James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Annual 1876

11 Felix in the extent of his expression, though T have realised fully the force of his statement at times. It requires much patience and decision indeed to be able to meet this same representative ball with fortitude, and a continu­ ance of practice to master it thoroughly. The mechanical persistency of a bowler in working away at the weak point in the batsman's armour is seldom unsuccessful. There are only two methods of playing what is termed a length ball, and it 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 much to do in the matter, but patience and decision are still more powerful allies. To play forw ard 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 recommend the adoption of forward play, whenever it is consistent with safety. To select at times the more advisable of the twro methods is difficult, but with consistent patience success will generally follow'. The slightest hesitation may be fatal ; so let me counsel rapidity of determination 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 many other points in connection with the science of batting that do not come wdthin the province of this article, though possibly I may enter on their treatment on another occasion. For my present 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 “ cu t ” well is of course one of the most brilliant 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 ruerelv 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 w'ell 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 wdcket is an accomplishment that can only be gained by practice. It may be safely stated that there is not in the present generation of cricketers a leg-hitter so remarkable for accuracy as was George 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 man as long-leg. It may be that there are few' hatsmon who can hit in this quarter without exposing themselves to the chances of a catch, but it is certain that at least among the professional cricketers of the day I can call to mind no leg-hitter worthy of comparison with George Parr. It is on the leg- stump that many batsmen are unquestionably weak, writb a propensity for