Famous Cricketers No 60 - Ernest Tyldesley

320. June 17, 1925: Lancashire v Essex The Essex book confirms there is a single missing in the Lancashire book where the scoring strokes for his 37 total only 36. 348. July 21, 1926: Lancashire v Somerset E.T.’s 126 adds across to 127 in the Lancashire book; there are some minor discrepancies compared with the Somerset book, in particular a 4 has replaced a 3. Accepted the Somerset version as correct. 354. August 11, 1926: Lancashire v Worcestershire The Lancashire scorebook gives Fred Root as caught E.Tyldesley in the second innings whereas Wisden , The Cricketer and all the press reports seen give the catch to Sibbles; since the Worcestershire scorebook is missing it is difficult to know how the discrepancy has arisen. Can only accept the Lancashire book’s version, though unconvinced. 357. August 28, 1926: Lancashire v Nottinghamshire Tyldesley’s 140 adds to 141 in the Lancashire book; the Notts book shows a 2 to be a single and vertical layout proves this to be correct. 362. February 24, 1927: Hon.L.H.Tennyson’s Team v Jamaica In the absence of any official score it has proved difficult to be sure exactly when E.T. came in to bat. In the first innings the press version (3-9) has been discounted in favour of an unofficial scorer’s record held at Lord’s which shows 3-8. In the second innings he may have entered at 1-126 or 1-128. In this case the Daily Gleaner figure of 1-128 has been accepted, though without any degree of conviction. 370. June 4, 1927: Lancashire v Yorkshire The Lancashire scorebook says E.T. was out at 2-41; vertical scoring proves this cannot be right. The Yorkshire book’s 2-47 agrees with the press and is obviously correct. 405. January 13, 1928: M.C.C. v Border Accepted the Louis Duffus version of when E.T. went in to bat (1-48), though the Cape Argus does plausibly suggest it was 1-49 (“Stop Press: Wyatt out 32, Holmes 16*, Extra 1, 49-1”). 407. January 28, 1928: ENGLAND v SOUTH AFRICA It is quite definite that Tyldesley was dismissed at 3-85, not 3-83 as reported ubiquitously to date. He was on 6 when Holmes was dismissed and the Cape Argus reports the subsequent events thus: “Hammond joined Tyldesley who, after snicking Nupen for a couple through the slips, was splendidly taken by Morkel (85-3-8).” 408. February 4, 1928: ENGLAND v SOUTH AFRICA It has always been reported that Tyldesley bowled 3 balls to finish the match. The Rand Daily Mail and the Cape Argus show his bowling as “2 0 2 0” which, while appearing to suggest he bowled two overs, can only really refer to the two balls he delivered. The Manchester Guardian reported thus: “... Stevens put Tyldesley on to bowl. Amidst peals of laughter the Lancastrian, with assumed seriousness, placed his field in a ring round the boundary line. There was another outburst of merriment when he opened his over with a wide and then a great burst of cheering as off the second delivery Catterall hit a two to give South Africa victory by 8 wickets.” Presumably this denotes that the two came off his second genuine delivery; in any event there is no evidence that he delivered three genuine balls, so his bowling is reflected here as 0.2 0 2 0. 409. February 18, 1928: M.C.C. v Western Province Tyldesley did share in a second wicket partnership of 51 with Percy Holmes, despite the f.o.w. being reported in most quarters as 1-34, 2-65. Holmes was actually out at 2-85, so the stand was 51. The Times exemplifies the error made: “With the total at 65 - only 2 runs short of the number required - Holmes was stumped ...” Since the winning total was 87-2, the mistake is obvious. 474. July 10, 1929: Lancashire v Gloucestershire Both scorebooks confirm that Ernest Tyldesley caught Barnett, not Dick Tyldesley, as per Wisden . The Cricketer confirms it was E.T. (See also “Amendments to Wisden ” section.) 542. August 26, 1931: Lancashire v Derbyshire The Derbyshire scorebook wrongly attributes Dick Tyldesley’s first innings bowling (and four wickets!) to Ernest. 87