John and James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1882

37 i Since C larke ' s day n slow bowler has been a mere change, but C larke bowled usually through the innings. As to the accuracy of the old school I can judge by this, that Mr. R udd would not bowl a ball in an innings out of the line, and be could pitch to nil inch almost as be required to either stump. Like C lark e , he bowled from his hip with a good elevation, but he could not, like C larke , send in suddenly a good fast ball “ when men were taking liberties.” C larke said this power was indispensable to a slow bowler ; he “ could not defend him­ self without it.” I don’t think that any man in my time did more for his side in bowling for two or three years than C lark e . From the time of the new style C larke ’ s bowling lay fallow, shelved for years. l ie never came out as a bowler till he was nearly fifty, and, strange to say, he suc­ ceeded in spite of being at a disadvantage in fielding liis own bowling, a very great point with slows. “ But,” 1 have heard it said, “ C larke would benowhere now.” My answer is, though hard to compare present with past, next to Mr. G race we have never had of late years a hotter hitter than G eorge P arr . P arr we know; lie has been seen and compared with men of the present day, and happily wc can also judge of P ilcii by com­ parison with P arr . For H illyer , who never bowled to P ilcii till past his best, and bowled to P arr in his prime, told me be was more afraid of being bit by P ilcii than by P a r r ; and since P ilcii was unequalled against the old underhand bowling of his youth, we may fairly say if P ilcii and P arr could not “ hit C larke all over the field,” we have men who could. F elix was no ordinary hitter. From his first successful innings against C larke , he was at first called and cheered on to the Nottingham ground ns “ C larke ' s master but, said F e l ix , “ much as I played him, I never did master him ; there was no bowler with whom I could do much less.” Speaking of C larke ’ s knowledge of the game, F elix said C larke would walk round, while his adversaries were practising, and make his observations. “ Master F el ix , I have summed them up, 1 value them at (say) 70, that’s their mark and he was generally very nearly right. Again, he would say, “ That gentleman practising yonder is ready money to me, I see his loose screw.” And often after one or two balls he would whisper to me at point as he passed, “ Now there will lie a haccident,” and true cn batsman was soon on his way to the tent. The certainty with which C larke would place a man and then play into his hands was unexampled. “ If a man plays me fast-footed I am sure of him.” When a man tried, as many did, with long icach forward, he had a ball just tit for the occasion ; lie would put on a certain screw almost sure to cause a catch. I f a man was hankering to hit him across, he would accommodate him by change of pace and twist with a rising on-hall to tlie on side, and so produce a catch from the edge of the bat on the off side. IIis elevation was such that you could not judge the ball till late, and his tendency to twist, from his arm being crooked from an accident, was so great, that he always took the upper cud at L ord ’ s , so as to twist against the hill, otherwise his twist would be in excess, so if lie put on his greatest twist when you went out to him, the hall was likely indeed to pass you and ghe a chance to the wicket-keeper. Io a first-rate player, almost a good hall is the worst hall you can fowl. C larke said he succeeded by giving, not like others, a good average length, but the exact length the batsman did not like. He thought, justly e ough the