James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1875

6 \ I J'eli � in the extent o! his expressio . n, though I have realised fully the force j ; of his statement a � times. It requires much patience and decision indeed to 1 : be able to m \ et this same �epresentative ball ,vith fortitt1de, and a continu- i !,tnce of . pract1c � to master 1t thoroughly- The mechanical persistency of a bowler m ,vorkillg away at the weak point in the batsma11'R armour is seldom unsuccessful. � here are only two methods of playing what is termed B length bnll, :ind it depends on the immediate selection of tl1e 011e or the other w:hether . s u cc e ss or discomfiture ensues. A batsman with a long reach ,,'lll s1:1-otber balls that wottld puzzle one of smaller stat11re. Reach · h � s unquestionably m '?- ch to do in the matter, b11t patience a11d decision are : still more po'Y erful allies. To play forward is undoubtedly, when possible the more advisable plan, as by this mea11s are avoided all the clevio.tions of the b�ll from spin or accidental deflections by reason of ground or other cal1ses. But forward play should be only used with caution, and to step out to a _ ball for the sake of smothering it is a dangerons experimen t that should be discouraged. With a straight bat much is possible, and it will be found , much can be accomplisl1ed . Obviously, in playing fOTward the ball mt1st be \ met at or near its pitch, and unless it can be so met, that there is no chance \ of its rjsi11g 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 l resolt1tion and ru1 opportunity of counteracting the course of the ball after its pitch with all its deflections ar 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 recommend the adoption of fo1ward play, I whenever it is consistent with saf�y. To select at times the more advisable of the two methods is difficult, but with consistent patience success will generally follow. The slightest hesitation may be fatal ; so let me co11nsel 1·apidity of determinati o n and promptitude of action, and, as in the case of \ back play-as before stated-a resol11te style of defence rather than a weak i resistance. There are ma n y other points in connection with the science of ! batting tho.t do not come within the province of this article, though possibly I t may enter on their . treatme n t on another occasion. For my present plrrpose it is enough to dir�ct attention to the points in batting o! most use t � young cricketers, without wasting time on the fancy strokes w� 1c!1 no treatise � nn I t teach. To '' cut'' well is of course one of the most br1ll1ant and effective ! hits in the hands of a g o od batsman, but example will here, more than I · in any other instance, be vastly superior to precept. To . state merely _ that I , in "cutting" the left leg usually takes the place of the ; 1ght _ as t ?e p ivot !' leg, and that the latter is briskly advanced to the off-s1�e, will g1 � e . � ut a ' 1 feeble idea of the beauty of this hit. T o cut well requires a :flex1b_1lit � of · I wrist that cannot possibly be transferred to paper, and possesses a fas � mat1on to on-looke r s that no pen can describe. To meet _ balls on the leg-side, too, without endangering your wicket is an accomphsbment th� t can � nl y be ,ained b practice. It may be safely stated that there 1s not 1n the iresent g!neration of cricketers a le g -hitter . so re D;l arka � le for acc � 1r � c y a � I wl\.s George Parr in his best day; _ for a g ? od leg-hi t ter 1s . now a 1ar i ty, 01 , the field could not be divested, as 1t now 1s so often, of so � p ? rt � t a man · as Jon11-log. It may be thlit there are few batsmen wh o can hit in _ th � s quart ? r · witho�t exposing themselves to the chances of a catch, but it is cert � in that at least among the professional cricketers of the day I c � ca l l :� m 1 mtl no le -hitter "·orthy of comparison with George Parr : It 18 on . 0 eg­ stum� that many bnt s mon are unquestionably weak, with a propensity for •