenberg. Carter did well, too, on two or three occasions. The prevalent fault is sacrificing length for spin ; most of them think spin is sure to get wickets. T h ey came on a lot during the tour, showing that they were capable of learning lessons. P. A. M. Hands and Zulch are really good batsmen ; I think Hands will be a great batsman yet, and Zulch is terribly hard to shift. The fielding of the side varied. It was quite good at times ; but dash was generally lacking. I had almost forgotten to mention our wicket-keepers. Strudwick was magnificent. Smith never produced the form he showed in Australia ; but, of course, the fact that Struddy was at his best lessened his chances. The googly m ay be reckoned a thing of the past. E very­ one looks out for it now. The only googly bowlers we met were Newberry and Meintjes, and neither is deadly. We had not enough men. I consider no side should leave England for a tour in Australia or South Africa w ithout fifteen players, and at least five of these should be amateurs. J. W. H. T. D o u g la s . C. G. M a c a r t n e y has scored five centuiics in his last seven first-class matches, all against different sides— Queensland, South Australia, New Zealand, Victoria, and Tasmania— but all on the same ground, Sydney. T h e Cumberland County C.C. has a credit balance of / 161, which suggests th at there is profit in lack of ambition. Cum­ berland cannot be accused of overweening aspirations, anyway. Their matches next season include fixtures with the Gentlemen of Durham and with North Lancashire. Mr. E. Valantine succeeds Mr. J. Wilson as Hon. Sec., the latter becoming Assistant Secretary. H a v e r f o r d C o l l e g e will again send a team across the water this year. Fixtures have been made for it b y the M.C.C. authorities. Among the schools to be met are Eton, Harrow, Rugby, Repton, Shrewsbury, Rossall, Uppingham, Malvern, Tonbridge, Cheltenham, Haileybury, and Charterhouse ; and matches have also been made with a few leading clubs— Hamp­ stead, Forest Hill, Southgate, and Silwood Park. Egginton Hall and the Old Reptonians will also be played. John Douglas Overseas. I n his remarks about the M.C.C. tour, given in this issue, Mr. Douglas says that it does not follow that because a man has had a good season here he is going to have one in the colonies on tour. Nor does the opposite follow. Of this Douglas himself is a case in point. He was very much below par in 1913, as he would be the first to a dm it; yet he did excellently well in South Africa. But John Douglas has always done well in overseas tours. His first was in New Zealand (1906— 7), when in the important matches of the tour he headed both batting and bowling averages. Tn the second match with Auckland he scored 46* and 64*, and took 9 wickets for 120, having more than anyone else to do with the English victory in a game th at at one time looked lost. Against Otago at Dunedin he made his highest score— 67. Against Hawke’s B ay at Napier he took 5 wickets for 41. He made 40 in his one innings and took 9 for 107 v. New Zealand at Christchurch ; and in the return at Wellington he scored 18 and 37, and had 12 for 125. His next tour was a brief one— to America in 1907. A 63 v. New York was his best performance in that. When he left England on tour again, it was as a member of an English side for Australia— and, bar being picked for England at home, no man can achieve higher cricket honours than to be chosen for an Australian tour. W hat he did will be fresh in the memory of most. Perhaps, though, his captaincy tended to obscure his actual performances ; to the man in the street the fact that, in Warner’s absence through illness, he had led the side to victory in the rubber of test matches was the important fact. But he did his share of the work as well as skippering ably. Centuries against Eleven of Australia at Brisbane and against Victoria in the return match, analyses of 5 for 65 v. South Aus­ tralia, 8 for 78 (two innings) v. Victoria, 4 for 50 in the first test match, and 5 for 46 in the fourth test speak for themselves. In the eyes of the man who knows runs made and wickets taken in Australia count for more than in South Africa, as, again, runs made and wickets taken in South Africa count for more than in New Zealand and America. But, setting such comparisons aside, John Douglas’s most recent tour was quite his most successful one. His scores included 119, 102*, 93, 77, 73, 61, and 51 ; and among his analyses were such as 4 for 14 ,4 for 26, and 4 for 34, though he did not put in a great deal of work at the crease. Here is a summary of what he has done in the chief matches of his four tours, disregarding games v. odds and the match at Toowoomba in 1911— 2, which Wisderis unfortunately includes with the first-class games of that time. B a t t in g . B o w l in g . Inns. N.o. R. A. H.S R. W. A. N.Z. .. 14 3 398 3618 67 . 663 50 13*26 America 6 0 116 19-33 63 • 7 ° 3 23-33 Australia •• 15 3 416 3466 140 . • 803 37 21*70 S. Africa . . 21 5 827 5168 119 . - 532 30 17-73 Totals • • 56 11 1757 39 04 140 . 2068 120 I 7-23 Which is good enough to be going on with. “ Leg B a tting .” Mr. A. T. Kemble, of Liverpool and Lancashire fame, whom the present writer has met on many a hard-fought field in both cricket and “ Rugger ” games, writing to the Daily M ail on the subject of the recent " leg-batting ” controversy, told the following inimitable story :— " On the first morning of a Lancashire v. Notts match, the umpire, genial old Tom Watmough, the erstwhile Derbyshire pro., gave Arthur Shrewsbury out “ l.b.w .” from the last ball before lunch-time. As we walked towards the pavilion and luncheon, I overhead the following dialogue between them :— ' I say, Tom ,’ said the retiring batsman, ‘ surely that ball didn't pitch straight ? ' ' Well, I dunno, Arthur,’ replied Tom ; ' but I were gettin' main tired o ’ seem’ you battin’ with your legs ! ’ ” H. M a c r o w scored 300 for Don (Tasmania) v. Wesley Vale on January 10. The total was 471 for 5, declared. O. McCall (86) and Macrow put up 348 before the first wicket fell.