James Lillywhiite's Cricketers' Annual 1874

2 6 be able to meet this same representative ball with fortitude , and a continuance of practice to master it thoroughly . The mechanical persistency of a bowler in working away at this weak point in a batsman's armour is seldom unsuc- cessful . There are only two methods of playing what is termed a length ball , M a n dit depends on the immediate selection of the one or the other whether success or discomfiture ensues . A batsman with a long reach will smother balls that would puzzle one of smaller stature . Reach has unquestionably muchto do in the matter , but patience and decision are still more powerful allies . To play forward is undoubtedly , when possible , the more advisable plan, as by this means are avoided all the deviations of the ball from spin or accidental deflections by reason of ground or other causes . But forward play should be only used with caution , and to step out to a ball for the sake of smothering it is a dangerous experiment that should be discouraged . With a straight bat much is possible , and it will be found much can be accomplished . Obviously , in playing forward the ball must be met at or near its pitch , and unless it can be so met that there is no chance of its rising over the shoulder of the bat, recourse must be had to defence . And in back play , there is always the advantage of an extension of time for resolution and an opportunity of counteracting the course of the ball after its pitch with all its deflections or curvatures . It enables a batsman to enjoy a better sight of the ball , to stop a bailer , and to be down on a shooter with equal certainty ; but generally , I should recommend the adoption of forward play, whenever it is consistent with safety . To select at times the more advisable of the two methods is difficult , but with consistent patience success will generally follow . The slightest hesitation maybe fatal ; so let m e counsel rapidity of determination 1 and promptitude of action , and, as in the case of back play-as before stated-a resolute style of defence rather than a weak resistance . There are manyother points in connection with the science of batting that do not come within the province of this article , though possibly I mayenter on their treat- ment on another occasion . For m ypresent purpose it is enough to direct attention to the points in batting of most use to young cricketers , without wasting time on the fancy strokes which no treatise can teach . To " cut " well is of course one of the mostbrilliant and effective hits in the hands of a good batsman, but example will here, more than in any other instance , be vastly superior to precept . To state merely that in " cutting " the left leg usually takes the place of the right as the pivot-leg , and that the latter is briskly advanced to the off-side , will give but a feeble idea of the beauty of this hit. To cut well requires a flexibility of wrist that cannot possibly be transferred to paper , and possesses a fascination to on-lookers that no pen can describe . To meet balls on the leg -side , too , without endangering your wicket is an accom- plishment that can only be gained by practice . It maybe safely stated that there is not in the present generation of cricketers a leg -hitter so remark- able for accuracy as wasGeorge Parr in his best day ; for a good leg -hitter is now a rarity , or the field could not be divested , as it now is so often , of so important a manas long-leg. It maybe that there are few batsmen who can hit in this quarter without exposing themselves to the chances of a catch , but it is certain that at least amongthe professional cricketers of the day I can call to mindno leg -hitter worthy of comparison with George Parr . It is on the leg-stump that many batsmen are unquestionably weak, with a propensity for "blind swiping " that inevitably denotes a certain recklessness , or, on the other hand,desire or fear for the safety of their limbs . Here again in playing balls