John and James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1882

20 both are exposed to equal danger from the ball, and both overcome thi8 danger, one of them gets runs three times as fast as the other. If we grant for the moment that a well-pitched breaking ball is equally for. midable, though in a different way, to both batsmen, and each keeps his wicket up for half-an-hour, A has got 30 runs, B less than 10. A has hit off the bowler, B has rather steadied him. It is important to remember this. But, says the objector, your remark is valueless unless the danger in each case can be shown to be equal or nearly so; is there a prob. ability that A who runs out will stay in as long as B who does not? This objection is strictly relevant, and must be dealt with. First, let us remember that to stay in a long time should only he the secondary objec t in batting: runs are and must be the first. So that the opposite view is not proved even if B does stay in longer. But I am convinced that in most cases he will not stay in so long. Of course when the ground is very fast and true, even slows are easy to play and easy to score o f f ; and under those conditions no one need mind t( staying at home” and getting what runs he can. But during the English summer, rain has a way of falling, the ground is very generally anything but fast and true, and the bowling desperately hard to play, and, if played, desperately hard to score off. When things are in this condition, a resolute runner-out fares best. If he is not resolute, he fares badly, and it is because so few men who run out are resolute, that the whole method is, so to speak, “ blown upon ” and distrusted. The theory is tested by the failure of those who are incom­ petent to put it into practice. A bad batsman is caught out for 0 from running out, and the verdict is, ever}7one should stay at home. This is not fair. The bad batsman would have got out anyhoAv, but a fair bats­ man who does not feel able to play good slows on a bad wicket, can with pluck learn to run out and make practically certain of some runs. His tactics seem to betray contempt for the bowling. In reality they are adopted from fear of it. It is primarily a met hod o f defence, because it is often the easiest wray to play a hard ball; but it is impossible to succeed in the attempt unless one direction is observed. When you run out, give up all thoughts of the home you have left behind you ; go on and on till you are at the pitch o f the ball, with teeth set and eyes wide open, and it is extraordinary how often you will drive it safe along the ground. I am also persuaded that at intervals, and without giving the s ightest warning, it is safe to make this venture by dashing out just before the hall leaves the bowler’s hand, and when his action is too far advanced for him to alter the pitch. A first-class professional bowler is so habituated to pitching the ball on the right spot, that it requires an effort for him to do otherwise, and that particular spot is one that is within easy reach of a runner-out, hut just at the wrong distance for a batsman who stays at home. There can he no doubt, however, lhat running-out is looked upon as dangerous, and any advocacy of it is unorthodox. So 1 would only urge all young batsmen to give it a trial when the bowling is slow and very difficult on a slow ground, and scoring almost impossible in any other wray. It should be limited to those conditions. If it should fail, we should be no worse off than before, and i f it should be found successful, what a different thing cricket in bad weather would become! Slows would not immediately spoil the fun as they do now ; the excitement of the spectators would be scarcely less than that of the batsman who feels