Famous Cricketers No 60 - Ernest Tyldesley

Results of Matches in which he Played Won Drawn Lost Total Lancashire County Championship 220 231 76 527 v Touring Teams 7 10 2 19 v Universities 8 8 2 18 Other matches 2 2 5 9 237 251 85 573 Test matches 6 4 4 14 Players v Gentlemen 2 6 0 8 Rest of England 1 7 2 10 M.C.C. abroad 8 12 0 20 Hon.L.H.Tennyson’s teams abroad 3 8 2 13 Other teams 3 5 2 10 260 293 95 648 Views Taken on Disputed Points (Dates quoted relate to the first day of the match in question) 19. July 25, 1910: Lancashire v Sussex Tyldesley’s score adds to 7 in the Lancashire scorebook, not 9; the Sussex book reveals that a final 2 had been omitted, so 9 is right. 21. August 4, 1910: Lancashire v Northamptonshire Assumed that E.T. caught R.A.Haywood in the second innings as shown in Wisden and the Manchester press. The Lancashire scorebook gives the catch to brother J.T. but the catch was taken at long-off where E.T. regularly fielded and the book is the recopied version and frequently subject to error. 23. August 25, 1910: Lancashire v Northamptonshire Quite definite from press reports that E.T. took three catches in the aborted innings, despite his name not appearing in the Lancashire team in the recopied scorebook. The Manchester Evening News shows him to be in the eleven and omits Lol Cook. 37. May 13, 1912: Lancashire v Sussex Neither scorebook’s strokes add to E.T.’s score of 107; the Lancashire book omits a 2 late on and totals 105, whilst the Sussex book includes an extra single in a run of 8 and totals 108. Confident 107 is right. 53. July 22, 1912: Lancashire v Sussex Wisden and the Sussex scorebook indicate that Tyldesley bowled 2.2 overs, whilst the Lancashire book has been altered to read 2.3; this looks like a late change to incorporate the wide bowled in his first over (!), his final over was clearly: “. W” only. Retained as 2.2. In the same bowling spell his final wicket is subject to different interpretations; the Lancashire scorebook has Street “st Street” (an obvious error), whilst the Sussex scorebook shows Street to be simply “bowled Tyldesley”. Wisden and the press both agree Street was stumped by Brooke and this has been accepted here. 77. August 4, 1913: Lancashire v Yorkshire The Lancashire scorebook shows Tyldesley’s second innings score as 21 but the strokes total only 17; the Yorkshire book reveals that his penultimate scoring stroke was the missing 4. 101. August 3, 1914: Lancashire v Yorkshire Tyldesley was out 4th in the second innings (per Yorkshire book) not 5th (per Lancashire). Vertical scoring reworking proves this. 124. July 25, 1919: Lancashire v Warwickshire The Lancashire scorebook strokes total 165 for Tyldesley, as against his score of 174; the Warwickshire book includes two missing fours and a single. 85