James Lillywhite's Cricketers' Companion 1884

36 E N G L A N D v. M r . MURDOCH ’S E L E V E N (3 rd M atch ). W e then proceeded to Sydney, where, on January 26, our last match against Mr. Murdoch’ s team was commenced in the presence of over 20 000 people. Mr. B ligh won the toss, and elected to go in on a soft, but good wicket. F o r ty runs were scored fo r the first wicket, and then a terrible collapse took place— 5 wickets fa l l in g for 7(5; but Mr. Tylecote and Mr. Read stemmed the tide o f misfortune so successfully that they brought the score to 191 before they were parted. Mr. Ty lecote ’s runs were made w ithou t a mistake, and in a remarkably short time. Mr. Bligh added a dashing 13, and we were a ll out for 247. Mr. Read, who was caught at deep square leg, batted splendidly. The Australian team had made 8 runs w ithout the loss o f a w icket when stumps were drawn. The next day the ground was drenched, and play was not commenced t i l l one o’ clock. A t luncheon time Mr. Giffen and Bannerman, the not mats o f the previous day, had scored 72. The rain again came down and kept the w icket easy; but soon after lunch Mr. Giffen had to leave for a well-earned 41. Rain stopped the play at intervals during the afternoon, and the ball was difficu lt to bowl w ith and to catch, as was demonstrated to our cost. A t the end o f the day ’ s play the score was 133 for 1 w icket, Bannerman (not out) 68, Mr. Murdoch (not out) 17. M onday , J anuary 29.— On the th ird day fortune was kinder to us, and we got the whole side out for 218. Bannerman made 94 in his usual safe sty le ; it was not a chanceless display, but i t was none the less valuable on that account. Mr. Blackham, who jumped about in his accustomed fashion, got 27. The w icket Avas now too dry to play easily, and Mr. Spofforth was irresistible. Our total was 123, Mr. Bligh whipping in w ith an admirable 17 (not out). T uesday , J anuary 30.— The Australians went in on a nasty-looking wicket to make 153 runs. F ive wickets fe ll for 17 runs, and no stand was made t i l l Messrs. Blackham and Bonnor got toge th e r ; but the latter Avas bowled at 56, and their innings closed fo r 83. Mr. Spofforth and BarloAV, for their respective sides, bowled magnificently. The only unpleasant circumstance during the whole tour occurred in this match. Mr. Murdoch objected to Barlow ’s spikes, alleging that in consequence of their peculiar pattern, they Avere the cause of cutting up the pitch, as he (BarloAv) ran over the crease after delivering the ball. Mr. B ligh told BarloAv to remove them, but remarked that Mr. Spofforth’s style of bowling Avas equally open to objection for the same reason. Mr. Spofforth replied by shoAving his spikes, Avhich Avere of the ordinary pattern and fixed only in the heel; he did not, hoAvever, deny that their effect Avas similar to those worn by Barlow, though he did deny that he caused this effect purposely. Mr. Spofforth, notAvithstanding our remonstrance, cut up the wickets Arery badly, and it was in a great measure OAving to this unfortunate propensity that their second innings closed for the small total of 82. ’This question of cutting up the wicket requires, in our humble opinion, immediate legislation, and it ought not to be left to the umpire to say Avhether it is fair or unfair play, but rather whether the effect caused is fair or unfair. The Australian umpire, when appealed to, decided tha as Mr. Spofforth had denied the damage to the pitch to be intentiona , it was fair play.