James Lillywhiite's Cricketers' Annual 1874

1 1 does not require more than a passing comment. Muchof this rotatory tendency is derived from the method in which the ball is held when it leaves the hand, though it is essentially the combination of arm and wrist that forms the positive instrument . There are somefew whohold the ball in the palm of the hand, but there is no better plan , to mymind, than to allow the tips of the fingers to touch the seamof the ball , holding it tightly , so as to give it the greatest amount of spin . But in this matter muchmust be left to the young bowler. Experiments will soon prove fruitful or fruitless , until more or less success is gained , and 6 6 use will father what's begot by sense ." Care must be taken, too, not to over- domatters by an excess of practice , as it will be found best to employ short intervals for the purpose , and not go in for undue taxation of energy . Above all , it is necessary that a bowler should learn to accommodate himself to the play of a batsman. To do this requires a reasonable amount of perception , without which slow bowling would be useless . As I have said before , the batsman must be flattered , and his weakness encouraged until he is hooked. With complete command over the ball , " pitch " will be of course a certainty , and the other incidental devices will follow . The variation of the pitch of the ball mustnot only be studied , but alteration of pace, which is quite as important a point. Slow under-hand, too, should be cultivated , and indeed, at the outset it wouldnot be inadvisable to acquire a first modicumof accuracy by this practice . Here, too , constant alteration should be the chief aim. Thechief defect of slow bowlers, in m yopinion , is that they are generally too slow , and that, moreover, theballs are tossed too high. Abatsman should never , except at the option of the bowler, be allowed to meet the ball at full pitch , as he can so often in these days. Of course an occasional toss , with the aid of a good field , is a useful experiment , but the mixture should be administered in moderation . Andnow a few words on the managementof bowling . I believe firmly in a change, and a constant change of bowlers . This may be old advice , but it is systematically overlooked . W h e na batsmanis regularly set, any change is better than none. Constant maidenovers weary the field as well as the spectators . Anyport in a storm, and a bad bowler will get a wicket whenthe best have failed . Trya change at both ends if necessary , and when the batsmen are separated you can go back to the former bowlers . Don't keep a manon simply because he has got awicket . Amanmaybe a recognised public bowler , but as he is only one of theeleven he must look to the other ten for help , and unless they can aid him b ygood fielding they have no right to places in the team. The advantages of any change are often visible in the best matches. See howWild settled Mr. W. G. Grace at Lords, in 1869, in the match between Nottinghamshire and the Marylebone Club , when he was apparently set beyond hope of retirement . Again, the benefit of a change was exemplified forcibly during 1870, at Canter- bury. It was in the match between North and South, and after Willsher , Silcock , and I had in vain tried to secure a separation of the batsmen , Mr. W. G. Gracetook the hall and got three wickets in six balls , not one of which was within a foot of being straight . Andthis is by no meansthe first time that he has performed so opportunely in a like manner. Should a colt be put into an eleven for bowling , he ought to be tried the first over , as, should he be good, the very novelty of his style makes him better than another , who maybe equally excellent , and should he " come off " some of the old players mayhave their nerve shaken at seeing their predecessors fall to an unknown. I don't know of anyother advice applicable to the present subject , but I have written what I think on the subject , as I said before , with a desire (if possible ) to serve cricket andJames Lillywhite .