Lives in Cricket No 46 - George Raikes

71 30. Warwickshire proceeded to rack up 345 (alas, no wickets for Raikes), requiring Hampshire to bat for more than 80 overs to claim a draw. Raikes alone looked capable of seeing off the inevitable; he played an innings of 60 that the Daily Telegraph described as “very well played”, and made “some beautiful strokes”, scoring nine ‘fours’. Unfortunately, the tail could not repeat its heroics of the first innings and Hampshire lost when within three minutes of time. Raikes’ third and final game for Hampshire in 1900 was against Yorkshire. The Times reported that Yorkshire were “not strong”, the Guardian responding that Hampshire were “represented by the strongest side they have been able to put in the field this season” – which perhaps reflects a high opinion on the abilities of Raikes. Despite their theoretical advantage, Hampshire failed to capitalise on winning the toss; bowled out for just 202, they then saw Yorkshire respond with 372. John Tunnicliffe made a fine 138 whilst Raikes came in for most punishment, going for 110 off just 21 overs. His scalps were notable – Lord Hawke and “Schofie” Haigh – but that would have been scant consolation. In Hampshire’s second innings Raikes went in with the score at 76 for two; joining Arthur Hill; they exactly doubled the score before George Hirst caught Hill. Raikes then added 94 with Arthur Webb and completed what was to be his highest first-class score of 77. His innings lasted three hours and ten minutes and contained 10 ‘fours’ – it is frequently mentioned when Raikes’ name crops up but, in truth, the general thought is that he was “blessed with more than his share of good fortune”. He was dropped before opening his account, twice more when on 46 and again on 59 - his innings of 60 in his previous match was probably a more meritorious knock. After his dismissal, Yorkshire completed a routine victory by six wickets. Raikes did not play again that year. It was not because he was dropped due to loss of form; far from it (his 260 runs at an average of 43.33 put him second in the averages) and, while his bowling had been inconsistent, he had taken some vital wickets. Nor did he lose form playing club cricket for the White Company as scores of 73 against Fareham and 100 against Priory Park were noted in August. Hampshire’s season continued to disintegrate, as they finished with 16 losses and no wins in their 22 fixtures – it seems likely that Raikes was unable to turn out owing to the need to do his ‘day job’. Perhaps Lang, who was not a great fan of sporting pastimes, forbad him to play any further? Hampshire had a much improved season in 1901, winning, drawing and losing six matches. They still found room for Raikes to play in five matches, between 15 July and 8 August. His first appearance saw him finish on the winning side for the first time as Leicestershire failed to build on their first innings of 410 and lost with ten minutes remaining. This was largely due to Charlie “Buck” Llewellyn who took eight for 72 in Leicestershire’s second innings and little to do with Raikes, who was ineffective. Eight days later he played in a match against Sussex which was ruined by the weather; he did have some success with the ball, upon being the fifth bowler called on. In 4.1 overs he dismissed three batsmen for just 21 runs, including The Curate of Portsea; Was Raikes A Muscular Christian?